Roberts? ROBERTS???
What Romney said:
"I will act to repeal Obamacare."
What Romney meant:
"I will act to repeal affordable health care for all."
What Romney should have said:
"I will act to repeal Romneycare."
You could
have knocked me over with a kitten's whisker when I got the news. Having awoken stupidly early that morning (before two AM) I was taking a long, late morning's nap when the decision was announced. I didn't feel the need to be wide awake when that decision was revealed. I was certain of the outcome - or so I thought. Justice Anthony Kennedy would side with the right wing junta that has been dominating that court in recent years - as he usually does. Not to my surprise that is exactly what he did. But John Roberts turning to the left??? What gives? This morning he is a hero to the progressives, He's damned-near a hero to me! Life is funny, you know?
Some have speculated that Roberts is worried about the legacy of presiding over the worst body of Supreme Court Justices since the assholes who gave us "Plessy v Ferguson" over a century ago. There might very well be something to that. It must make him rip his pillow to shreds just thinking about it as he drifts off to dreamland every night. I would imagine that it gives him ulcers to even read about Chief Justice Roger Brook Taney, author of the Dred Scott decision and (I cringe as I write these words) a distant relative of mine. But who would have thought that John Roberts would pull an Earl Warren on us? Not me. Not in my wildest, weirdest dreams.
Warren was th
e reliably conservative, Republican governor of California who had served as Thomas Dewey's running mate in 1948. Four years later he went for the presidential nomination. When it became clear at the convention of 1952 that he was not going to get the big prize, he made a deal with Dwight Eisenhower. Warren would endorse the general on the condition that he get the first vacant Supreme Court appointment. Ike agreed. That vacancy came up in September of 1953 when Chief Justice Fred Vinson died suddenly of a heart attack. The president hesitated at giving him the top spot but Warren insisted. The agreement had been "the first" vacancy - and a deal was a deal. Ike relented - much to his eternal regret.
Earl Warren (to everyone's surprise) turned out to be one of the most progressive jurists in the history of that body. Less than a year after being sworn in, he would gently but firmly guide the court toward the historic "Brown v Board of Education" decision which effectively outlawed school segregation in America forever. Many years later, Eisenhower (a border-state-southerner by birth) would call his appointment of Earl Warren "the biggest damned-fool mistake of my life".
Warren was hugely unpopular during his lifetime - especially (although not surprisingly) in the deep south. Anyone who is old enough to remember driving through that region of the country during the nineteen-fifties and sixties can vividly recall the "IMPEACH EARL WARREN" billboards that littered the landscape. Highly controversial then, history has been quite kind to Chief Justice Earl Warren. His legacy is deeply respected and secure.
I can't
help but wonder if Chief Justice John Roberts was thinking about his own place in history when he came out yesterday on the side of the angels. Is he worried that, a century into the future, his heirs will cringe at the mere mention of his name much in the same way my family cringes at the mention of the name "Roger B. Taney" nearly one-hundred and fifty years after his passing? That could possibly be the reason for his turnaround yesterday. This is just a theory of mine. Whatever the reason, I'm not complaining - trust me. Good for him for doing the right thing.
I can see the right wing billboards now:
"IMPEACH JOHN ROBERTS!!!"
Just you wait....
“Just because a couple people on the Supreme Court declare something to be ‘constitutional’ does not make it so. The whole thing remains unconstitutional,”
-Rand Paul
NOTE TO RAND: The very fact that the Supreme Court says that something is constitutional does indeed make it so. At one point in our history, slavery was constitutional. For the record, just because something is constitutional does not necessarily make it right. Affordable health care for all people is right. This is such a no-brainer it's embarrassing to have to explain it to grown adults. This begs the question: Has Rand Paul ever sat through so-much-as-a remedial civics lesson? You've gotta wonder.
Leave it to the
Republicans to rain on this parade. Within two hours of this historic decision being made public, uber jackass and Buddy Holly lookalike, Eric Cantor, announced that on July 11, immediately following the Fourth of July recess, the House will vote to repeal "Obamacare". Poor old Eric ought to be careful what he wishes for. Very soon the American people will start to understand - in a way they haven't previously - exactly what the Affordable Healthcare Act (it's not "Obamacare") will mean for their economic security. If they succeed in killing this, it could very well explode in their faces, killing that disgusting party in the process - not that that would be a bad thing, you understand.
"Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy."
-Jesus of Nazareth
MEMO T
O THE "CHRISTIAN" RIGHT: Affordable health care is quite merciful. One-hundred years ago in 1912, Theodore Roosevelt became the first, main stream American politician to propose national health insurance. This is one of the reasons (one of many) why the GOP today never even mentions his name in their campaign literature and propaganda. The type of enlightenment that was personified by TR has become anathema to the Grand OLD Party. It's almost inconceivable to me that a century later we're still having this discussion.
I've been a tad skeptical recently regarding Barack Obama's chances of being reelected come November. What with the Supreme Court's Citizens United debacle and the Voter ID laws being enacted in swing states all across the land, it seemed to me that the man had too much of an uphill climb to contend with. All bets are off. This might be the political victory he desperately needs that will give him enough momentum to beat Romney like a rancid egg. We shall see.
