The White House recently asked that people send "fishy" (potentially misleading or untrue) stories about Health Care in the media or elsewhere to some White House email address. This is being done "supposedly" to allow the administration to correct the record. They insist that no records or name-lists are being kept but how do we know?
A recent editorial in USA Today by House Speaker Pelosi and sidekick Steny Hoyer claims that drowning out opposing views is "Un-American" and that they want full debate on this "important issue". An interesting claim considering they tried (and failed) to cram this measure through the Congress in just a few weeks prior to the August recess. Their goal was obvious if unstated, they wanted to pass the massive health care plan before they had to face their constituents and before a real debate could occur. Their editorial claims now that they're taking the time to "do it right" ring exceedingly hollow. They want to pass "something" that they can then transform into their Utopian socialist system under the cover of legislative and bureaucratic "darkness" without addressing the "opposing" views which they claim are so important. Please!
Ms. Pelosi, have you not considered that the "disruptive" people at the town hall meetings whom you hold in such contempt might be aware of the monumental scope of the change you are attempting to foist upon America and have gotten no adequate answers or explanations from their elected officials in any other manner? Such reasonable explanations are what we expect from our elected officials here in America Madam Speaker, and as you are obviously not comfortable with that, perhaps a job search is in order. That would be better than your continual insults of the citizens for whom you work.
The President and every Democrat within shouting distance swears up and down that this plan will not spell the doom of private insurance in the US in favor of a socialist "single-payer" system. Despite these claims the President himself and several members of the Democratic cabal are on record in their own words saying that that government system is exactly where they want to get to. Are we to believe their current words or their previous statements? How are we to know?
They also claim that this plan will cover more people for less cost and without rationing care. A strong statement that requires a "willing suspension of disbelief" in order to accept.
Their red herring claim that some don't want to do anything is insulting and wrong. Improvements to our health care and insurance system are desired by all but it is instructive that rather than break a large problem into several small ones and effectively address each using available free-market improvements that take advantage of the cost efficiencies inherent in our competitive system, the Democrats again choose what promises to be a single bloated government controlled program that once created cannot be adjusted effectively.
The supporters of such a plan yak incessantly that we are the only western country without a universal health plan but they do not identify which of these "desirable" systems achieves it's goals without huge cost overruns and without rationing care.
This reminds one of the recent confirmation hearing for Justice Sotomayor where we were asked to set aside all her many off-court comments and rely exclusively on her narrow and less controversial court opinions. The problem with that is that once on the court Justice Sotomayor is free to more strongly implement her "true beliefs" on these matters as she is no longer constrained by higher court decisions nor answerable to those that opposed her.
The Health Care implementation is exactly the same. Once bills are passed by both Houses (even if they differ considerably), the reconciliation process to combine them, and the eventual "implementation" by scores of government agencies that will "make" the final rules will allow ample opportunities for the "true colors" and socialist goals of this health care plan to be fully realized, again outside the field of view of the public and without accountability. Such a strategy is immoral and despicable.
Thanks, but no thanks.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 25
You people don't want explanations, "reasonable," unreasonable, or dam-all silly. You just want to shout down and intimidate everyone else in th' room.
Buncha bullies 'n' asshats.
We want a national health care plan.
We don't think killing debate with lies and obstruction is democratic.
It is the Republican way, blocking debate with lies and bullying.
Planes leave every day for Paris. Take one. I will support instantly a market based reform package to improve health care insurance, availability, portability and costs. Giving the government control of the system is ludicrous. The quality of health care itself in the US is already second-to-none.
You are missing the point. The Dems won't answer real questions and that fact forces the volume of the questioner to increase out of frustration. I ask a number of valid questions below for which the answers I would think would be interesting to many, but no democrat will address them (least of all Pelosi /Reid and the rest of the Statists running things).
http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474977761395
PS Nice name-calling.
