In an odd coincidence, the House debate on Saturday to overhaul health care took place on the third anniversary of the 2006 election that gave Democrats majority control after 12 years of Republican dominance. It fell to President Obama and to Congressional leaders to persuade those Democrats still sweating the final vote that it would not prove the party’s undoing in next November’s midterm elections.
Both Mr. Obama and the House leaders showcased Democrats’ newest colleague, Representative Bill Owens, who last Tuesday won a special election in an upstate New York district that Republicans had held since 1872. In the campaign, Mr. Owens gave unabashed support to the pending House health care bill, despite the opposition of national conservative groups, including the new Tea Party Patriots, who backed Mr. Owens’s conservative rival.
Mr. Obama, during his private pep talk to Democrats, recognized Mr. Owens’s election and then posed a question to the other lawmakers. According to Representative Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, who supports the health care bill, the president asked, “Does anybody think that the teabag, anti-government people are going to support them if they bring down health care? All it will do is confuse and dispirit” Democratic voters “and it will encourage the extremists.”
Another freshman Democrat from New Mexico, Representative Martin Heinrich, said the president’s comments overall were reassuring. “If you want to see a recipe for failure,” Mr. Heinrich said, “don’t do the things you talked about in your campaigns and turn your back on your base. All the independent voters in the world don’t matter if the Democrats don’t turn out.”
“This is an opportunity to do something as big as Social Security,” he added. “And me, personally, I don’t want to be on the wrong side of history.”
I do think that there are anti-government people, but the tea party attendees (most of them) aren't. Though I usually vote Democratic, I have considered going to a Tea Party myself as I believe that the deficits and debt are one of the most importatn issues in the US today.
I have mixed feeling on what should be done about healthcare. Haven't read about this particular bill.
What do you do when even your own President shows no respect for a group of people? Interesting.............
I think it's a virtue to be anti-government when it's anti-bloated-pig government like we have today.
I have mixed feeling on what should be done about healthcare. Haven't read about this particular bill.
Nobody has read that particular bill, especially the idiots who voted for it.
What do you do? Continue the resistance. Keep in mind "It is never wrong to take your country's side against your government; it is always wrong to take your government's side against your country."
Robert, I am not sure what Congressman represents your district here in New Jersey, but Congressman Pallone's office doesn't want to hear anyone's concerns regarding this. They hang up on you. He supposedly knows all about this plan...everything! When I called the others in our State on Wednesday, they were all still reading. Doubtful they absorbed what it said or even finished reading. But hey, President Obama wanted it, Nancy Botox delivered it....and here we go!
Now now, Suzanne, no need to be disrespectful to Madam Speaker by messing up her name.
It's Nancy Botoxsi
We have Rob Andrews...worthless to call his office. I imagine the staffer answering, laying the phone down and doing her nails while she mumbles at appropriate times"...ummmm...mmm-hmmm....really?....o my..."
"What do you do when even your own President shows no respect for a group of people? " Suzanne
I think we can safely say that most (if not all) in the government these days have no respect for the American people.
Love the name Botoxi!
Sending a Green Star is a simple way to say "Thank you" You cannot currently send a star to Katii because you have done so within the last week
- I am a bad girl!
Robert - He is one of the worst of worsts! I spoke to his staff last week and then I called them this morning to thank them for being idiots. Didn't phrase it quite like that but.............
I feel for you, truly. I got Lance and he's doing an ok job...with some exceptions.
Nancy - Good point! But I thought the President wasn't even aware of us? hmmmmmm.......
Well, I am sure that he is not aware of me as an individual. But none of them have been. Ah well.
What do you do? Continue the resistance. Keep in mind "It is never wrong to take your country's side against your government; it is always wrong to take your government's side against your country."
We were saying that years ago when Bush Jr ruled, and you would have called us traitors.
Well, on this one I will disagree with you Robert. I have never seen a President so into himself and his cronies as "W".
GWBush wasn't against the country. BHObama is.
Really? I don't beleive that either. As long as you keep making false statements, unfounded accusations, and rely on double standards to justify your narrow views instead of objective, verifiable facts that all can agree upon, you will be shot down by those who know better and have already done their own research. Which I have. Bush Jr was against the American people and proved it by starting a war without a declaration by Congress for reasons that would never have made sense to anyone if Americans had not been scared witless by the hysteria that followed 9-11. He manipulated and used us and I will never forgive him for that.
Dale, it really is an opinion. While you and I disagree with Robert, it is an opinion.
Robert is entitled to his opinions. He is not entitled to facts that have no basis in reality. Had we held Bush Jr to that standard in 2002, he still might have invaded Iraq, but at least he wouldn't have gotten away with that claim of Iraq having weapons of mass destruction. He might have told the truth, that it was all about settling an old political grudge and getting our hands on Iraq's oil. Iraq was not even threatening to invade any of its neighbors that year. We'd kept Iraq under economic sanctions for 12 years, complete with no-fly zones. Remember that Iraq had fought an eight year long war with Iran and also suffered badly in the Persian Gulf War. Saddam even allowed the UN weapons inspectors back into his country. It seems clear that Iraq was too weak to pose much of a threat to anyone, so our invading it in 2003 was totally unjustified. We could have just continued the sanctions and the no-fly zones and later found a way to enable the Kurds and the Shiites to overthrow Saddam themselves. Only that way Iraq might have fallen under the influence of Iran, another of America's enemies. Both Iran and Iraq had once been our allies under oppressive tyrants and then became our enemies; Iran because of a popular revolution, and Iraq when it stopped doing what we wanted it to and did what it wanted to, WITHOUT our permission! It attacked and sacked a weaker nation, Kuwait. We attacked and sacked a weaker nation, Iraq. So how are we any better?
