So the solution is to throw the baby out with the bath water, right Charlie?

Let's see - The state of American health care has a few blemishes, maybe a mole or two, maybe even a spot of basal cell carcinoma. Let's put her in the burn unit and do a 90% skin graft job.

This single payer nonsense is nothing short of another power grab, brought to you by the current administration. It's quite obvious that you, along with at least one other here, are quite comfortable with that. Sacrifice liberty for security. I choose not to. I'll take care of me and mine, thank you very much, and I resent the federal government attempting to deny me the choice.

It's really quite simple, Charlie. You are in love with the idea of Big Brother taking care of us.

I am not.

What a country. We're both still allowed to think the way we do.

For now.

Quote:


Since FDR the Feds have slowly moved toward being the type of government that the Constitution was written to avoid.  The Feds just don't have the authority to do what they are doing, unless they ammend the Constitution first.  It's time we turned the bus around and started moving back in the right direction.

I stand corrected Kevin.  Thought about it when I posted but was too lazy to research it.  Quote:

Oh shit.  Sorry Charlie, when I went to quote you to post a reply, I accidentally modified your post.  Since I can't retrieve whatever it is you wrote, I had to delete it.

I suppose I should quit responding to this thread now! LOL

geezus


edited to add: just have to add one more thing. In the bill it is mandated that all have health insurance.  It also gives an amount of how much it'd cost to have it.  13% of your income.  Do you know that'd be $300 more per month we'd have to pay for health insurance should Jesse's employer (yes it's union, but that's another mess to get into) decide to drop the coverage?  I'm scared to even think about it!

monty- #1, I did read the article.  I normally don't make it a point of posting links on the fly without reading them first.  Secondly, did you read any of my other posts??  Obviously not or you would see my reasoning for not having a public option.

I'm not against health care for all citizens, I'm against a PUBLIC OPTION.  I don't believe that is the way to accomplish the end goal.

I never said anything about if it was bad or good monty.  You're putting words into my mouth.  You see, it's all about perception, and if you think I was trying to incite fear, you know nada about me.

If anyone wants to know, I threw it up there to show there are faults in the system, but some claim to act like it's the solution to the problem and there just isn't any other way of going about it.

Whatever!  I'm done.

Brew wrote on Sep 15^th, 2009 at 2:32pm:


I did not say that 3 out of 4 members of the public support a public option ... a majority in both groups do.  It is actually higher among doctors, probably because there are fewer wound-up wackadoodles in that group that froth at the mouth about keeping government away from The Medicare.

But your right - in the end, the medical system won't be under control of the doctors or patients. This is about what the insurance companies want.

Brew wrote on Sep 15^th, 2009 at 3:46pm:


It's not a question of insulting your intelligence, it is about a legitimate difference of interpretation.

We went for over a hundred years on the interpretation that states can treat some people as property, much longer on the interpretation that women were not entitled to equal rights. And then when there was a proposed constitutional amendment to explicitly grant women equal rights, the tea party elements were simultaneously telling us that it wasn't needed, because the word 'man' really meant man and woman all along (founders intent be damned), and that granting women equal rights would lead to same-sex restrooms, public nudity and incest, and mandatory estrogen shots for every male over 12 years of age.

Melissa wrote on Sep 15^th, 2009 at 12:21pm:


Mel,
We already pay that much a month, plus we have a $500.00 deductable per person.  BUT, what we pay now is still far less.

If there were to be a public option, what is to stop illegals from opting into the plan?  There are no provisions that will stop an illegal alien from buying into the public option.

Taken from Fact Check.org

The House version of the health care bill explicitly prohibits spending any federal money to help illegal immigrants get health care coverage. Illegal immigrants could buy private health insurance, as many do now, and they could also buy into a new government-run insurance plan if Congress creates one. But unlike legal residents, they wouldn't get federal subsidies to help them. The bill's exact language: "Nothing in this subtitle shall allow federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully in the United States." Health care legislation in the Senate is also being crafted to exclude illegal immigrants from coverage.

There's no provision for how the prohibition would be enforced, or any requirement for people to prove they are citizens or legal residents before getting health care benefits. In fact, Democrats on the Energy and Commerce and Ways and Means committees defeated Republican-offered amendments that would have required people to verify their legal status before getting care, with some Democrats saying such requirements would be unnecessarily burdensome for people legally entitled to coverage

To the italicized part, I would ask why?  Didn't this same bs occur with states making voters provide picture IDs to vote?

Obama also said
Quote:


He also said if you tell lies about health care, we will call you out.... so Wilson called him out..

stevegeebe wrote on Sep 15^th, 2009 at 9:57pm:

Indeed.

Multimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or

Newsweek now says we're born racist. Just like homosexuality. Shouldn't we be celebrating it?

Check this out:

45% Of Doctors Would Consider Quitting If Congress Passes Health Care Overhaul

By TERRY JONES
News Analysis by IBD | Posted Tuesday, September 15, 2009 4:30 PM PT

Two of every three practicing physicians oppose the medical overhaul plan under consideration in Washington, and hundreds of thousands would think about shutting down their practices or retiring early if it were adopted, a new IBD/TIPP Poll has found.

Here's the whole article:

Multimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or

Just a little different than the claims made by the original post.

Charlie wrote on Sep 15^th, 2009 at 10:57pm:

Never have I seen that kind of dreck here. Be fair.