And, no... Pelosi and Reid aren't gonna show up on Gather and answer your questions.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=32987
See George Soros buy attendees to 'support' health care reform at townhall meetings.
http://www.redstate.com/absentee/2009/08/10/whats-faker-than-astroturf/
I cannot grasp the sort of thinking which would vilify Justice Sotomayor for speaking her mind and having while an outstanding judicial back ground yet you embrace the person of Clarence Thomas who when appointed had little or no judicial experience. The whole world except conservatives knows Thomas was appointed as pay off by republicans for holding back laysuits by citizens who had civil rights gripes and his conservative leanings was what they wanted. With that sort of experience in mind it shines a real light on those who are apt to vilify someone like Sotomayor and says to me there is little honesty in your visions. To further make that sort of thinking putrid to me is when one of the conservatives holds Thomas up as a shining example of what a black leader should be. How sick and repulsive such a statement can be especially when his largest claim to fame is that he kept many Americans from advancing due to his stone walling and deliberate attemtps to keep those who had filed cases with the Equal Opportunity Commission from reaching an actual court. Yet, he is accepted by most conservatives though he had little court background from which to draw. Lets contrast that with the most recent Supreme Court appointment. I am still hearing complaints about what she said and her feelings on topics yet Thomas had damn near nothing for them to look at. It simply says to me that conservatives accept a person for their conservative ideals regardless of their record and background.
I know I didn't read the word immoral in your article. After living under eight years of immoral leadership I must be hearing things.
It dictates that all health insurance plans will follow the government plans, of which there may be several. Insurance companies will have to follow the government dictates. Of course that will eventually eliminate insurance companies since they will not be able to compete with a cheaper government plan. The government would not have nearly as many government forms to fill out and that takes money.
The gov. plan IS administered by political appointees and is therefore a political beaurocracy.
That information comes directly from the bill. HR3200
The Sotomayor confirmation process caused me to 'codify' my own criteria in such matters and I realized that it is to find a judge that judges the same way that he or she lives/thinks/writes and speaks. That consistency will go far toward insuring that judges don't adopt a power mad activist direction after confirmation. That's important because unless we allow the Constitution (and by similar argument congressional laws) to have a consistent meaning until we as a people decide to change the meaning, it becomes no longer a guarantor of rights nor a bulwark against an overpowerful government but just a facade over which we can throw whatever meaning we desire politically at the moment.
My point is that such consistency on where the democrats want to take the country is totally lacking. While admitting that free-market principles have have the most American a solid chance at prosperity throughout our history, they steadfastly refuse to adopt any such principles to address economic stimulus, energy, or health care. Otherwise tax reductions, nuclear power, domestic drilling, tort reform, and real competition would be part of the discussions. That they are not is an indicator that Democrats actions which consistently choose big-government statist policies betray their more moderate words.
I have and will criticize the Bush administration for their lack of adherence to proven conservative principles but where is the criticism from any in the democratic party of the Obama administration's embrace of socialist big government policies? Do you think that is what democrat's signed up for (gov't controlling banks, owning car companies, setting private company employee salaries, controlling health care)? Spencer, how can people under such a government be free?
There are real proven ways to stimulate the economy, improve health care, enhance energy independence, and clean up the environment but they are free-market oriented rather than Statist oriented so you (and this administration) don't like them. Oh yeah, they are one other thing - American. You know , that "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of happiness thing"!
"I believe if the government takes it over every citizen from the youngest to the oldest is going to pay a dear price for it."
That's weird, because the for-profit insurance companies have us all paying dearly for it now. At LEAST 18,000 DIE every single year, as a result of our current, miserably failed system, and it devours nearly 20% of our national GDP. Every day, another 14,000 Americans lose their insurance, and the majority of current bankruptcies are the result of medical expenses, most of which are accured even though those persons were insured at the time. How much more "dearly" could it really get? By every possible measure, our current system is a catastrophic, total failure.
"Plus there wil be rationing and we the people will have nosay."