How much longer will it be before Saudi Arabia turns against us too? Most of the 9-11 hijackers were from THAT country! Why have we forgotten that?!
What about the claims that Israel also has WMDs, including nuclear weapons? Should we send UN inspectors to it too? And then also invade it before the inspectors can do a through study of it?
I haven't been to a tea party but from what I see they are made up of taxpayers who have put a lot of money into the system and want a say as to how that money is spent, and how much they want their taxes to increase. Seem like reasonable requests. I guess I'd have to say they remind me of myself! The money Bush and congress spent on questionable wars is gone; no use whining about that now but we can try to keep making things worse.
Dan, I will gladly join with the tea party people when they also take a determined stand against overseas wars, which also cost vast amounts of taxpayers' money and LIVES! But instead they bash Obama for domestic policies unrelated to wars. I can't stand that double standard. That's why I admire the Libertarians more than either the Democrats or the Republicans, even while thinking most of the Libs are too extreme.
Dale,
That's a good point. I think it just took time for this mess to come to a head. I suspect you will see these people questioning our foreign entanglements more. Not just wars but all these overseas bases. Some of Republican leadership is more than a little worried about these people as they tend to include libertarians and independents. Just because they oppose the Democrats now doesn't mean they'll support Republicans. At least I hope the Republican leadership doesn't get that idea.
The Tea Partiers are anti bigger government, bigger taxes, bigger spending. Not all have the exact same agenda, not all are from the same walks of life.
SEATTLE today—
House Speaker Nancy Botoxsi toured Swedish Medical Center in Seattle on Monday, calling it an example of what's right with health care.
The California Democrat says it was appropriate to visit Swedish as her first public appearance after the House passed the health care bill over the weekend.
Botoxsi says Swedish is a leader in innovation while attempting to hold down costs.
Congressmen Jim McDermott and Jay Inslee, Democrats from Washington, accompanied Botoxsi on the tour.
On Saturday, the House passed a far-reaching plan for overhauling the U.S. health care system on a 220-215 vote.
The House bill is projected to expand coverage to 36 million uninsured, or 96 percent of Americans.
Whether or not they are racists (I think the group consensus from the thread was that there were some racists but not all and some rallies had racists but not others), the tea party events have prominently featured pictures of Obama as Hitler and called him as well as many others "fascists" and "socialists."
Given those facts, it is reasonable for Obama to tell potential supporters in Congress that they might as well vote for the health care bill because voting against it is never going to placate the tea party people.
People in this forum have griped that Obama doesn't show any leadership, but to be a leader you have to choose a direction even if it angers some people. With that in mind, why wouldn't you choose a direction that will probably anger people who hate you anyway?
When Bush was President, there was no reason for him to try to placate people who did not want war. He chose war and essentially said "Too bad, but I've chosen another direction." I disagreed with him, but he probably knew he wasn't going to get my vote anyway. And I never said Bush was a fascist or Hitler.
We can't have our cake and eat it too all the time, with leadership and everybody getting what they want. Making tough policy choices will anger people.
(Generally and not anybody in this group if they haven't done it) If you've already charged to the streets to call a President a Nazi, don't be surprised if he writes your vote off and doesn't worry if he pisses you off. You already told him you'll hate him regardless of his further actions.
Whether or not they are racists (I think the group consensus from the thread was that there were some racists but not all and some rallies had racists but not others), the tea party events have prominently featured pictures of Obama as Hitler and called him as well as many others "fascists" and "socialists."
Given those facts, it is reasonable for Obama to tell potential supporters in Congress that they might as well vote for the health care bill because voting against it is never going to placate the tea party people.
People in this forum have griped that Obama doesn't show any leadership, but to be a leader you have to choose a direction even if it angers some people. With that in mind, why wouldn't you choose a direction that will probably anger people who hate you anyway?
When Bush was President, there was no reason for him to try to placate people who did not want war. He chose war and essentially said "Too bad, but I've chosen another direction." I disagreed with him, but he probably knew he wasn't going to get my vote anyway. And I never said Bush was a fascist or Hitler.
We can't have our cake and eat it too all the time, with leadership and everybody getting what they want. Making tough policy choices will anger people.
(Generally and not anybody in this group if they haven't done it) If you've already charged to the streets to call a President a Nazi, don't be surprised if he writes your vote off and doesn't worry if he pisses you off. You already told him you'll hate him regardless of his further actions.
good points Kevin.
Robert, I usually disagree with you, but the following quote from your post is perfect:
"It is never wrong to take your country's side against your government; it is always wrong to take your government's side against your country."