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
tomdegan@frontiernet.net
SUGGESTED VIEWING:
Sicko
a film by Michael Moore
This excellent documentary on America's diseased health care system was released to the theaters five-years-ago today. If you haven't seen it, you ought to. If you have seen it, it's time to watch it again. You can pick it up for under ten dollars. Here's a link to order it off of Amazon.com:
http://www.amazon.com/Sicko/dp/B003008RWA/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1340971712&sr=8-1&keywords=Sicko
Organize a showing of it at your local library if you can. This is a film that every American should see.
AFTERTHOUGHT, 7/2/12:
Do you
want to check out some heavy duty political satire? Just have a look at Susie Sampson's Tea Party Report. Susie goes on location and just talks to people - and the people cooperate. The results are often shocking and always hilarious. Here's a link to her You Tube channel:
http://www.youtube.com/teapartyreport
Onward, Susie Sampson!
"I will act to repeal Obamacare."
What Romney meant:
"I will act to repeal affordable health care for all."
What Romney should have said:
"I will act to repeal Romneycare."
You could
have knocked me over with a kitten's whisker when I got the news. Having awoken stupidly early that morning (before two AM) I was taking a long, late morning's nap when the decision was announced. I didn't feel the need to be wide awake when that decision was revealed. I was certain of the outcome - or so I thought. Justice Anthony Kennedy would side with the right wing junta that has been dominating that court in recent years - as he usually does. Not to my surprise that is exactly what he did. But John Roberts turning to the left??? What gives? This morning he is a hero to the progressives, He's damned-near a hero to me! Life is funny, you know?Some have speculated that Roberts is worried about the legacy of presiding over the worst body of Supreme Court Justices since the assholes who gave us "Plessy v Ferguson" over a century ago. There might very well be something to that. It must make him rip his pillow to shreds just thinking about it as he drifts off to dreamland every night. I would imagine that it gives him ulcers to even read about Chief Justice Roger Brook Taney, author of the Dred Scott decision and (I cringe as I write these words) a distant relative of mine. But who would have thought that John Roberts would pull an Earl Warren on us? Not me. Not in my wildest, weirdest dreams.
Warren was th
e reliably conservative, Republican governor of California who had served as Thomas Dewey's running mate in 1948. Four years later he went for the presidential nomination. When it became clear at the convention of 1952 that he was not going to get the big prize, he made a deal with Dwight Eisenhower. Warren would endorse the general on the condition that he get the first vacant Supreme Court appointment. Ike agreed. That vacancy came up in September of 1953 when Chief Justice Fred Vinson died suddenly of a heart attack. The president hesitated at giving him the top spot but Warren insisted. The agreement had been "the first" vacancy - and a deal was a deal. Ike relented - much to his eternal regret.Earl Warren (to everyone's surprise) turned out to be one of the most progressive jurists in the history of that body. Less than a year after being sworn in, he would gently but firmly guide the court toward the historic "Brown v Board of Education" decision which effectively outlawed school segregation in America forever. Many years later, Eisenhower (a border-state-southerner by birth) would call his appointment of Earl Warren "the biggest damned-fool mistake of my life".
Warren was hugely unpopular during his lifetime - especially (although not surprisingly) in the deep south. Anyone who is old enough to remember driving through that region of the country during the nineteen-fifties and sixties can vividly recall the "IMPEACH EARL WARREN" billboards that littered the landscape. Highly controversial then, history has been quite kind to Chief Justice Earl Warren. His legacy is deeply respected and secure.
I can't
help but wonder if Chief Justice John Roberts was thinking about his own place in history when he came out yesterday on the side of the angels. Is he worried that, a century into the future, his heirs will cringe at the mere mention of his name much in the same way my family cringes at the mention of the name "Roger B. Taney" nearly one-hundred and fifty years after his passing? That could possibly be the reason for his turnaround yesterday. This is just a theory of mine. Whatever the reason, I'm not complaining - trust me. Good for him for doing the right thing.I can see the right wing billboards now:
"IMPEACH JOHN ROBERTS!!!"
Just you wait....
“Just because a couple people on the Supreme Court declare something to be ‘constitutional’ does not make it so. The whole thing remains unconstitutional,”
-Rand Paul
NOTE TO RAND: The very fact that the Supreme Court says that something is constitutional does indeed make it so. At one point in our history, slavery was constitutional. For the record, just because something is constitutional does not necessarily make it right. Affordable health care for all people is right. This is such a no-brainer it's embarrassing to have to explain it to grown adults. This begs the question: Has Rand Paul ever sat through so-much-as-a remedial civics lesson? You've gotta wonder.
Leave it to the
Republicans to rain on this parade. Within two hours of this historic decision being made public, uber jackass and Buddy Holly lookalike, Eric Cantor, announced that on July 11, immediately following the Fourth of July recess, the House will vote to repeal "Obamacare". Poor old Eric ought to be careful what he wishes for. Very soon the American people will start to understand - in a way they haven't previously - exactly what the Affordable Healthcare Act (it's not "Obamacare") will mean for their economic security. If they succeed in killing this, it could very well explode in their faces, killing that disgusting party in the process - not that that would be a bad thing, you understand."Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy."
