Health care advocates: Obama can fix system / LJWorld.com

Archive for Monday, August 25, 2008

August 25, 2008

Ron Edmonds/AP Photo

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., waves to delegates as he takes the stage Monday at the Democratic National Convention in Denver. In the back is his niece, Caroline Kennedy.

Election 2008

In-depth coverage of the candidates and the issues, all leading up to the Aug. 5 primary and the Nov. 4 general election.

Denver — The problem that has defied a solution for decades and has left nearly 50 million Americans without heath coverage is on a trajectory to getting fixed, advocates for a public-run system said Monday.

"The only question is how long will it take to get there," U.S. Rep. John Conyers Jr., D-Mich., told about 100 people at a meeting of the Progressive Democrats of America.

Standing in the way, he said, are "just a few filthy-rich corporatists who are making vulgar profits."

Conyers, who is chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, has a bill that would establish a universal health insurance program with a single-payer system.

Advocates for expanded health care meeting at the Democratic National Convention say they believe that their presidential hopeful, U.S. Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., can accomplish the task, but they said he is going to have to be pushed and helped.

They said the Obama campaign was prodded to include language in the Democratic Party platform on an iron-clad commitment that every American be guaranteed affordable, comprehensive health care.

"We have to keep the pressure on," said Dr. Rocky White, who has pushed for a single-payer system in Colorado. "It is going to happen. Where is the dam going to crack first?"

Dr. Vernon Mills, a pediatrician who practices in Leavenworth, said he believes Obama has the wherewithal to move Congress forward on getting health care to those who need it.

Mills said Obama's upbringing - as the child of a economically struggling single mother, and his work in helping poor neighborhoods in Chicago - gives him experience in knowing the plight of working families.

"He has empathy," Mills said.

But just as importantly, he said, he believes Obama can motivate people to work on the issue.

He said presumed Republican nominee U.S. Sen. John McCain's proposal, which includes a tax credit to offset the cost of insurance, is not enough.

"It doesn't fill the gap," Mills said.

Kansas state Sen. Marci Francisco, D-Lawrence, said it will take the work of many people to improve the health care system.

"I don't see it as Obama doing this. I see this as the country doing this," Francisco said.

She said once more people realize how important health care is, including issues of nutrition and living healthy lifestyles, then there will be reform.

"All of us can't continue on a path that we are on," she said.

Discussion

LJWorld.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.
Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.

25 August 2008
at 11 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

VTHawk (Anonymous) says…

Great, just go ahead and print Leftist propaganda as news…Just what are “vulgar” profits? I though that profit was the motive for free enterprise, and the natural result of business transactions. We don't hear of Apple's “vulgar profits”, or those of the Merc.
25 August 2008
at 11:12 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

tunahelper (Anonymous) says…

all people need to do is to put down their cell phone, get off the couch, turn off their PS2 and get a job!i work hard and get benefits thru my work. I'll be damned if I have to pay for some stupid lowlife who won't go and get a job.
25 August 2008
at 11:17 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

chargdup (Anonymous) says…

tunahelper,I have two jobs, I also get my benefits through work.I believe all Americans should be entitled to a health care system where everybody pays in to the system, and everyone benefits.There's not enough room on this board for me to go off on the health care “system” that's supposed to be so “glorious.”You're just ignorant.
25 August 2008
at 11:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

merrill (Anonymous) says…

How much is the sick U.S. health care system costing you?If more people understood the full size of the health care bill that they as individuals are already paying, the corporate opponents of a universal single-payer system might find it far more difficult to frighten the public about the costs of that system.http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2008/0508harrison.htmlSupport HR 676
25 August 2008
at 11:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

merrill (Anonymous) says…

About H.R. 676The opponents of national health care, mostly those who are badly misinformed or paid agents of big corporations that are now making huge profits off of the current system by denying needed care to millions, will try to scare you by calling it “socialized medicine”. You're going to hear that a lot in the coming months but don't be fooled; nothing could be farther from the truth. In fact, the goal of this program is simply to create a fair and equitable single payer health care plan that all Americans can afford and benefit from while leaving most of the existing structure of practicing health care professionals and facilities completely alone. You choose your doctors, your hospitals and need no permission from anyone to go see them whenever necessary. No exclusions, no pre-existing conditions, no denied claims, just top rate, affordable, professional care for you and your family including prescription drugs, mental health AND dental services in addition to long term care, whenever you need it.
25 August 2008
at 11:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