To date, I have been to four tea parties. I have never seen nazi symbolism or President Obama's picture in any way. Dan is correct that tea partiers (including me) are not only anti democrat, it can be anyone who is pushing sh$$ty policy on to us. President Obama never cared what the tea partiers thought from day one on April 15th. His own words reflect I didn't know there were any protestors (not exact words). I think they should be concerned with us. ALL OF THEM!!!!
Regular people like me who have been footing the bills for a long time who sat by and allowed it to take place are finished with the foolishness. Maybe we should-of ... could-of ... would-of till the cows came home, but we didn't. We are now. End of Rant 
ps - Botoxsis bill represents that those that don't purchase insurance will be fined 2.5% of their salary. If they don't pay that they face 5 years in prison or $250,000 fine. Let them send me to jail....a little hardworking mother. That should go over really well. Now our jails will not only be filled with small time drug offenders, but people who can't afford healthcare. I guess that's one way of getting it to them. SO STUPID!!!!!!!!!!!!
This post was modified from its original form on 09 Nov, 18:24
Perhaps there were no accusations of Obama being a Nazi or a socialist at the rallies you were at, but they were at other rallies. Now regardless of whether the attendees were racists, it is a reasonable conclusion that nothing Obama could do from those days forward would win a significant number of those votes.
They were mad about the bailouts that were started by Bush but supported by Obama, too. They were mad about the debt, but Obama knows well there is not enough he could do about the debt between the rallies and the 2010 election to change their minds. What was he going to do, raise taxes to decrease the debt?
Realistically, Suzanne, is there anything Obama could do at this point to get your vote and win over the votes of most of the people at those rallies? I can't remember reading a single thing you have posted in favor of Obama. On a lot of things, you seem to have a visceral disagreement with him.
I'm not saying you don't have a right to your opinion or are irrational or anything like that. I'm not trying to convince you to like him, but I think you have to admit that it's fair for him to assume that he wasn't likely to win your support or the support of most people at the rallies (especially the ones with Hitler, Marx, socialist, Nazi, traitor, etc. charges).
For example, would it be fair to say that you won't be supporting Nancy Pelosi any time soon when you call her "botoxsis"?
It is my opinion that the more Liberals try to paint Tea Party attendees as racists - which they are not - the more it will draw support to the Tea Parties and the more people will attend Tea Parties.
I say, let Liberals keep making this charge of racism because, in the end, it is fueling the Tea Party movement. And that is good for America. IMO.
"Realistically, Suzanne, is there anything Obama could do at this point to get your vote and win over the votes of most of the people at those rallies? I can't remember reading a single thing you have posted in favor of Obama. On a lot of things, you seem to have a visceral disagreement with him." Kevin
As Katii might say Absofukinglutely. You know you would be wrong to a degree because in the beginning I gave him a break. I still have spoken of him respectfully and I might add it is getting harder and harder to do so. The dismissal by him of the tea partiers from the beginning showed a lack of respect from the get go. The crazies really infiltrated after that and they are so outnumbered by the likes of me. Those racism charges are lame and do not reflect tea partiers.
I don't like his spend...spend...spend policies. His bigger, bigger government policies. Lets tax, tax, tax policies. They do nothing to help the likes of me. They just make life harder.
This totally may not be fair, but I lost all respect for this man for coming here and campaigning at 5 events for the very governor who put New Jersey in to this deep, deep hole we are in. That coupled with the fact that he has not gone to show support for those at Fort Hood yet disgust me.
Yes, I know he's going tomorrow. I say it's a day late and a dollar short for the Commander and Chief. Just my feelings.
So you would be right...NO VOTES FROM ME
This post was modified from its original form on 09 Nov, 19:28
As far as Botoxsis (that's Katii's, but I love it) NO she won't get a vote either ever........
(Generally and not anybody in this group if they haven't done it) If you've already charged to the streets to call a President a Nazi, don't be surprised if he writes your vote off and doesn't worry if he pisses you off. You already told him you'll hate him regardless of his further actions. ~Kevin
Good point, Kevin.
For the record, I am disappointed that Obama has not followed thru on some of his promises, but I'm still glad he's the President because - as the powers-that-be would have us choose from those chosen for us to choose from - he's not McCain/Palin. The shock and disappointment that made me cry the morning of November 3, 2004 would have paled to the shock disappointment I'd have felt if McCain/Palin had been elected. Allowing that the vast majority of American voters are 'party voters' no matter what (much to my sadness and dismay), I am proud of my fellow Americans that they vetoed McCain.
"As Katii might say Absofukinglutely. You know you would be wrong to a degree because in the beginning I gave him a break. I still have spoken of him respectfully and I might add it is getting harder and harder to do so. The dismissal by him of the tea partiers from the beginning showed a lack of respect from the get go."--Suzanne
Even if you were being respectful to Obama, it's a reasonable decision by him to assume he's not going to get your vote or the other tea party protesters. That's essentially what his point was.