-Jesus of Nazareth
MEMO T
O THE "CHRISTIAN" RIGHT: Affordable health care is quite merciful. One-hundred years ago in 1912, Theodore Roosevelt became the first, main stream American politician to propose national health insurance. This is one of the reasons (one of many) why the GOP today never even mentions his name in their campaign literature and propaganda. The type of enlightenment that was personified by TR has become anathema to the Grand OLD Party. It's almost inconceivable to me that a century later we're still having this discussion.I've been a tad skeptical recently regarding Barack Obama's chances of being reelected come November. What with the Supreme Court's Citizens United debacle and the Voter ID laws being enacted in swing states all across the land, it seemed to me that the man had too much of an uphill climb to contend with. All bets are off. This might be the political victory he desperately needs that will give him enough momentum to beat Romney like a rancid egg. We shall see.
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
tomdegan@frontiernet.net
SUGGESTED VIEWING:
Sicko
a film by Michael Moore
This excellent documentary on America's diseased health care system was released to the theaters five-years-ago today. If you haven't seen it, you ought to. If you have seen it, it's time to watch it again. You can pick it up for under ten dollars. Here's a link to order it off of Amazon.com:
http://www.amazon.com/Sicko/dp/B003008RWA/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1340971712&sr=8-1&keywords=Sicko
Organize a showing of it at your local library if you can. This is a film that every American should see.
AFTERTHOUGHT, 7/2/12:
Do you
want to check out some heavy duty political satire? Just have a look at Susie Sampson's Tea Party Report. Susie goes on location and just talks to people - and the people cooperate. The results are often shocking and always hilarious. Here's a link to her You Tube channel:http://www.youtube.com/teapartyreport
Onward, Susie Sampson!
posted by Tom Degan @ 4:09 AM
75 comments
75 Comments:
The outcry from the Republicans makes my little ole heart jump with glee. They're threatening to move to Canada. Hahahaha. Hope they have their papers in order before trying to cross the border.
From what I've been reading, boy Eric is in deep trouble in VA with a very low approval rating. It looks very good that his arrogant arse will get kicked out of Congress.
My constitutional law professor told me in 2007 that he had confidence in Roberts. I thought he was crazy but now I see why he felt that way. Knowing that the majority of constitutional law scholars thought the Healthcare Act should pass constitutional muster and knowing that the citizenry was starting to believe the U. S. Supreme Court was partisan along party lines, Roberts showed a moment of intellectual HONESTY and voted accordingly. This leaves me pleasantly surprised and a bit more hopeful as to the fate of our nation. That said, there is still a lot of work ahead to achieve social justice so keep your sleeves rolled up folks and let's get it done !!!
I decided to add a comment about the Healthcare Act. While it is within the realm of reason to consider the mandate a " tax " and uphold the power of Congress to implement it, I think being " forced " to buy a product from a private for profit capitalist source is ethically wrong. The Act should have included a public option so folks can fulfill their obligation without being at the mercy of a ruthless for profit Medical Industrial Complex that cares more about profit than the health of the patients. If the tax penalty imposed gave coverage to the taxpayer then we would finally be on the path to much needed socialized medical care. But it doesn't do so and like all tax revenue whether slated for a specific purpose or not will end up being wasted on something that only will benefit the wealthy.
Ellis D., Esq. "The Act should have included a public option..."
But Obama took that off the table right at the start. He did this because he's such a Socialist*, or something.
* And also the Act wouldn't have passed with it included.
Obama and the dems lied in every possible way about their legislative intents in the 2008 election.
They lied about the terms and taxation of this health care program.
The 2010 election blowout was a reaction to this wholesale deceit.
Anyway you slice it, democracy will sort this out in November. The choices are clear. The democrats have had a hold on congress and white house. Their actions speak volumes. They will no longer be able to lie and be believed.
If obamacare is what people want, the dems will win in November. Otherwise, the people will repudiate JugEars/Pelosi/Reid. I'd bet large on repudiation.
Boltok: I really hope that you will join all the other Republicans in their mass exodus to Canada. Maybe there, with their universal HC, you people can get psychiatric treatment for paranoia and cognitive dissonance.
I am happy here in the USA and happy to spend my own money on health services or anything else for that matter. You left wing theives have countless tyrannical countries to choose from. You don't need to f up this one.
I can't wait for November.
The decision gives me a whole new perspective on Roberts. My less anyaltical brain than your thought maybe it's a tiny penance for calling corporations people. Thinking of him knashing his teeth and ripping his pillow puts an even better light on the man.
There is also a minor bit of speculation that as Roberts occasionally has seizures, he might be a little more compassionate in feeling for the need for universal health care.
Living in IL, I find it quite interesting that Senator Mark Kirk who recently had a stroke is against the ACA. Yet in an interview he recently said that he thanked God that he had access to the best health care in the world. OK, Mark, so you have the access to the best courtesy of my tax dollars, yet you would deny me access to the same?
Boltok, if you are happy to pay your own way, I sincerely hope that you are extremely wealthy or never have any serious medical problems.
Hey conservatives, this is your legislation. It was invented by Heritage Foundation, proposed by the likes of Orrin Hatch, and enacted by your guy Romney. Now you're against it because the black democrat got it enacted? You guys would have a lot more credibility if you said something like "hey look this guy has no ideas, instead he steals from us" rather than spewing the lies and unhinged propaganda for something you invented and supported before you where against it. Morons.
Charles,
Given that you live in a liberal bastion, can you please tell how your state has successfully financed all of its programs. There is a rumor that IL is defaulting on commercial obligations and has massively unfunded obligations. That cannot possibly be true in the land of Obama.
Whether I am rich or poor, and I was very poor once, I don't want your money.
What I've never understood about modern politics is our "collective priorities." There are those who identify themselves as "conservative," who believe that health care is a privelege and not a right.