merrill (Anonymous) says…

Is national health insurance 'socialized medicine'?No!Socialized medicine is a system in which doctors and hospitals work for and draw salaries from the government. Doctors in the Veterans Administration and the Armed Services are paid this way. The health systems in Great Britain and Spain are other examples. But in most European countries, Canada, Australia and Japan they have socialized health insurance, not socialized medicine. The government pays for care that is delivered in the private (mostly not-for-profit) sector. This is similar to how Medicare works in this country. Doctors are in private practice and are paid on a fee-for-service basis from government funds. The government does not own or manage medical practices or hospitals.The term socialized medicine is often used to conjure up images of government bureaucratic interference in medical care. That does not describe what happens in countries with national health insurance where doctors and patients often have more clinical freedom than in the U.S., where bureaucrats attempt to direct care.
25 August 2008
at 11:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

twaldaisy (Anonymous) says…

It is called the insurance company takes your premium and keeps it, denies your claim several times even though you are covered, and then after many weeks maybe even months, ins. finally pays, but during all those delays they have earned interest on the money. I have paid into the system for years and not used much except for a broken leg. Went in for a regular yearly check up with the same doc and was denied 3 times and it was a covered service. Some goes to research but not from the insurance company side. I strongly feel that if ins. would pay for more preventative office visits (i.e. regular check ups, x-rays, hell throw in an MRI body scan every 2 years) the overall cost of health care could go down. Quit using the ER as a clinic for your earache, toothache, whatever and that would be helpful also. I have worked in healthcare for over 20 years and seen the BS from all sides (docs, nurses, billing, ins company, patients). Its a moneymaker and will continue to be so. Ins companies spend millions on lobbyists so good luck getting that changed.

25 August 2008
at 11:37 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

twaldaisy (Anonymous) says…

Yeah Merrill it is called Medicare, which is being taken out of my paycheck right now for patients that use it right now. If the Gov't had not messed with Medicare and Social Security the money taken out of my check now would be for me later, but again, it is paying for the people that worked hard most of their lives and paid into the system alerady, but the gov't pi**ed their money away. And who is going to watch this single payor system to make sure there is no fraud? Medicare/Medicaid have learned the hard way and I guarantee fraud is still ongoing.
25 August 2008
at 11:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

merrill (Anonymous) says…

Why National Health Insurance?* We'll all receive identical healthcare* Provides extraordinary leverage against suppliers* Protects families and business alike from being gouged by the healthcare industry* Treatment for serious illness such as cancer will not be cut off because a patient has reached the point insurance companies will pay no more:happens everyday* 60% of healthcare insurance today is paid with tax dollars so why not 100% that covers all who need treatment.* Citizens will not be forced to lose all of their assets or file bankruptcy due to serious illness as does happen somewhere everyday as we speak* Eliminates healthcare dollars going into special interest campaign cookie jars* Eliminates healthcare dollars from financing golden parachutes*Veterans receive care immediately for whatever symptoms war has imposed on their physical or mental health. No more waiting on the Dept. of DefenseNational Healthcare eliminates over 1,000 different policies thus eliminating tons of wasteful administrative costs. That money could be included towards 100% coverage. It is estimated todays administrative costs runs at 33%:that is a lot of dough.
25 August 2008
at 11:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

Comrade Conyers wrote (In the best Party line jargon!):”Standing in the way, he said, are “just a few filthy-rich corporatists who are making vulgar profits.”Marion writes:”Corporatists”?Shades of “Dr.” Castro!And Lenin.Since when are profits vulgar?
25 August 2008
at 11:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