It can be portrayed as disrespectful, but it is accurate to recognize that there is no point now in trying to compromise to appeal to people who go to these rallies. Remember that you seem to have gone to the least radical versions of these rallies. It's simply Obama making a realistic assessment of the situation.
"As far as Botoxsis (that's Katii's, but I love it) NO she won't get a vote either ever........"--Suzanne
So don't be surprised if Pelosi does nothing to seek to change your mind. She's lost any chance of appealing to you, so it does not hurt her to anger you even more.
Kevin, Not surprised and not disappointed. Pretty much expected. How many Tea paties have you attended that you know are filled with radicals? Just curious. President Obama just like all others is supposed to represent us all. Nice to know that the points of views of thousands don't mean squat to him just like all the others. No change at all. Good for him.
I voted for President Obama. I am 58 years old and have never seen a president take office with our economy failing and 2 wars that seem to be unendable. He promised health care reform...but if we don't quit bickering with each other...our Congress is going to make it mandatory to purchase unaffordable health care so the insurance conglomerates are happy with them. Where is our STRONG PUBLIC OPTION that was a necessary part of this reform? This was the item that we were promised would bring down health care costs? IMO, if there is not a strong public option included in this bill...it should be killed...and we should all work together to do it. I would rather see our entire health system socialized than see this pork barrel congressional plan put into effect.
Dale, we won't miss you at the Tea Parties. I post my opinions, facts and truth. You post diatribes. Does Hugo Chaveaz write your material? Fidel Castro?
Only in America would you get 80% of the people satisfied with the health care that they already have.
I don't think that is an accurate reflection Christian.
It's ok because when they start to jail us because we still can't afford health care or the penalty they plan to impose. We'll get free health care in prison...see it all works out in the long run. Plus we will have the added beneifit of bankrupting small business. I think all in all it's a really good plan put forth by our wonderful congress.
Dear Robert,
Are you including the 40 million or more Americans who have no health care coverage in your statistics? Are they also satisfied? Then I guess we need no health care refrom because, well, those without health care coverage love it the way it is!
Speaking as one without healthcare for their family. I think this plan suks. I absolutely believe there should be reform, most people do. It's in the details. I think to penalize the very life blood of this country (small business) and individuals who's lives depend on their business, is insane. Rather than let them build back up and recoup. Let's hit him again with yet another bill to pay .... when they can't.
I agree with you, Suzanne.
The details say whether this currenbt plan will work or not work; will provide true, adequate, reasonable, fair and equal health care coverage to those without coverage - without penalizing them in the process.
This plan, IMO, does not do that and therefore it should be rejected.
Which doesn't diminish the immediate need, IMO, of a plan that does work.
You have a point, Suzanne. Maybe we could get all of the care2 members put in the same jail. Just imagine the dicussions we could have!!
And Robert, who on earth are the 80% of Americans satisfied with their healthcare?
It is my opinion that the more Liberals try to paint Tea Party attendees as racists - which they are not - the more it will draw support to the Tea Parties and the more people will attend Tea Parties.
I say, let Liberals keep making this charge of racism because, in the end, it is fueling the Tea Party movement. And that is good for America. IMO. ~Knate
I believe you're right, Knate, and I agree - that is good for America.
I would rather see our entire health system socialized than see this pork barrel congressional plan put into effect. ~Beverly
Me too, and I'm not in the least in favor of giving the feds yet more power over the people (I'm in favor of taking back much - most - of the power they have over the people). It just makes me sick that big medicine has it's huge paw-prints all over this non-reform bill.
And damn straight Obama should be listening to every American, especially those who oppose his policies. He promised as much in his acceptance speech:
I will listen to you, especially when we disagree.
...
As Lincoln said to a nation far more divided than ours, we are not enemies but friends. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection.
And to those Americans whose support I have yet to earn, I may not have won your vote tonight, but I hear your voices. I need your help. And I will be your president, too. ~President-elect Barack Obama
I tell you right now I'll go to prison rather than give them a dime if I can't afford to get healthcare. But I will go screaming and kicking. Most people who know me, know I am a decent hard-working law abiding citizen. I think I could get people to make a stink when they come for me.
They can put us all in jail with the low level criminals, that will really be beneficial to our debt. They'll have to pay for our groceries, healthcare, dental, eye, room and board.....hmmmm I am liking the plan more and more.
Only in America would you get a large movement of people opposing health care reform. 
~Christian
Christian, those Americans are not opposing "health care reform."
Americans are opposing non-health care reform and more fleecing by for-profit-big-medicine. Our higher taxes will not go to pay for more and better health care, they will go to add to the profits of private insurance companies. That is not even remotely 'reform.'
Only in America would it cost $4,000,000.00 (4 million dollars) to die, as it did just a few months ago for a friend of ours.
And Robert, who on earth are the 80% of Americans satisfied with their healthcare? ~Beverly
Indeed 
Is there an employer ANYWHERE who is "satisfied" paying astronomical prices that rise daily to provide medical benefits to their employees ? or a middle class employee who is "satisfied" paying upwards of $12,000 per year for their 'portion' of employer costs to provide medical insurance?
I agree, Katii.
Americans want fair, equal, true health care reform - that works, is efficient and its costs don't send us into the poorhouse.