Oh, so there's no rationing with for-profit insurance then, right? How about when when an HMO tells you which doctor and clinic to see? How about when the insurance company tells your doctor how you should be treated? How about when the insurance company drops you as soon as they find out you're in need of serious medical care? How about when they refuse to even cover you, due to a pre-existing condition? How about when you wait weeks and weeks and weeks for non-critical procedures?
That's NOT rationing, right? What's the word that YOU use for it?
"There are real proven ways to stimulate the economy, improve health care, enhance energy independence, and clean up the environment but they are free-market oriented rather than Statist oriented so you "
Oh yeah, that's been working out REALLY well for us, hasn't it? There is NO SUCH THING as a "free market." Why don't you rightwingnuts get this? Your idea of "free market" capitalism is to shovel billions upon billions of dollars in corporate welfare at massive companies, let them take their profits overseas to avoid taxation altogether, let them poison our food, air, and water, and then let them internalize all profits and externalize all risk, so that when they succeed in their gambling efforts, they rake in massive amounts of wealth, but when they hose things up, you and I are left to pay for the cleanup.
Some "free market." You people need to get a frigging clue.
I just got an email asking me to pray for a little girl who is very sick with a mystery illness which may be autoimmune in its origins. She needs to get follow up tests at a major hospital and the father was laid off at Ford and they are concerned she won't get in before his benefits run out.
I'm praying that those who would poison the well and wish major money worries on a family in health crisis grow a heart and a brain.
Shame on you. Really.
We can be extremely thankful that they comprise such a tiny sliver of the general population, but that fact doesn't make them any less dangerous. In fact, as we're seeing with far too much frequency, the more their numbers are diminished, the more extreme, hateful, terroristic, and utterly dangerous they become. I do believe that we will see them attempt to rise up and take arms against this nation fairly soon, because they're not going to get their way, they cannot stomach having a black man in the white house, and the "liberal media" keeps blasting them, 24/7, with vicious rightwing propaganda and hatred, to stir them to violence.
This will undoubtedly go down in history as a terribly dark period in this country, as the negative forces of ignorance, bigotry, hatred, and fraud are forced against their will to the point of obscurity and irrelevance. Their ideals are miserable failures, their beliefs are ancient disgraces, and the entire world is moving on without them, thankfully.
Right now, the republican party is, without question, the most dangerous threat that this nation has ever faced. But, we WILL triumph, because the truth is on our side.
How embarrassing to go into a town hall meeting shouting out a LIE a repub operative told you was true. Now the shouter looks not only like a LIAR but a kook.
In just your last few posts you accused me/others on this side of the debate of aggressively lying, plain ole lying, rightwingnuts, poisoning the world, clueless, shameful, extreme, heartless, souless, unconcerned, without compassion, twisted, sick, genetically defective, diseased,abnormal, dangerous, extreme, hateful, terroristic, and utterly dangerous, ignorant, bigoted, hate-filled, and fraudulent. Nice! - and a glowing testimony to your open-minded accepting civil respectful liberal mindset.
What you did NOT do, and what you never do is address any of the real concerns that people have with this administration and their willing cohorts in the Congress and their efforts to force this untested, unplanned, poorly thought out, unworkable, un-American, unable to be paid for, intrusive, at least partially un-Constitutional, corrosive to freedom and liberty, ineffective, destructive, and socialist scheme upon the American people.
Many valid concerns have been brought up by me and many others. None get answered and the questioner is ridiculed and the idea of reasonable opposition dismissed, and this by the President, Speaker of the House, Press Secretary Gibbs, many Democratic members of Congress as well as from all you "yes-we-can"-ers. Congratulations, pat yourselves on the head. No dissent allowed. No opponent unattacked. No reasonable alternative (to Statism) acknowledged. The heck with our children and with America. Well done.
More truth for you (not that you want to read any of THAT):
http://www.classicalideals.com/HR3200.htm
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=32987
http://healthcarereform.nejm.org/
An alternative proposal:
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/08/12/another-good-conservative-alternative-to-obamacare/