BigPrune (Anonymous) says…

Obama has empathy? Are you freaking serious Dr from Leavenworth?Narcissists are incapable of having empathy. Politicians, lawyers, and movie stars don't have empathy. That's why most of them have so many failed marriages/multiple marriages.Frankly, they need to have the reporter's name listed along with the headline so I can avoid clicking on leftist propaganda.
25 August 2008
at 11:54 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

BigPrune (Anonymous) says…

One more thing, the Democrats in Washington are far richer monetarily than the Republicans. Why the lies, always?
26 August 2008
at 12:08 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Ragingbear (Anonymous) says…

Obama will use his herd of magical unicorns to produce medicine for our sick and disabled. Makes about as much sense as all the other health care plans I have seen lately.
26 August 2008
at 1:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Daytrader23 (Anonymous) says…

Acupuncture and Chinese medicine 5,000 years old, average life expectancy of the people who use it, 97 years and never confined to a wheel chair or invalid.Modern Western Medicine and all of it's “breakthroughs” 200 years old. ( Even though it really is over 2,000 years old however Hippocrates work was repressed by the church for centuries.) So 200 years old, average life expectancy, a whopping 76 years while spending the last few as an invalid in a nursing home. I not asking you to “believe” Chinese medicine is superior, just look at the results. And the results have been constant for over 5,000 years. I have studied both and both have their merits in fact even Chinese doctors suggest a mix of both. (I would only use a western doctor for surgery) Chinese medicine is much cheaper however it is not supported by insurance companies who would prefer you to stay sick. Some people say you can't prove Chinese medicine is more effective, See the first paragraph.
26 August 2008
at 2:19 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

VTHawk (Anonymous) says…

Life expectancy by country:USA: 78.06China: 73.0(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy)I like Eastern medicine for many things, but I still like “Western Medicine” when I am ill.

26 August 2008
at 3:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Daytrader23 (Anonymous) says…

Anonymous userVTHawk (Anonymous) says:Life expectancy by country:USA: 78.06China: 73.0(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cou:)I like Eastern medicine for many things, but I still like “Western Medicine” when I am ill.–––––––––––––––––––-The life expectancy was from people who used Chinese medicine, not by country. The idea that once you're in China it's all herbs and poultices is a silly stereotype. China's life expectancy overall is low because they started from way behind the poverty curve. The gain in average life expectancy in the U.S. over the last century or so was almost entirely caused not by medical advances but by the Pure Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act, the child labor laws, and inprovements in working conditions, including the five-day week. So life expectancy by country is not a fair comparison to life expectancy by medical styles which is even harder to find statistics. The best way to find out is to visit a Shaolin temple and see first hand the effects of Qigong.
26 August 2008
at 5:30 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

creamygnome (Anonymous) says…

Profits are vulgar when people start dying because they can't afford to see a doctor. What is it, like 10,000 people a year die simply because they don't have health insurance?I believe Microsoft had to be broken up due to being a “monopoly”? How is that any different than the health care system. Let's find a list of how many health insurance executives are making more than 1 million dollars a year. What about ExxonMobile? Didn't they make something like 40 billion PROFIT last year? profit.Stupid capitalism.
26 August 2008
at 5:52 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rantor (Anonymous) says…

What's left to fix? Hillary already fixed right?
26 August 2008
at 6:10 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

KsTwister (Anonymous) says…

For those seniors who have already paid heavily into a system that is letting them down, having to worry about healthcare now is ridiculous. If it is this way for the next generation they had better get ready for no help at all.
26 August 2008
at 6:13 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

mike_blur (Mike Blur) says…

VTHawk, don't you find it a little unsettling that for being the wealthiest and bestest nation in the world, we're 45th in life expectancy? (29th among UN member nations.)I'll submit that life expectancy directly correlates with quality of health care.Nations with life expectancies greater than the USA (short list):Canada, France, Italy, Israel, Austria, Norway, Sweden, Spain, Switzerland, Australia, Greece, Japan, Germany, South Korea, Jordan, the UK, etc.If health care was the NCAA Tournament, the USA wouldn't make it to the second round.
26 August 2008
at 6:18 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