In reading comment threads by again supposed conservatives, there is this seeming "threat" that those with health care access are now going to have to wait.
Yes...wait. If people are covered under ACA, some supposed conservative might have to wait longer to be seen. Generous lot ain't they?
Even on this thread, we have Boltak believing his pocket is going to be picked by 'thieving liberals.' This is the great distortation/distraction of the right: appeal to conservative's cheapness.
NOTHING is being stolen from anyone. It's like car insurance Boltak; so if we both have Progressive as our carrier, by your logic, YOU are 'stealing' from me as well.
In fact, the only one that might be screwing over Boltak is his precious capitalist employer, who may decided that under this ruling the existing coverage he has may be done away with to cut costs and raise profits.
Which in the conservative mindset is a 'good thing.' After all, those 'job creators' have 'risked' and their investors need to be rewarded.
Since you wingers are so against this ACA, which you invented, then you admit your own ideas were wrong and would instead get behind supporting universal medicare for all (not that you deserve it)?
I love that "Socialist' President! Of course the right winger's don't know a real socialist from that thing they sit on while complaining.
A local neurosurgeon has written a great book and it should be admired for its frankness... It's Enough to Make You Sick by Jeff Lobosky. http://www.amazon.com/Its-Enough-Make-You-Sick/dp/1442214627
Every Tea party enthusiast should read it... might even make them give up tea.
Laneman,
You show yourself to be like most liberals, uncivilized, selfish, and contemptuous. I would gladly endure, smiling from ear to ear, the most painful, long term, debilitating, and untreatable disease knowing that not one cent of my money goes to a useless cunt like you. Likewise, I'd be smiling if the above happened to you.
I have made any political contributions. That changes today.
TD,
I just noticed the advertisement on you page. Do you get paid for my traffic or does it go to Blogger? I'd like to think your efforts as rendering some commercial benefit. How much do you get paid per click? If you are getting paid, I will click the ad each time I visit. It will be like a small contribution for endless humor your blog provieds.
So much for the lefts claim that conservatives never meet them in the middle.
OMG! We're doomed! Call out the militia! Freedom is dead! Here come the death panels, here come the death panels...
Say can anyone show me one of those death panels? I can't see any at all.
I guess I gotta get me the "Right" goggles to see them.
But we should be very, very afraid anyway, if we are to beleive our conned-servatives' shrill hysteria.
Or even if we don't beleive them.
The fact that their cult has them all so brainwashed is more frightening than those death panels that nobody can see.
Laneman,
I visit sites like these to experience the pathetic self pitying fools. I'd bet your hatred is because you feel that you haven't received what you are due in this life. You're not the type that is truly concerned about others. Concerned people don't act like you.
Tell me your life story of woe liberal baby. Maybe you can make me see the light :)
Coming soon..."We can't force you to invest, but we'll tax you if you don't buy treasuries."This is the precedent that is now set.
I have yet to hear one dollars and sense explanation how this Act is going to be funded without increasing the debt given the current economic conditions. Perhaps the first sentence is not too far off.
It's official Obama lied about his "Affordable Health Care Act". It is a tax, it will raise taxes, and will it be funded by taxes. So as the cost of the "Affordable Health Care Act" increases, and it will, just like Medicare cost has gone up,(unlike Teddy Kennedy's promise to the contrary) so will taxes. Dave Duyba must be creaming in his pants over that fact.
What else has Obama lied to us about in the last 3 years?
ZZZZZZ (to comments)
In all the unsustainable societies throughout history, the fingers are pointed, the sides are chosen, and the soon to be slaughtered are vigilant in their defense of their image of holy worth.
The United States society is no different. This society is unsustainable. It is so because the land is raped and poisoned, the people are demoralized and made incompetent, and the governors are profiteers. Go ahead and argue that, IDCare, I just know that everything government touches, in the history of government, turns to a polished turd.
All of this elephants and asses is sickening. Everyone has their brand of horse crap just waiting to be presented as apple pie (don't forget baseball!). The whole thing is so embroiled in the waving of a rag, singing of an off-tune song and pledging with hand on heart to a bunch of frauds, that the monumental deception of it all is monumentally sickening.
Now, here comes the 'if you don't like move the eff out' crowd, all of whom like it, but like to finger-point-bitch about it even more.
Those that follow the beast will find themselves ravaged by it. All government is the beast. It is fictional, has no soul, or compassion, or empathy. It is there to steal your life, soul and heart, without hesitation.
But then again, maybe that is what the 'vote' is all about. Making sure we all get what we want.
Choose your boxcar, lovers of government, history has shown that there is no other way for it to end.
Unless, of course, that you consider yourself as the beginning of government, instead of government's jailhouse bitch. Fly the flag that presents you atop your flagpole, not the flag the re-presents the greatest frauds in all known history. Or don't, and let the henchmen of frauds take you down one at a time...
Yoo hoo, folks,IT ISN'T A TAX.
The Supreme Court certainly did not it a tax. They CALLED it a PENALTY, which may be levied under the government's taxing authority. It's a tax like a speeding ticket or a DUI fine are taxes.
It only affects about 1 – 2% of all Americans.
Don't buy into the extreme right/conservative terminology. It's not active. It's the big lie. It's the propaganda that they're using to gain traction.
"Stone In Italy this only effects 1-2% of Americans", where did you get that bull shit?
