What do you expect from a politician? They never keep any promises and blame each other as the reason. Washington is full of money hungry back stabbing idiots and it's on both sides starting at the top.
"I'll make our government open and transparent, so that anyone can ensure that our business is the people's business."
"When I'm president, meetings where laws are written will be more open to the public. No more secrecy! That's a commitment I make to you as president. No more secrecy!"
"When there's a bill that ends up on my desk as president, you the public will have five days to look online and find out what's in it before I sign it -- so that you know what your government's doing."
-- Barack Obama
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said Monday night he doesn't even know where the people writing the new health-care bill are meeting.
Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said Monday night that discussions of the new plan in the Senate were a "private matter" and that "it's wise not to talk about the specific details."
So much for openness. It's only your health care they're tinkering with, after all.
Democratic leaders are overhauling one-sixth of our economy and playing God with your health, and they're doing it behind closed doors and without significant input from people with other ideas. And all that passionate feedback from fretting senior citizens at the August town hall meetings? It seems to have gone in and out of our leaders' ears.
As for the new, nebulous "opt out" provision unveiled just this week -- in which states, under some ambiguous, unexplained circumstances can opt out of the federal government health plan -- what gives Washington that kind of power?
The truth is, this country was founded on the notion that a central government would be convened to do the states' collective bidding -- not the other way around. That -- and the Constitution, particularly the 10th Amendment -- has been turned on its head.
It's likely that if this kind of federal government takeover of the health-care system had been introduced in 1860, there would have been no Civil War: The North would have seceded too.
Talk about opting out!
Comments
What do you expect from a politician? They never keep any promises and blame each other as the reason. Washington is full of money hungry back stabbing idiots and it's on both sides starting at the top.
I watched Charlie Gibson do a soft piece on the Obumbler campaign last night. Obumbler said and I quote "McCain said I am risky, no what's risky is McCain wanting to tax health care benefits..." Here are the Democrats in congress now planning to tax health care benefits. It's another lie by Obumbler, but of course since it is Obumbler's lie it is OK. We had long discussions on the health care bill on this posting site with people quoting long portions and sections to refute each other. I said it didn't matter because nobody really knows what will be in the bills...Here we are with change we can believe in..WELL [filtered word] IN ONE HAND AND WATCH THE CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN WITH THE OTHER AND SEE WHICH GETS FULL FIRST...Can Tech Lover or Hot Foot please channel the bill like they did in the past and tell me whats in it? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA..
Plain and simple, the devious and secret plans to take over the health care industry is a move by the current party in power to see that they stay in power. The benevolence of this "king and gentle" move to take your tax money and spend it on your "health care" isn't anything more than another political power play. That's why is is being done in secret, once again. That is why it will be voted on before even the politicians read it. This is a permanent shackle that will drag this country down to an economic equivalency of the other socialists countries. Unless this congress control is removed before these insane proposed shackles are locked on, we'll wallow in poverty with no chance of recovery until the country is reformed.
Oh, stop whining. There's no point in "reaching across the aisle" when those on the other side want only to chomp your hand off. To hell with bipartisanship. It only works when there is good will among the parties and Repugs want only to see this president fail.
Well Hotfoot, explain why no one is allowed to see what is going into this healthcare bill that you are about to be forcefed!
You'll see the bill when they're ready to present it--plenty of time to hate it and pick it apart, so don't worry. In fact, why not just start NOW with the hating and picking...since the Repug reaction (and the reaction of ACES and many of the posters on this board) is independent of actual substance.
I don't know if there's enough lobby money and political threats to force this insanity into law, but it would be prudent to contact as many congressmen as possible to voice you opinion. 2010 is the threat that we must follow through on.
First when they tried to work with the repubs we got lies and mistruths, death panels anyone(introduced by our own J Isakson by the way). Secondly, you can read all 5 bills online right now. There will be open debate on the floor. I would not have repubs at the table to have another round of Grassley's and folks not working in good faith. Didn't you people watch Baucus and his committee everyday debating and finally passing their version of the bill. People crying for more transparency are crying for more opportunities to lie to the elderly. We have been debating hc reform since I have been living everyone has made up their minds long ago. Dems are pushing forward and the repubs stance hasn't changed since 1994. Talk about insanity the repubs haven't changed one lick since 1994 so why would the dems continue to deal with them. This is the best chance for reform in our nation's history. The repubs will be on the wrong side of history just like Medicare, and SS.
The "death panels" exist in EVERY socialist country with universal health care. EVERY!!! It's where your are judged to not be worthy of the cost of state health care and are given pain medicine to ease you death.....as food and water is withheld until you "pass". The proposed bills are not even voted on, beyond committee. The house (and the senate) hasn't found any combination that can be passed yet. Where's portability? Where's tort reform? Sure they intend to cover pre-existing conditions, but that's EXACTLY like buying car insurance after the wreck or house insurance after the fire. Only the government will provide this insurance. You know, the same government that bought all of the toxic loans that has caused the current recession with decades of debt. Stupid in '94 is still stupid today. This health care reform is a trick for the stupid, but an obvious mistake to the informed. SAVE THE COUNTRY. Vote against this socialist takeover.
The opting out scam is an option where a state can opt out of the government health care if 2/3 of the state congress votes for it. Of course, the state will still have to pay the federal tax to support the "health care", but if 2/3 of the state congress wants to p opt out, they can. I'm sure this impresses the worshipers. The rest of us find it just plain stupid.