POCO (Anonymous) says…

Is Health Care a “right” because the American people need it? We also need food. Is food from the government also an American “right”? Let's move right along with shelter.. a “right”? Clothing? A right? What are the rights of Americans as defined by our Constituion/Bill of Rights? I don't see anything about health care. We need to be real careful about what is and what is not a “right” or we will become a socialized country. We already provide health care under the Medicare/Medicaid programs. Health care for needy chldren (whose mothers do not bother to sign them up for), free charity care subsidized by the government, free medication from pharmaceutical companies for those who cannot afford it, etc., etc.Who are the uninsured? A whole lot of young people who would rather spend their money on iPODs and other toys than sign up for health insurance in the workplace. Check the statistics…. know your facts before you decide on killing a gopher in your back yard with an atomic bomb called nationalized health care or whatever socially acceptable name you want.
26 August 2008
at 6:51 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says…

merrill (Anonymous) says: >>”Is national health insurance 'socialized medicine'?”“>>No!”Let's see:Premiums, since they come from taxes, will be based on income, not age, health, family size, or any other factor actually related to how much a family needs or uses healthcare. In other words, everyone pays according to their ability, and receives according to their needs.That would be Marxism, merrill.”* We'll all receive identical healthcare”The same lousy healthcare, with long waiting lists, scarcity of doctors, and entire categories of treatment not paid for - nationwide.”* Provides extraordinary leverage against suppliers”You mean like the federal government does with prescription medicines, merrill? Oh, wait, they don't negotiate on those, do they?By the way, merrill, how have they been using that 'leverage' so far? Who typically pays a lower rate for medical services, Medicaid/Medicare or private insurance companies?”* Protects families and business alike from being gouged by the healthcare industry”And instead sets a single-payer system with premiums collected with the force of law to gouge us even worse (except the good folks who already believe in living off someone else's income).”* Citizens will not be forced to lose all of their assets or file bankruptcy due to serious illness as does happen somewhere everyday as we speak”Maybe they should have insurance.”* Eliminates healthcare dollars going into special interest campaign cookie jars”How much has the AMA and various other groups spent on pushing for this nationalized system, merrill?Of course physicians are in favor. Medicare/Medicaid pay higher rates than the private insurers do, and with payment guaranteed by the federal government, their prices will go up, not down, like anything else the fed guarantees payment for. Nationalized healthcare does nothing - nothing - to address the real source of the problem, the *cost* of medical care, not who's paying for it. Even Obama said that, which drew a lot of heat from the other Democrats during the primaries compared to the socialized medicine advocates like Clinton and Edwards.Those of you who think claims will never be turned dowm have never applied for Social Securitiy or VA benefits. Or have never been on Medicaid. They do it all the time.You want to expand Medicaid to cover those who truly *need* it? (That does not include everyone who currently does not have insurance, by the way.) Fine. But it's pretty hysterical that the loons who rant against the unfairness, inefficiency, and inept nature of the government on a daily basis think it's a good idea to trust them with our healthcare.
26 August 2008
at 7:07 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

POCO (Anonymous) says…

I have actually interviewed a number of young people and under 65-yr olds to determine why they are among the uninsured. Some of the reasons include: ,Opted out so I could spend $$ on things I want to do.I'll just wait until I'm old enough for Medicare and hope that nothing happens in the meantime. I'm young and nothing will happen to me. I just need a mammogram now and then. I'll wait until the state gives out the free ones. I'm not payin' those co-pays. My employer should give me free insurance and better better benefits. I'm not paying part of the premiums. Who needs it. I was busy and forgot to sign my kids up. If I need care, I'll just go to the E.R. They can't turn me away. For these reasons, we need to have national health care????