Have you read the law to find out what's in it?
So it's not a tax, it's not a mandate, now it's a PENALTY?
Stay tuned for the next liberal loony tune explanation for their failed policy.
Lameman,
Beginning in 2008, the liberals have had complete control for two years, and significant control for two years. Please tell how they have made the world a better place??? You offspring (if so, I wish them luck) will be paying off the debts and damage your ilk have created. If you feel the need to blame someone, the best place to look, especially for you, is in the mirror.
A standing question to all progressive/libs/dems or whatever you call yourselves: show me a place where you have governed that is prosperous.
Boltok, most of that is the Bush-era "temporary" tax cuts, two wars, the recession and the automatic reactions to the recession (increased Medicaid use and other social insurance policies). You've still got the tax cuts (which, remember, the GOP was willing to default on the debt to keep). One war is over (*wink wink*) while the other is fizzling down (although you'll be paying for the VA to deal with the fallout for decades), and the remainder is the continued depressed revenues from the recession and the continued spending to, you know, help people effected by it not have to live in their cars.
Obama's not great. The Dems are, as usual, mostly feckless and partly corporatist. All of that is bad. The GOP, meanwhile, has gone insane. Look at the Ryan plan (more an ideological declaration than than an actual plan, but...). Look at it! It's a five step plan:
1. Poor? Screw you.
2. Old? Screw you.
3. Sick? Screw you.
4. Young? Screw you.(*1)
5. Rich? Here are your tax cuts.
That's not a plan; that's a formula for revolution.(*2)
*1. And, with no hint of irony, self-awareness or shame Ryan accuses Obama of "austerity policies" while doing so.
*2. Good news for you, though, as you'll be able to get a gig as a Pinkerton to put it down.
I just want to say that I can see new spring in our young President's step with the Supreme Court upholding the ACA!
I got tingles up my leg listening to him publicly respond for the first time after the ruling.
My only concern is that the Kock brothers paid off Roberts knowing that having the ACA upheld will enrage the Nazi right wing Fascist Tea Party crowd and the independents in the swing states to bring down Obama on Nov 6.
If I were Obama I would fly off to Martha's Vineyard with Michelle again to celebrate and hobnob with the 1% on the taxpayer's dime.
MO
On Ryan Plan, what happens, as an example if you make $1,000 per year and spend $1,800 per year in perpetuity as an individual? Answer is at some point you can't.
That is what USA and most of Europe is doing (go Poland!!!).
You might say, quantitative easing or money printing is the answer. That is an immediate and harsh tax on low income and fixed income earners. The upside here is Paul Krugman keeps his job, and idiots like you can argue fairness into oblivion.
JG is going to power heave when I say this, but why don't you pick up Sowell's book BASIC ECONOMICS for a start. It's written to a basic level for people whose libraries, such as yours, are filled with coloring books.
Boltok: "The 2010 election blowout was a reaction to this wholesale deceit [about the terms and taxation of the Affordable Healthcare Act]."
Gee, and I thought it was because the Republicans promised us jobs.
Jefferson's Guardian, you're both wrong. It was because Obama was going to kill old people.
Republicans???
How about Obama's Lean Forward and take the Stimulus Package where the sun don't shine.
Last time I checked Harry won't let a budget come to a vote. Clearly the Republicans were in complete control and squandered their power.
Obama prefers to kill the youngest of people: 4th trimester abortions. Also, he likes playing Drones on his playstation.
Boltok, Your ignorance, conceit and complete lack of compassion for anyone or anything is becoming embarrassing to watch.
Boltok: "4th trimester..."
WTF?!
Ellis D., Esq.: "...I think being 'forced' to buy a product from a private for profit capitalist source is ethically wrong. The Act should have included a public option..."
I totally and wholeheartedly agree with you. I, for one, have been against this aspect of the Affordable Care Act from day-one. As whole, it's a bonanza for the health insurance providers, which, understandably, makes sense given the president's (and congress's) corporatist underpinning. But, it may very well be better than the current "system" (which is what conservatives, apparently, want to maintain).
Modusoperandi: "Jefferson's Guardian, you're both wrong. It was because Obama was going to kill old people."
Yum! Soylent Green!
boltok,
How come it takes 60 votes to pass anything in the senate? Because of republican obstructionism. Nothing gets done because of conservative bullshit like overuse of the fillibuster and anonymous holds and stupid unrelated riders and amendments added to bills. Look at the crap coming out of the tea bagger house! How many jobs bills did they pass? Instead they bring up abortion bills and crap like resolutions reaffirming the stupid "In God We Trust" is our national motto.
And please DO NOT talk to me about debts and damage created. The debt and damage was created by conservatives. This debt is caused by the financial crisis, tax cuts, and unfunded wars all brought on by conservatives. The conservative policies of torture, deregulation, privatization, free trade, outsourcing are what have damaged this country.
"A standing question to all progressive/libs/dems or whatever you call yourselves: show me a place where you have governed that is prosperous."
Take a look at Germany, Norway, Sweden, The Netherlands, Denmark. And states like Vermont, NY, Washington, Oregon are way better off than conservative bastion hell holes like MS, Alabama, and LA.
"Stay tuned for the next liberal loony tune explanation for their failed policy"
This Policy is a conservative policy. It came from a conservative think tank, promoted my conservative congressmen, and enacted by a conservative gov.
"Take a look at Germany, Norway, Sweden, The Netherlands, Denmark."