Health care reform just for the sake of health care reform is NOT health care reform.
Costs must be controlled - and quality must be provided for all - and coverage must be extended to all. Is that impossible to achieve? I say, no. But it is impossible under the current health care proposals and they should be rejected.
The legislators need to stop &%#ing around, to listen to the people, and to get it right. No other alternative is acceptable.
How much should the best health care in the world cost?
Who should pay for it?
If the problem is 12 million uninsured, wrap them up in Medicaid and give them insurance. But don't dick around with MY coverage.
I agree with you, Robert, that no one should "dick around" with your health care coverage. Not at all.
And I would go for a plan that somehow, fairly and if feasible economically, takes all those without health care coverage and puts them under the umbrellas of Medicaid and Medicare.
As long as your health care coverage - that you are satisfied with - is not altered in any way at all. And as long as you and other tax payers don't end up paying an outrageous increase in your own health care costs and your taxes.
But don't dick around with MY coverage. ~Robert
In what way do you imagine YOUR coverage would be dicked with, Robert?
I agree with Katii and Knate, Health care reform was presented to the public as a means of reducing medical costs from bankrupting our country within decades. We were told that we needed a strong public option to reduce these costs...but instead we have a bill that will make it mandatory for us to purchase insurance from these private insurance agencies. If this were an affordable option, do you think people would decline health care coverage? Of course not! Now not only will we not be able to afford health care premiums...but they want to fine us if we can't. Does this make any sense?
Once again, I restate my opinion...WE MUST FIGHT HARD TO INCLUDE A STRONG PUBLIC OPTION WITH PREMIUMS SIMILAR TO MEDICARE. If we can't pass a bill including these things...then we must kill the current givaway planned for the insurance industry. We would be better off if they did nothing.
"Kevin, Not surprised and not disappointed. Pretty much expected. How many Tea paties have you attended that you know are filled with radicals? Just curious. President Obama just like all others is supposed to represent us all. Nice to know that the points of views of thousands don't mean squat to him just like all the others. No change at all. Good for him."--Suzanne
Are you saying that there haven't been any pictures of Obama as Hitler, no one has been calling him a socialist, and no one has been calling him a fascist?
I haven't been to any of these rallies, but I have met plenty of people who have and who supported them. They are not shy about the "Obama is a socialist" or "Obama is a fascist" kind of crap. It's not real subtle.
And while you can spin it as Obama not caring about the opinions of thousands, this is a country of hundreds of millions, and tyhose thousand have pretty much already decided not to vote for him.
Katii...have you been paying attention to the whole mess? The "government option" will be a way for providers to dump their med benefits into the government bin. Private employers and pension plans will pay a one time penalty to get rid of paying for coverage for employees and pensioners. After 2013 it will be illegal for you to join a private HC plan, to move from one job to another and keepm your private HC, or to change your HC options.
That's how my coverage will be dicked with.
Once the camel's nose is under the tent it's just a matter of time before he is crapping on the rug.
Kevin, same discussion different day. You know I have said, we have all seen certain signs. They have not been at the rallies I've attended. I certainly don't believe the Nazi and racist signs are in the majority. Socialist, well maybe Kevin, people honestly feel he is a socialist pushing socialist policies. Maybe you should attend the rallies and give them the true definition of the word.
The thousand you refer to is inaccurate, I would think it is fair to say we are easily in the hundreds of thousands. But hey we won't vote for him so we don't matter. What a croc!
This post was modified from its original form on 10 Nov, 9:21
Exactly why should employers be paying for people's health care anyway? I agree 100% that these so-called "reforms" being offered up to the American public are almost anything but. The difference is that as a non-Tea Bagger, I still believe reform is necessary whereas Tea Baggers view reform as some kind of anti-American push to turn America into a communist state.
But what's wrong with single-payer, universal health care? It's the most popular system in the world by far. What is this objection to having the government pick up the tab? It's so much cheaper and more efficient.
Granted, nothing the US government does is cheap and efficient, but it doesn't have to be that way.
"Granted, nothing the US government does is cheap and efficient, but it doesn't have to be that way." Christian
You answered your own question. It wouldn't be cheap if the government touches it. They will come after individuals and small business to make up the cost. I think a single-payer system would be great without government involvement but with strict regulation and caps placed on insurance companies.
Then why aren't Tea Baggers fighting for that instead of expending all their energy opposing president Obama just because he's a black democrat?
If one opposes something, wouldn't it make sense to provide an alternative instead of just opposing something for the sake of opposing something?
Then why aren't Tea Baggers fighting for that instead of expending all their energy opposing president Obama just because he's a black democrat?
What would to say to any "tea baggers" that are themselves black?
Christian, I think it is fair to say, you haven't attended any of these parties. We are not opposing a black President. That is so insulting and ridiculous. Truly.
I have a favor to ask and of course, you don't have to oblige. Do you think you could stop referring to us as Tea Baggers. It really is rude and quite irritating. I know you wouldn't want to present yourself that way...would you? 
Thanks for the consideration.