26 August 2008
at 7:19 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

POCO (Anonymous) says…

Once again, I'm struck by the photo that begins an Obama story. Why do so many photos of Obama show him with his nose in the air? Here's the official body language interpretation of a person with his nose in the air:”Nose in the Air: When the nose is raised by tilting the head back, the message is clear. This person is saying, “I'm superior. I'm better than you.” Literally, “looking down one's nose” is the universal symbol of snobbery.”Someone responded on another question by saying he/she was sick of seeing Obama's nasal hairs in every photo. Perhaps… as an elitist, this comes naturally.
26 August 2008
at 7:26 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

kansas778 (Anonymous) says…

Mike Blur (Mike Blur) says: don't you find it a little unsettling that for being the wealthiest and bestest nation in the world, we're 45th in life expectancy? (29th among UN member nations.)I'll submit that life expectancy directly correlates with quality of health care.******************************************Actually, if you go by life expectancy, the US health care system is the best in the world. Don't shut off your brains, and pay attention”The US life expectancy rate is affected by many social pathologies that are absent or rare in many other nations, such as high rates of homicide, drug use, AIDS and obesity. However, if Americans survive to enter a nursing home, their life expectancy rises to the longest in the world. The fact that many do not survive is not a fault of the present health care system. Compared to other nations, the US makes available more high-tech devices and procedures. America has four times as many open-heart surgeries as Germany and six times as much radiation therapy and eight times as many magnetic resonance imaging machines as Canada. America's physicians, with a universe of modern technology at their fingertips, are the envy of the world's physicians. Based on purchasing-power parities, America has the highest standard of living in the world: the US gross domestic product per capita is more than 55 percent higher than that of Western Europe, 35 percent more than in Australia, 28 percent greater than in Japan, and 11 percent higher than in Canada. There is nothing strange, then, about Americans devoting an increasing share of the incomes on medical attention as they grow more prosperous. Surely there is at least as much justification for spending a marginal dollar on health as on a nicer car, more recreation, or another beer.”Doug Bandow
26 August 2008
at 8:11 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

OnlyTheOne (Anonymous) says…

Tunahelper you have a lot to learn about life and jobs!Now my intended comment about this “Vote for Obama” advertisement:hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
26 August 2008
at 8:19 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

barrypenders (Anonymous) says…

Of course people in health care want the government check. It sure beats having to act responsible for an insurance company.
26 August 2008
at 8:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

BuddhaDude (Anonymous) says…

It is just a shame that you have to have insurance in order to afford health care.
26 August 2008
at 8:45 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

RonBurgandy (Anonymous) says…

Merrill,Great points. Health care is a right…especially for the wealthiest nation in the world. Ridiculous how little people care or how they think it is a simple “get a job” black and white solution. Sad.
26 August 2008
at 8:47 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

POCO (Anonymous) says…

“BuddaDude: It is just a shame that you have to have insurance in order to afford health care.”BuddaDude… I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. Or, perhaps, I can't believe what you are saying. This makes little sense…. should is the most modern health care system in the world be free? Or????
26 August 2008
at 8:50 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

bondmen (Anonymous) says…

Anyone care to venture a guess about who is the best person to practice a tried and true and inexpensive way to stay healthy via preventative health care? Yes that's right, each and everyone of us, i.e., individuals living responsibly. A good diet, exercise and not engaging in unsafe behavior works to each persons benefit!Folks who are not responsible need someone else to pay for their drugs and surgery and will be swayed to vote socialist for so called “free” government health care. Only one little problem with this pipe dream - the federal government is financially broke and taxpayers (workers and owners) cannot afford the tax increase necessary to pay for it without further damaging an already over leveraged economy.Exceptions of course should be made for the genetically impaired and certain accidents where poor (irresponsible) behavior was not involved. Why should responsible, thoughtful members of society be forced to pay for those who are irresponsible and uncaring?

26 August 2008
at 8:51 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

KsTwister (Anonymous) says…

Wait until people find out that their retirement insurance is going to give them the boot when they turn 65,67,or 69 as the case is now. Then what? Hope they can afford several hundred a month for what it will cost in a few years at this rate of increase. Good luck on that bet.
26 August 2008
at 9:49 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

canyon_wren (Anonymous) says…

I won't go into the issue of health care but it is unbelievable that ANYONE would come right out and say Obama can fix it! How did people (not all, fortunately) ever get duped into thinking he will be the miracle worker he says he can be. No one is THAT wonderful—and certainly he is far down the list of people who can even approach it.
26 August 2008
at 10:25 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