Ok. Take a look at Greece, Spain, Italy, England, Ireland.
Your point?
Harley A.: "Ok. Take a look at Greece, Spain, Italy, England, Ireland."
Or...take a look at America.
Your point?
OK. Look at Luxembourg and Ethiopia.
Your point?
Actually, if this goes on much longer, it will solidify my actual point.
Time to reprise this this open letter that my brother Jeff wrote from France (where he lives) to his fellow Americans:
HELL CARE
"As an American who has been living in Europe for most of the last 20 years, one who has visited doctors numerous times in four different countries, whose two children were brought into this world in European hospitals (France and England), who has himself spent a week in a public British hospital, and who underwent an operation in a private British clinic, I think I can say a thing or two about health care in Europe.
"Our out of pocket expenses for the births? Zero. Even though in France my wife spent 5 days in the hospital after the birth of our first daughter, which is standard by the way.
"During the three years we lived in England, we never once paid for medicine for our children. Children get drugs for free in the UK. Visits to the GP are free for everybody.
"My expenses for the week in the NHS hospital? Zero.
"The cost of the operation in the private clinic? Zero, it was covered by my work insurance, as was the post-op physical therapy I needed.
"In Western Europe you would never be forced to sell your home in order to pay for your medical bills, as happens all too often in America when catastrophic illness strikes and the insurance company decides that your condition was 'pre-existing'.
"The quality of the care? Mostly good. French hospitals are excellent, even the food is decent. The food at the NHS hospital was beyond awful, but then again most English food is pretty bad (though they do have great Indian food). At night, they were understaffed, but I am guessing that, apart from that place where Dr. House works, most American hospitals are understaffed at night, too.
"In short, in the US, you pay more, get less, and die younger than we do in Europe. What part of that don't you understand?
"My fellow Americans, you have nothing to fear except those who would use fear to keep you enslaved to the myth of the might of the American health care system."
Jeff Degan
What can I tell you? The guy is a Communist. Not only does he live in France, he actually likes it there. An eternal shame to the good name of the Degan family. Let us boil down his seven paragraphs to their juicy essentials, shall we?
HEALTH CARE IN THIS COUNTRY SUCKS!
I'm just sayin'.
Tom,
One of my son's has been living in Europe for years and has pretty much the same story as your brother about the health care. Not too bad, really.
JG
4th Trimester. You are correct in your WTF assertion. Mr. Jug Ears, while in IL senate voted in support of killing an infant that survived an abortion attempt. So, lets say you are a viable fetus, and a tough one at that. You manhandle the vacuum tube and spinal puncture device. You climb out of the womb as fast as you can because is a damned dangerous place. You take a breath of fresh air and see the lights. Obama says its OK to kill this little survivor because mom had intended to kill it in the first place.
This is not a when does life begin argument.
Laneman,
It's not obsturctionism, its the law and/or senate rules that affect how votes are conducted. Both parties have been at both ends of this knife. It is not obstructionism if you vote and use rules to object against what you do not believe in.
Either party could have changed this over time. Neither has.
Let's, says a reincarnated Ronald Reagan were President. How would you feel about a super majority then. I'm sure your opinion would be different.
Laneman,
I find it interesting that Germany was your first choice in the series. Didn't those folks hold a Holocaust not too long ago. I think there is a sign when entering Germany that says, if you are a Gypsy, Jew or a Catholic, don't get out of line, we know how to fix that problem (Mexicans know that the Germans could extend this sentiment, so they don't go there). You certainly dont see 30 million Mexicans crossing their border.
Tell me about Chicago, New York, New York City, Gary IN, Camdem NJ, Baltimore, Philadelphia, ...
Romney sure likes health care. Well, at least until he didn't any more. Now that he must answer to his corporate overlords. Just go to YouTube and check it out for yourself. The man is a complete tool. He'll be anything he's needed to be at any moment. Thus the "Etch-A-Sketch" branding. Perfect label. Conservatives are soooo fortunate to have him as their answer for America's ills.
Boltok: "This is not a when does life begin argument."
And this relates to Roberts' vote of affirmative, how?
Harley A.: "...if this goes on much longer, it will solidify my actual point."
Which was...?
JG
You're right, its now the government being able to say when life ends.
My bad.
They are already saying he has a health problem with epilepsy that makes him incompetent to be a Justice. You wait, they will try to impeach him. Hope he gets it as I doubt it will work unless Americans are so foolish as to turn the Senate over to the Republicans in which case, they'll also aim to impeach Obama. They like to spend their time that way.
Jefferson's Guardian "Which was...?"
That those European hellholes' budgets are being broken across the back of their cushy socialist* healthcare systems, crushing them under the weight of them paying less per capita on healthcare than the US, while covering everybody or virtually. Shut up, that's why!
* SOCIALISM!!!
Modusoperandi: "...crushing them under the weight of them paying less per capita on healthcare than the US..."
Thank you, Modusoperandi, for the clarification. I knew there was something I wasn't seeing... ;-)
boltok,
Yes it is obstructionism. The republicans only want one thing, to make sure as little as possible gets accomplished until the black man is out of the white house. It is unfortunate that the democrats lacked the will and the courage to make the rule changes when they could.
You do realize that there is a different government in Germany now then when the Holocaust occurred, right? And that Mexico does not border Germany right?