Christian, I don't know a lot about the tea-party people but I do know this......Suzanne is a supporter of them and she is definately not a racist or a bigot and is not opposed to Obama JUST because he is black. She is opposed to some of his policies on a political front. She is not a mindless bigot and I am sure she is not alone in that! I don't agree with Suzanne on a lot of things, but that is just politics for you. There is no need to accuse people unfairly of things.
"Then why aren't Tea Baggers fighting for that instead of expending all their energy opposing president Obama just because he's a black democrat?"
Christian,
A slight correction: Obama's only half black, his mother was white so I think both races are equally represented. Having said that, I don't think his race has anything to do with it; it's all about taxes and deficit spending.
This post was modified from its original form on 10 Nov, 11:07
I think that racists and bigots are in the minority of the Tea Party members. Christian - that's a bit of a narrow interpretation. I'm certainly not a member myself, but I think it's unfair to characterize them as being prejudiced in the majority.
I do have to say that anyone who thinks that Obama is a socialist really has no idea what a socialist is...Obama is pretty middle of the road...and moreso since he has been in office
In all fairness to Christian it is much worse being labled by a former President.
As far as the socialist issue, some think it...some don't. We are not all the same, but share similar goals or concerns. Not identical.
I know that Suzanne - I never think it is fair to lump all the people in a group together.
There are plenty of folks outside of the Tea Party who feel that way about Obama.
Pleas excuse me if you thought that I was looking at the Tea Party members as a monolithic group.
Not at all Elizabeth. The post really wasn't directed at you, it wa just a thought.
I find you to be a very fair minded and considerate person. I enjoy your point of view
How's it in Albany today.....Cloudy?
Where is our STRONG PUBLIC OPTION that was a necessary part of this reform? This was the item that we were promised would bring down health care costs? IMO, if there is not a strong public option included in this bill...it should be killed... Beverly:
I completely agree Beverly, without a strong public option this will only exasperate the situation.
As to wondering if anyone is listening.
Anthony --
We're holding a strategy conference call this Wednesday, November 11th, at 7:00 p.m. for some of our top Iowa volunteers -- and I'd like to invite you to join.
This is from the organizing Iowa campaign, outreach of the Obama Whitehouse.
So yes, they are listening, they just fail to comprehend what they are hearing. To many interests of avarice are in the way.
The "government option" will be a way for providers to dump their med benefits into the government bin. Private employers and pension plans will pay a one time penalty to get rid of paying for coverage for employees and pensioners. After 2013 it will be illegal for you to join a private HC plan, to move from one job to another and keepm your private HC, or to change your HC options. ~Robert
Can you point to the specific language in HR3200 that talks about all that, Robert? I ask because I find it hard to believe that the insurance industry would allow the feds to make it "illegal" to purchase their private insurance. But I'd be interested in reading about the dumping part in the bill too.
Robert,
You seem to be critical of anything that has been proposed to fix health care. Is it your opinion that as long as you have health care, everything is okay, too bad for those of us who don't. Don't you believe the statistics that show that the price of health care will bankrupt our economy within decades? How would you fix this mess? Or do you work for the insurance industry at the age of what? 107? Say something positive!
We have a government program called Medicare for older americans and now they want to raid MC resources to pay for a government program to cover 96% of other Americans without insurance? How fair would that be?
Who are the 4% left out of the equation altogether?
That is why we all need to become involved. Medicare was not to be raided to pay for this reforn, the top 5% were to have their taxes raised, and they deserve to have their taxes raised to the levels they were pre Reagan. It is not fair that the poor and middleclass have to struggle to survive while the rich become richer. Ten years ago, how many people did you hear of that possessed a billion dollars? To me, that is greed and it is disgusting.
Our government program for the elderly is an example of socialized medicine called Medicare. It works well. I believe it would work for all citizens of this country. Of course, that would leave many insurance reps unemployed, maybe they could find a way to insure for climate change damage or something equally ridiculous...LOL
Beverly,
Unfortunately raising taxes on the top 5% will not pay for this plan. Taxing the middle class will be necessary unless we keep going into more debt. If that's what it takes, and we all agree then maybe that's the way to go; however, telling us that it won't increase the deficit and taxes won't increase is insulting my intellegence.
I wouldn't say Medicare is working well. In fact private insurance is subsidizing Medicare because Medicare doesn't pay doctors enough so they make it up by billing everyone else at a higher rate. Even with that Medicare is going to be in trouble in a few years. We should learn from the Medicare experience that a program like this is probably going to have cost overruns like Medicare. By 1990 Medicare ending up costing 10 times what was projected. We should assume the same miscalculations for the current plans.
I'm not saying to leave the status quo, I'm just saying the bills so far are bad ideas.
IMHO, and as I've said many times, the only way to 'reform' health care is to reduce the cost of medical services and treatments. And, IMHO, the only way to do that is to get the medical industry out of Wall Street and make it a non-profit industry, like all essential services should be.
I don't know what to call it when a single chemo injection costs $6 Thousand.
I don't know what to call it when it costs $4 Million for someone to die after a catostrophic accident that left the victim brain dead and so physically broken there was no life to be had just because 'medicine' could keep his heart beating.
What do you call that?