POCO (Anonymous) says…

Obama is selling people a “bill of goods” and too many are dumb enough to believe that he can solve the problems of the world. This country has a ton of problems, but more government intervention and social programs are not going to solve them. We've got a Jimmy Carter II on our hands and just look what Jimmy Carter I did to this country.
26 August 2008
at 10:49 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

“Obama can fix system”Lol! Is he still smoking?
26 August 2008
at 10:50 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

KU_cynic (Anonymous) says…

Bad headline.I object to the characterization of supporters of more government intervention as “health care advocates.” The implicit suggestion is that those who favor employer/self paid insurance tax parity, health care savings accounts, allowing customers to select from state-approved insurance options nationwide, and other solutions that preserve choice and incentives are somehow NOT “health care advocates”. There is much to do to make the US healh care system better. Emphasizing government control and proposals that limit choice and stifle innovation are wrongheaded positions in the view of many “health care advocates”.
26 August 2008
at 10:55 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

POCO (Anonymous) says…

“75x55 says: Is he still smoking?”Interesting point…. Obama “can fix our broken health care system”…. heck, he can't even ensure a better health status for himself since personally he still smokes. He has a history of risky behaviors in illegal drug use. Yet, he can single-handedly pave a better health future for Americans. LOL is correct !!!!
26 August 2008
at 11:28 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

POCO (Anonymous) says…

I wish someone would help me understand “why Obama”? The only reason that I seem to hear is because we are sick of George W. OK…. that's a reason, but why do they think Obama has all the answers. He has limited experience, was considered bright while in school, was fairly effective as a community organizer. But, we are looking for someone to take over the most important job in our country. If we were in the position of hiring and Obama presented his resume, what does he offer us? Little time in the Senate, nothing solid in the way of passed legislation, supposed experience in a committee that he was never a member of…. and what else?? Would anyone hire him as the CEO of a large company? Why is anyone considering him for the highest office in the land? One who wants to bring about change… but, does he have a clue how to do it? This is a serious question that I pose. I really wish I understood “why Obama”.
26 August 2008
at 11:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

cabella (Anonymous) says…

I am just so sick and tired of this paper shoving this propaganda in our faces and laughing to themselves as they write and post it here. At least i don`t pay for this big cage crap trapper…

26 August 2008
at 2:03 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

acoupstick (Anonymous) says…

Douglas (Doug) Bandow is a former columnist with Copley News Service and former senior fellow at the Cato Institute. He resigned in 2005 due a scandal involving payments for columns from lobbyist Jack Abramoff -wikipediaObviously he's a good source.
26 August 2008
at 3:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

snap_pop_no_crackle (Anonymous) says…

Bill Clinton says: “The former president, speaking in Denver, posed a hypothetical question in which he seemed to suggest that that the Democratic Party was making a mistake in choosing Obama as its presidential nominee.He said: “Suppose you're a voter, and you've got candidate X and candidate Y. Candidate X agrees with you on everything, but you don't think that candidate can deliver on anything at all. Candidate Y you agree with on about half the issues, but he can deliver. Which candidate are you going to vote for?”Then, perhaps mindful of how his off-the-cuff remarks might be taken, Clinton added after a pause: “This has nothing to do with what's going on now.”“http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/bill-clinton-in-denver-again-undercuts-obama-2008-08-26.html
26 August 2008
at 3:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Confrontation (Anonymous) says…

Anyone who truly believes that his/her work benefits are guaranteed forever is a true idiot. More and more employers are cutting health benefits. It's the bottom line that matters, not whether or not you can get medical care. The only ones who don't want universal health care are those who aren't intelligent enough to realize that their insurance companies will eventually screw them. Unless you have millions in savings to cover the additional costs that your insurance company refuses to pay, then you and your family won't have a chance.
26 August 2008
at 5:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

kansas778 (Anonymous) says…

acoupstick (Anonymous) says: Douglas (Doug) Bandow is a former columnist with Copley News Service and former senior fellow at the Cato Institute. He resigned in 2005 due a scandal involving payments for columns from lobbyist Jack Abramoff -wikipediaObviously he's a good source.*******************************…said while citing wikipedia. Regardless, any substantive reply in store?