When Bacus brought his bill out he had good numbers (dollars) Snow had signed on, and the Bacus bill had a good chance. Then Reid decided to layer it with public option etc and screwed over Snow. Lieberman won't vote for it and neither will a bunch of Democrates. If this is such a good bipartisan bill why doesn't Reid have enought votes in his own party to pass the bill? Don't blame the Republicans, blame your fellow democrates, if the Democrates voted for it it would pass!!!! DUH....
WP, you argue everyday on here the govt spends too much on entitlement programs which most aren't even life and death. But today you argue the govt is going to sanction death to save money doesn't make sense to me. Move out the way folks BHO will sign hc as a Christmas present to all you angry right wingers. I hope it doesn't spoil your Christmas.
WP, the fool's scorn is kingly praise, indeed.
cn, your lack of knowledge makes you think this is a "your team against my team" situation. It's not. It's America against the end of America. Obama has already borrowed so much money that it'll be decades before it can be paid down to manageable. Where is the money for universal health care going to come from? An 80% federal income tax? The $50billion/year savings from medicare mismanagement doesn't exist. If it did, don't you think this administration would already be saving it? Do you really think the death option as price control isn't a part of universal health care in England? It was featured on the BBC this last week. Your convoluted arguments and silly attempts at gloating don't change the facts. You do seem to be good at rooting for your team though.
and another little kicker,president smack daddy long legs and his clowns want to pay our enemy not to fight us.will someone please tell me what these idiots dems and rep have done for the american people.wait i'll tell you N O T H I N G !!!!
Gee, WP, that's what I was responding to. Not quite sharp enough to catch that? Please wipe the foam from your mouth and clean the fog from your glasses.
Repubs argue everyday about fed govt spending too much money. Which is totally true. However, I think it is impossible to believe the one time the govt is going to not spend money is to allow seniors to die. Since I believe that every citizen should have access to health care it should make the govt prioritize spending. In my mind that means ending earmarks, non-essential entitlement programs (life/death not involved), and limiting foreign aid. But, I don't think anyone honestly believes politicians are going to cutting funding and put seniors too death. If for no other reason they value reelection too much. If we end of with death panels we would already be a banana republic with 3rd world healthcare.
Time for me to work now. Time for you to watch your "programs" on FOX. Enjoy the Sea Bond commercials and maybe today you'll order something from the Video Professor. Silly sod.
Keep holding up SS and medicare as examples of gov't programs. It makes the point of how screwed up gov't programs are.
cn, it's not a matter of cutting spending by killing seniors, it's a matter of increasing spending so far beyond the available money that decisions on where to spend available money must be made. Eventually that will come down to who to spend the money on, the young person that will earn money and pay more taxes or the elderly that has finished his era of taxpaying. This point has been reached in England, according to the BBC, and health care for the old has been replaced with a sedative.
HotFoot, you do make my point.
I work with a doctor from Canada, Yes there will be death panels, they already exist in the insurance world we have today. The pros and cons to this HCR are practically split down the middle. Most of us have a problem with it because it should not be the governments place to force this upon us. I have a problem with it because too many people out there do not work by their own choice. I should not have to work so I can have less and them have more. Too many of these people who cry they cant afford health insurance will have nice new cars, internet, cell phones, designer clothes, haircuts/style(this is expensive for women), manicures, vacations, and on and on....Get rid of the things you DO NOT NEED and pay for your own insurance like the rest of us.
WP, I am just saying the govt has a lot of waste to get rid of before they got down to death panels. I just think like I said earlier when we get to the point of death panels, health insurance probably won't be on the top of our list anymore food and shelter will be.
smec, you are going to have to learn to go with the flow. Quit working so hard and sacrificing the niceties in life. Sit back and relax. Obama's got your back.
Not if we stop this socialist take over of health care, cn. There are MANY more steps that need to be taken first. The most major of which is to get government out of health care so the free market can bring the cost back down because of competition. The government effort (since the early '60's) has not made anything easier for anyone and has only succeeded in increasing the costs for a number of reasons. Portability would also increase competition. Tort reform would save a huge %. Universal health care would get to the death-instead-of-care option way too soon.
WhitlessThomas, it doesn't matter which post you refer to. Yours haven't changed since before or after your operation.
Children, please. Remember your manners and play nicely. There's actually been some decent discussion this morning, apart from the standard nasty snarkiness by some of the less-than-articulate (excluding, of course, the last two comments).
Heh heh, GOOD one, WP [snort, heh, drool, heh heh] You really told HIM.
The proposed healthcare bills are so good, the Congress will likely be forced to use reconciliation to pass any healthcare law. This is failure of the DEM to even get their own party to vote affirmative. The 85% of people who have insurance will foot the bill for this stupidity with much higher premiums than they would have paid otherwise. Only the DEM would fail to see the fallacy of passing "noble legislation" at the worst economic time since the 1930's. "We have no money, so let's spend a trillion dollars". Try that as a personal way of handling your budget and see how long it is till you lose everything. Why do you expect it to be different for the Federal Gov? They're raising the debt ceiling, that's the response our Congress has to running over the $12.1 TRILLION limit. Healthcare "reform" will die, crap and trade will die, and the crisis of the economy will roll on.
The Augusta Chronicle ©2012. All Rights Reserved.