Sometimes I feel torn about this subject - because I am one of those without healthcare.
My COBRA ended in July of 2008, and I cannot get an individual policy because I have pre-existing conditions. I think I may have post4ed this already, but I had breast cancer diagnosed in December of 2002. Until I have been cancer-free for TEN years, no one will insure me, unless, of course, I get health insurance through a job.
I'm looking forward to some changes in the system, but I'm not loving the current offerings from the House too much.
My understanding is that people who don't get health insurance will be fined. Well, a lot of people cannot afford it at the current rates...
And if forced to buy healthcare, it may cost more than your income.
I am sorry to hear about this.
Dear Elizabeth,
A number of our members have the same problems you have.
We all should be concerned about this, and concerned about how the Congress intends to "reform" health care. Will this be a good reform. A bad reform? No reform? A wasted effort? An improvement for people who need improvements? Or a giant boondoggle that will only benefit the powers that are already in control?
Elizabeth,
I'm sorry to hear about your problem getting insurance. I am grateful that my wife and I are now covered but I do worry about the future and the possibility that we may loose our insurance. Do you have any options like Medicaid?
Elizabeth,
I am so sorry about your unfortunate situation. May things work out fast and well for you!
"A slight correction: Obama's only half black, his mother was white so I think both races are equally represented."
I agree with this Dan, but the people who care at all what race our president is see only a black man.
“Kevin, same discussion different day. You know I have said, we have all seen certain signs. They have not been at the rallies I've attended. I certainly don't believe the Nazi and racist signs are in the majority. Socialist, well maybe Kevin, people honestly feel he is a socialist pushing socialist policies. ”—Suzanne
I know we have had that discussion.
Anyway, regardless of what those people mistakenly believe the word “socialist” means, the point at which they march and call Obama “socialist,” it is reasonable for Obama to say that they are unalterably opposed to him. There is no longer a point at which Obama should try to win them back.
“Maybe you should attend the rallies and give them the true definition of the word.”—Suzanne
That would be a waste of time because I doubt any of them care about the actual definition of the term. I’ve had little enough success in the easier discussion environment of Care2. Besides, I’d rather not be counted as yet another person rallying to that cause.
“The thousand you refer to is inaccurate, I would think it is fair to say we are easily in the hundreds of thousands.” ”—Suzanne
I was using your term for the numbers from when you said “Nice to know that the points of views of thousands don't mean squat to him.” If you don’t like that estimate, I used it only because I am trying to accept your own statements as accurate as possible to find whatever agreement we can.
“But hey we won't vote for him so we don't matter. What a croc!”—Suzanne
I don’t think you don’t matter, and I doubt he thinks that you don’t matter either, but practically speaking there is no electoral benefit to him for trying to placate or compromise with the tea partiers. And by placating and compromising he’ll anger people who are supporting him.
"and tyhose thousand have pretty much already decided not to vote for him." Kevin
That is what I responded to (thousand). Maybe it was a type-o on your part. I don't blame you about the definition thing. It was more a joke due to what has been going on here.
The only problem I see with ignoring Tea Partiers is we are not all the same. There are possibly votes to be found in there. As it stands right now, I am not very happy with anyone. The first person that actually comes up with a workable plan for the middle-class and small business will have my undying loyalty. I'm willing to bet there are others as well. That's where he is foolish, he's giving up on a potential voting block and not listening to our concerns which are very real.
I meant to use your term "thousands." I also didn't mean to add the extra "y" in "those."
I know the tea partiers are not all the same, and I assume Obama's people know that too. But I think they probably also know that as diverse as the group might be, it includes very few people who are likely to vote for Obama. I think that is just realistic thinking.
Probably so, still he should not dismiss us. Sorry if I came off as biotch. Just really tired of the labeling and dismissing of people who are concerned. Not saying by you...but it certainly seems to be a main topic here...there...and everywhere!
I forgive you for the type-o's
I would agree with Kevin's last statement - very few people who are likely to vote for Obama.
Dan and Bente - luckily, I have found a charitable program that has helped with some medical expenses. UNfortunately, I don't have much money, but it's enough that it disqualifies me for Medicaid. But you know, I have a roof over my head, enough food to eat, I will start some training for some Microsoft certifications for which I will get a scholarship...I have a car that works, and I have never had a recurrence of cancer...I'm really doing okay...
"That's where he is foolish, he's giving up on a potential voting block and not listening to our concerns which are very real."--Suzanne
Do you really think there is a substantial potential voting bloc for Obama at the tea parties?
What if he listened to your concerns and had to say "Sorry"? Would he win many votes?
He's not in much of a position to cut taxes further without massively expoding the debt. In fact, he's probably going to have to raise taxes or at least let the Bush tax cuts expire. Will that make him friends among the people calling him "socialist"?
And given the dire situation of many Americans, there is not a whole lot of room to make cuts to domestic programs. There would be hell to pay if he cut unemployment benefits or funding to education, and many of the states would have fallen apart except that the federal government bailed them out (it's certainly true in Minnesota). Rather than placate the current protesters, he'd be likely to add to their numbers.
