Lisa Benson for December 15, 2009

^Why do you ask if we “hate” America? Seems like you are expecting a certain response… Why don’t you, now that you have the government , get off your tail end and make all those theories of yours a success instead of sitting on the web throwing out spurious troll-bait? Could it be you know you’re full of carp and have your own agenda?

No pup, it is a legitimate question. Human isnt saying the republicans hate america or its people, but rather he is saying that it APPEARS like they do because they are standing in the way of what is clearly something meant to help people, people who are sick, dying and in serious need. Now if the republicans had created their own plan, where they introduced changes or rules that gave people a sense that they were working for them, instead of working to favour the industry, then they wouldnt come across that way. So to reiterate, it isnt that human is saying that rebuplicans actually hate america and its people, but rather through their actions (and lack of other sorts of actions) it appears like they do.

Ayn Rand? You have never even read Ayn Rand. The only reason you mention it is because it was used by Fox News in the special about how the government is evil.

You can’t help a soup sandwich.

Ugh Scott, I would like to remind you that i have a minor in theology. I have read plenty of christian theology and text to know what you rant and rave about is not factual. Again you are totally misinterpreting what i am saying and instead take it as some kind of attack on your religion. I didnt even mention religion. The reason I mentioned that fact that you never read Ayn Rand was because she believed that both economics and religion played no part in government. And clearly you dont understand the consequences of such a system. Having a totally unregulated economy is not the way towards building an economy. It will be riddled with unfairness and irregularities. Monopolies would flourish and competition will be non-existant. The reason is because people will try to win at the economy. The whole point of having a free market is that it is perpetually free, which requires REGULATION! (Anti trust laws and labor laws) So by definition it is impossible to have an unregulated AND free market. Secondly, there is NO evidence of Barak Obama trying to do anything for the sake of lobby groups. In fact, the people MOST in step with their lobby groups are the GOP, so your point is moot. And finally, why would you put qoutation marks around work when it comes to the government? Are you an anarchist? Do you believe there should be no government? becuase that is the ONLY way you could defend your ideology. I would like to remind you that all military people also work for the governement, and unless you are saying that everyone in the military is a parasite, I would recommend reworking your statement into something with a little more sense.

Lisa, do you go for the natural tree look? No ornaments?

I think the excessive amount of ornaments are meant to represent the excesses of the health care debate. The fact that it is 2000 pages (which I agree is too long), and it is essentially dwarfing the tree (which is almost falling over by so much weight).

p.s. Scott, I am not complaining to you, i am REPLYING to your posts, which have little basis in fact, and when you are confronted by you lack of said facts, you revert to mindless name calling. Bravo, you have certainly shown me the sort of caliber of intellect you are working with.

btw, if that’s a dimocrat tree, it’s a holiday tree, or a kwanzaa tree, not a christmas tree.

I don’t know about the ax, but by voting against nationalized health care - in whatever form - the Republicans will be helping. But next term they better hit tort reform.

um churchill, you do realize that Andy Stern works for a labor union that is trying to improve the lives of literally millions upon millions of workers across all sectors of the economy, right? And what possible agenda could this guy have that is so evil? Universal health care? Better pay? Safer work conditions? Greater equality in the work place? OMG, he must be satan, because Jesus would never want something like that! Imagine, people being treated fairly and recieving an decent living. How awful!

I am a liberal but I can not for the life of me understand why it a holiday tree but not a holiday Menorah.

The repubs have put forth alot of plans but ol PIGlosy and dingy harry havent even alowed them into committee. so dont speak of what you know nothing of.

Oh, now I get it; the Republicans are trying to destroy the health care system in order to save it.

@churchillwasright

Churchill was indeed right but remember he said conservative and not republican. Pseudo-intellectual foreign drivel aside no one in the United States would be denied life saving health care because they could not afford it and lets face it, if it’s not life saving than it’s not really other peoples responsibility to subsidize it.

Basic question

A) if you could spend 1 penny and save the life of a 3 year old would you do it? no need to answer

B) if you could spend $10M and prolong the life of a 98 year old by 1 day would you do it?

C) if you spend $1M and save the life of a 3 year old would you do it?

D) if you spend $10M and save the life of a 3 year old would you do it?

E) if you spend $100M and save the life of a 3 year old would you do it?

That is the debate going on right now and it appears many year would say yes to E. When you realize that is not possible then we can begin to have an intelligent discussion.

European Health Insurance card ad.

http://www.guzer.com/videos/pancakes-to-win-girl.php

Dear Churchill,

You say, “The left thinks if they keep saying Obama is a centrist, people will believe it. He isn’t.” This is an assertion, not an argument. Yesterday I provided some examples of positions and actions taken by Obama that are moderate rather than leftist.

You might want to compare two columnists for the New York Times – Paul Krugman (who is not really a leftist, but certainly a left-liberal) has been somewhat critical of Obama’s moderation, while David Brooks, a moderate Republican, has generally been enthusiastic about Obama. Brooks’ column today says that Obama’s Oslo speech was profound. He thinks that Obama is a “cold-war liberal”. I disagree with a lot of what Brooks has to say in this column, but I think he and Krugman together demonstrate my point. (I should add that I admire Brooks, though I disagree with him. He’s an intelligent moderate/conservative with a good heart. He’s always worth reading.)