Obamacare is the largest tax increase in the history of our country. If it follows the pattern of Medicare, it will only become more expensive. In order to fund Obamamcare, the 50 states will have to increase taxes to pay for it, or cut Medicare services.
Whether its good or bad, the truth is it is not going to reduced cost, Govt programs never do, and will provide mediocre health services free to all.
Example of failed Govt liberal economic planning and some still want the same Govt to be in charge of our health care?
General Motors (GM) shares fell to a fresh 2012 closing low of 19.57 on Monday. The stock hit 19 in mid-December, the lowest since the auto giant came public at $33 in November 2010 following its June 2009 bankruptcy.
Normally you might say, tough luck investors. But this is Government Motors. The Treasury still owns 26.5% of GM, or 500 million shares. Taxpayers are still out $26.4 billion in direct aid. Shares would have to hit $53 for the government to break even.
Those shares were worth about $9.8 billion as of Monday. That would leave taxpayers with a loss of $16.6 billion.
But that’s not the full tally. Obama let GM keep $45 billion in past losses to offset future profits. Those are usually wiped out or slashed, along with debts, in bankruptcy. But the administration essentially gifted $45 billion in write-offs (book value $18 billion) to GM. So when GM earned a $7.6 billion profit in 2011 (more on that below), it paid no taxes.
Include that $18 billion gift, and taxpayers’ true loss climbs to nearly $35 billion.
MO – not my point.
I realize our system has problems and is probably overpriced. My point is that you cannot simply point to a country with socialized healthcare that ostensibly functions well and expect we can easily mimic it and solve our problems – like a silver bullet. The US and Sweden (for example) are very different culturally, geopolitically, economically. Sweden is a Scandinavian backwater – socially monolithic, relatively productive, isolationist, etc… Germany was also brought up as an example – actually a relatively expensive healthcare system, though 90% socialized. The point being that none are a “cookie-cutter” solution for us. So, to say “hey, look at Sweden, Denmark,…..” is oversimplification. There are plenty of examples of socialized countries who are not faring quite so well. And, I submit that true social costs are elusive figures at best, so I wouldn’t be so quick to assume we understand the true costs of ANY country’s healthcare system. Is our system broken? Yes, parts of it. Overuse of the insurance model, fear of litigation on the providers’ part, unhealthy lifestyles on ours, over-medication – all issues that contribute – and none having a whit to do with a “public” option.
Lameman,
I'm done arguing with you for now. You are a fool.
I am willing to resume this conversation in about a year when the Republicans have the White House, majority/super majority in the Senate and majority in the House. I can hear the liberal pukes like you crying from the highest mountains how the filibuster is essential to stop the Right Wing Extremist Tea Bagging tyrants. (I was suprised to learn this week that Anderson Cooper is a Tea Bagger. I would have never guessed.)
How does someone become as fucked up as you???
"How does someone become as fucked up as you???"
Just ask Jefferson's Guardian, or Modusoperandi, they are experts in becoming fucked up!!
Anon,
You touched on something that crossed my mind. I think Lameman is our domestic MO.
Harley A.: I realize our system has problems and is probably overpriced
Probably...?
Harley, as I've asked on another blog, what's the republican solution? If not the Affordable Healthcare Act, what do you suggest? I haven't heard a legitimate response from the conservative camp. Why is that?
"Our out of pocket expenses for the births? Zero. Even though in France my wife spent 5 days in the hospital after the birth of our first daughter, which is standard by the way.
"During the three years we lived in England, we never once paid for medicine for our children. Children get drugs for free in the UK. Visits to the GP are free for everybody.
"My expenses for the week in the NHS hospital? Zero.
"The cost of the operation in the private clinic? Zero, it was covered by my work insurance, as was the post-op physical therapy I needed."
DO THOSE SOCIALIST COUNTRIES HAVE MAGICAL PIXIE DUST THAT THEY SPRINKLE EVERYWHERE SO THAT EVERYTHING IS FREE? DO SOCIALIST COUNTRIES KNOW HOW TO PLAY THREE CARD MONTY TO SHIFT COSTS AND COOK THE BOOKS?
YOU HAVE TO BE A DELUSIONAL LEFTIST TO BELIEVE "THINGS ARE FREE". PULL YOUR HEADS OUT OF YOUR DUMB ASSES!
Just the Falsehoods! (drag-queening as "Vanessa" on his truly liberated days): "PULL YOUR HEADS OUT OF YOUR DUMB ASSES!"
C'mon "Vanessa", you know that you get extra angry when you wear your sticky nylon hosiery in this hot weather, and the fake chartreuse-colored wig and matching corset can't be helping matters. It's really hot in Connecticut right now, so just chill.
Besides, it's Independence Day, you should be wearing something more appropriate.
Supporters of Obamacare are willfully ignorant of basic economics. The fundamental problem with health care costs in America is that the doctor-patient relationship has been profoundly altered by third-party interference. Third parties, either government agencies themselves or nominally private insurance companies virtually forced upon us by government policies, have not only destroyed doctor-patient confidentiality. They also inescapably drive up costs because basic market disciplines — supply and demand, price sensitivity, and profit signals — are destroyed.
Obamacare, via its insurance mandate, is more of the same misdiagnosis.
Gabriel Vidal, chief operating officer of a U.S. hospital system, sees this problem squarely in his daily work. As he explains, Obamacare will only make matters worse because it fails to recognize that "costs are out of control because they do not reflect prices created by the voluntary exchange between patients and providers" like every well-functioning industry."