^ Lonecat

I find it amusing that when Liberals are allowed to make their own definitions somehow the NYT comes out moderate.

Reality: NYT=Fox=WSJ=HuffPost

Krugman for many years now has been labeled the single most biased newspaper columnist. Now that Obama is in he attacks him from the left. (Lying in Ponds).

If you don’t call Krugman a leftist then the only leftist on earth ever is Karl Marx.

a real “GOOD IDEA” stop the BS thee guys are selfish and incompetent……there isn’t and never was a healthcare crisis but they are making one

Anyone who visits a hospital emergency room or urgent care center knows there is something wrong with our healthcare system. As for the bill passed through the House, over 700 amendments were put in it by Republican Congressmen. How many pages? I don’t know.

CogentModality: Bloody funny, thanks ;-) I have an EHIC card, in fact just yesterday posted elsewhere regarding it.

”The European Health Insurance Card (EHIC) allows you to access state-provided healthcare in all European Economic Area (EEA) countries and Switzerland at a reduced cost or sometimes free of charge.”

Dear Libertarian,

I did not say that the NYT was moderate. I said that one of their columnists was a moderate republican, and another of their columnists was left-liberal. I said nothing about the editorial policy of the Times, which I grant is usually liberal.

Your claim that Krugman is “the single most biased newspaper columnist” is irrelevant to the discussion. You say that he is attacking Obama from the left. Thus you seem to agree that there are people to the left of Obama – Krugman for one. And there are people to the left of Krugman – Chomsky, for example. I would call Krugman a left-liberal, while Chomsky is on the left. (Though he’s not a Marxist.) Thus Obama does not qualify as a leftist. Nor was Bush a fascist.

They shouldn’t cost anything extra. Please note the cavaet: ”allows you to access state-provided healthcare” http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=559&langId=en It is for European EEA & Ch residents not just nationals. If you have an insurance in your country of residence or tax based National Health Service like the UK or Portugal, you should be able to get a card. One might still pay a minimal charge or it might cost nothing but it is still advised to use your own travel insurance that covers all medical emergencies and access to private medical care. Most travel insurances will waiver excess fees if you use your EHIC card as well. http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=564&langId=en ”Depending of the legislation of the country where you are staying, health care is either free or, if you have to pay, you will be reimbursed. If you have to pay up-front, the card will guarantee that you receive money back in that country or, if you were not able complete the reimbursement procedure, soon after you return home by your local health authority.”

I’m covered by the the UK NHS which is tax-payer funded. Just about any resident in the UK qualifies for one. My in-laws are Austrian and their card also cost nothing but they pay a regular monthly amount to a medical insurance scheme since that’s how their universal health-care is provided. Although if you’re unemployed or unable to obtain medical insurance, there is a state cover, so you still have access to a card.

Also, this isn’t for “health tourists”! It is just for tourists, travellers or students (these might need a slightly different arrangement).

What I don’t know is who ultimately pays for the care i.e if the host country then bills the resident’s country’s health system or bears the brunt of your care. I suspect the former. You guys should really try get a universal cover thing. If 27 +3 +1 countries came to an agreement about their disparate health systems for their travelling residents & nationals, I’m sure you lot, who all at least speak more or less the same language (English or Spanish ;-) ), should be able to agree on something.

Seems to me the proposed legislation is becoming less meaningful. A public option, or early buy-in to medicare, appears to be a goner, and with it goes the only pressure on private insurers to control costs. The proposed reductions to medicare, which McCain supported as a candidate, provide a meaningful way to control costs in the program the government now administers. Instead,the proposed cuts are being used to scare seniors about losing benefits, and AARP is now being demonized for supporting reform. (Just got a new e-mail about it today.)

Thus, two significant mechanisms to get at controlling sky rocketing healthcare costs are being eaten away and may disappear altogether.

What are we left with? Minimal change to the most egregious insurance industry practices. (Banning exclusion of coverage for pre-existing conditions is not enough. In addition, there is no control on what private insurers may charge for that coverage. If insurers can charge $2,000/mo for someone with high blood pressure, who is going to be able to afford that?)

I’ve heard nothing about retroactive recision. or whether or not there will be a lifetime cap, or annual cap, on medical payouts appear to be iffy too.

And what help is there for smaller businesses without a public option, or for self-employed? Will those be people now be forced to purchase private insurance at their over-inflated premium costs, with high deductibles and co-pays and limited coverage? And if help is offered via subsidies from govt., then we’re once again subsidizing outrageous health insurers overhead and profits, rather than simply paying for medical care. In effect, we’re expanding the massive taxpayer gifts to insurers as we do with medicare Advantage.

I don’t see any of this stopping the continuing erosion of employer-paid health benefits for working people; i don’t see it helping those who are underinsured and one major illness takes them to the brink of bankruptcy. (67 percent of personal bankruptcies are for medical bills.)

I listened to Lieberman today and he’s enjoying his role as spoiler. Truth is, with his wife a well paid lobbyist for health behemoths, including insurers, he shouldn’t even have a vote on this?

I’m very discouraged.

bruce, you have an individual health plan, not from an employer? Did you work with an insurance broker? Can you share any details about the plan you have? If you’re paying, when averaged out, only six percent of your medical bills, you’ve got a good plan. What do you have?