Instead, "health costs reflect the distortions that government regulators have introduced through reimbursement mechanisms created by command-and-control bureaucracies at federal and state levels," he continues. "But it is theoretically and practically impossible for a bureaucrat — no matter how accurate the cost data, how well-intentioned and how sophisticated his computer program — to come up with the correct and just price. The (doctor-patient) relationship" has been corrupted by the intrusion of government and its intermediaries (HMOs, for example) to such an extent that we can no longer speak of a relationship that can produce meaningful pricing information."Health care's problem is too much government.
Absent such pricing information, our system increasingly resembles socialist systems with centralized price setting, shortages, rationing, apathy, and declining quality of care. As the situation deteriorates, fewer bright young people want to practice medicine and fewer foreign doctors seek to immigrate.
Lets hope this year's election is like the 2010 election and the progressives get flushed down the Toilet!
"Ron Paul" is right. It's so much cheaper to let poor people get sick and die. Health care costs money after all, and are they really worth it?
I have come to the conclusion on this Fourth of July that the enlightened "Thinker" Dave Dubya is severely underemployed!
This man has superior cerebral capabilities like myself which entitle him to be part of my authoritarian group of Washington central planners who know what is best for the unenlightened masses and to be working as a prison guard is an outrage. Where is the justice? It must be Bush's fault for Dave's underemployment!
Have a HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY!!!
While you still have some independence.
Dave "the enlightened prison guard" Dubya said:
"Ron Paul" is right. It's so much cheaper to let poor people get sick and die. Health care costs money after all, and are they really worth it?
Ron Paul was actually a doctor and are you actually deluded enough to believe he would like poor people to get sick and die? You are an idiot besides being a red diaper baby marxist who says he has no idea of who Saul Alinsky is.
You are my favorite obfuscating "teen drama queen" from those glorious days of the Utopian Age of Aquarius where peace and love would rule the planet! Look on the bright side Dave (and JG), todays pot is grown to be much more potent, even Ellis D and MO will agree that today's pot produces bigger illegal smiles!
Ron Paul "Supporters of Obamacare are willfully ignorant of basic economics. The fundamental problem with health care costs in America is that the doctor-patient relationship has been profoundly altered by third-party interference. Third parties, either government agencies themselves or nominally private insurance companies virtually forced upon us by government policies, have not only destroyed doctor-patient confidentiality."
Exactly. That's why Medicare is cheaper than Medicare Advantage which is cheaper than the equivalent private insurance would be if they had to insure old people.
"They also inescapably drive up costs because basic market disciplines — supply and demand, price sensitivity, and profit signals — are destroyed.."
How much "market discipline" will one find in an industry where one side can literally answer "How much have you got?" when the other asks "How much it will cost me not to die?"?
Even the idea of "competition" pales somewhat when the idea of shopping around for surgery comes up ("Hi. I've got this bad ticker that's starting to make me be dead. What kind of a deal can you give me?").
Healthcare is not like buying a car. Doctors are not like salesmen in different car lots; competition doesn't work. It's a nice idea, but
Free Market healthcare is a myth
"Obamacare, via its insurance mandate, is more of the same misdiagnosis."
My issue is that it gives the same group that's so poor at controlling its own costs (administrative costs in private insurance are far higher than those of, say, Medicare) a bunch more customers.
Dave Dubya "'Ron Paul' is right. It's so much cheaper to let poor people get sick and die."
Oh, please! I mean, come on! They aren't going to "let poor people get sick and die". They're going to let the Invisible Hand of the Free Market do it.
Do you doubt the wisdom of the Invisible Hand? Do you?!
Modusoperandi: "Do you doubt the wisdom of the Invisible Hand? Do you?!"
I think Just My Two Cents! has been stroked too many times by the "Invisible Hand". He has totally gone blind.
For the most part, I like this post, but come on, Susie Sampson as an afterthought? She should be foremost in our hearts and minds, especially as we celebrate the birth of this great nation.
While I agree with the general substance of what you're saying, two small points:
1. You say, in response to Rand Paul's inane comment on constitutionality, "The very fact that the Supreme Court says that something is constitutional does indeed make it so. At one point in our history, slavery was constitutional." This is a bad example. Slavery became unconstitutional by the ratification of the 13th Amendment and not by a decision of the Supreme Court.
2. I don't think "begs the question" means what you think it means.
The problem with Tom's rejoinder to Rand's statement is that it semantic and does not take into account Rand's intent. What Rand was saying is that the Supreme Court can and does contradict the Constitution in their judgements at times. In his opinion (right or wrong), he feels the decision to be in conflict with the Constitution.
Harley A.: "...the Supreme Court can and does contradict the Constitution in their judgements at times."
Like with Citizens United...
And Roe v. Wade...
Personhood being a crucial issue in both cases. Seems maybe they have a hang up on that one particular concept...
Anon,
Obama/Romney car is not the largest tax increase in history. Not even close:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/files/2012/07/Obamacare-tax-chart.jpg
And it does not give free health services to all,
Harley A.: "Seems maybe they have a hang up on that one particular concept..."
Possibly. The Burger Court was deemed by many to not go far enough in defining what makes a person; the Roberts Court going too far.
Historians may one day view both as being as divisive as slavery. Will the method to solve the divisiveness be as horrific? We'll find out.
Post a Comment
<< Home