Do you think there would be a rousing cheer of support among the tea partiers if he cut the military budget? That's the only place where there is room for cuts right now, but we're in the middle of two wars started by his predecessor.
I think you are probably one of the more reasonable tea partiers. You aren't one of the racists or people marching with Hitler signs, and you seem to have gone to the less extreme marches.
But you're pretty anti-Obama and aren't likely to support him. If that's where you are at, it's hard to think there are many potential Obama voters at those extreme rallies.
Next time you're brewing up a tea party, why don't you ask people if they would consider voting for Obama, or what he would need to do to win them over. I'll bet it is a whole lot more than just not use the "B" word or listen to them.
I'm not going to try to explain the real definition of "socialist" at any of these rallies, but I would be tempted to ask them those questions.
Katii...read the bill...it's posted online. Ask BHObama... ~Robert
How just like you, Robert, so often stating something as fact then never able to qualify it. If you read the bill yourself however, instead of responding with a smartass quip you might have brought something of substance to the discussion and pointed us to the page or section number your claimes could be found under. But that's OK, I just won't expect you to be a credible source of information.
P.S. I did read it.
Kevin I just responded to you and it is gone .
I am going to give it a couple minutes and hope my lost post comes home. Otherwise, maybe tomorrow. It was thoughtful and heartfelt and now I am completely frustrated.
How just like you, Robert, so often stating something as fact then never able to qualify it.....P.S. I did read it.
Are you calling Robert a stonewaller, Katii?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonewall_riots
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonewall_Jackson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Stonewall
Stonewall is one of my favorite words.
"Kevin I just responded to you and it is gone .
I am going to give it a couple minutes and hope my lost post comes home. Otherwise, maybe tomorrow. It was thoughtful and heartfelt and now I am completely frustrated. "--Suzanne
Sorry to see that. I hate that when it happens. And even though I try to write it in Word or something, or copy it before I hit "post reply," it still gets me sometimes.
I await your newer version.
Kevin, my passion for this topic for the time being has disappeard just as my post did. However, I did say I would respond so here is my unenthusiastic response.
I do think there is a potential for people within the Tea Party movement to be swayed in any direction. So long as it is a direction that considers their concerns. There are libertarians, independents, even some from the left who are among the ranks of the tea partiers.
I think we are a somewhat realistic group and while tax cuts are always preferable, sometimes not doable. What concerns tea partiers is the continued spending and the potential of much higher taxes. If the tax situation could be maintained or leveled off that might be enough for right now. The bail-outs of wall street and the auto industry has not done much for the average person. The stimulus has not created jobs. The idea of bigger government but not better government is not encouraging.
The people who attend these parties are not rich...nor poor. They are however teetering on loosing their very existance. Not much is being done to help small business and as I see it this health care legislation will kill it.
As far as me, it is now a personal matter and probably a stupid way to think about President Obama. I really have a problem with how many times he came to New Jersey campaigning for a Governor who has put this State in a dire situation. This situation occurred before the national economic crisis. Corzine was a nightmare for us in this State. When President Obama praised him and said he was a big part of the economic recovery. To me, that was scary. What does President Obama have planned for us, if Corzine was a big part of it?
I tell you, the first person that comes up with a plan to help out the middle-class and small business in a real way, will have my confidence. No one impresses me as of yet to have this ability or desire.
My first post was soooooo much better. Hope this sort of addresses it.
Why is everybody afraid to live their lives without whatever Government, &/or Wall Street (insurance bureaucracy) provides? Are we that dependant on those without souls to provide health? Do we not have responsibility for our own existence? What part of greed do we want to participate in? If we're upset with insurance, why have it? Same with Government. They'll get the message much better if we choose to not participate in what they're selling, rather than screaming, & hollering about how they're screwing us.
How many people do we know that do despicable things every day because they are employed by some big bureaucracy (government, or business) , that they would never do if they were responsible personally for? My point; there's no soul in a bureaucracy. If we want them to serve humans, we must come together, & be that which we were created to be, or; continue fighting over things that don't matter, & wallow in our misery forever. It's only a choice, & every human has that choice.
David, I believe 100% in being responsible for your own existance. Good way to be. But the reality is we need medical insurance, car insurance and to pay taxes etc. To just say no...doesn't cut it.
Why is everybody afraid to live their lives without whatever Government, &/or Wall Street (insurance bureaucracy) provides? Are we that dependant on those without souls to provide health? Do we not have responsibility for our own existence? What part of greed do we want to participate in? If we're upset with insurance, why have it? Same with Government. They'll get the message much better if we choose to not participate in what they're selling, rather than screaming, & hollering about how they're screwing us. ~David
I'm with you there, David. Why Americans don't flatly reject what government imposes on them is the reason Americans live under those imposistions.
What would happen if everyone - or at least a big majority - of Americans got together and all dropped, quit paying for their medical insurance?
How many people do we know that do despicable things every day because they are employed by some big bureaucracy (government, or business) , that they would never do if they were responsible personally for? My point; there's no soul in a bureaucracy. ~David
Right again. What would happen if all those people - or at least a big majority - who do the work of the souless just refused to do that work? What would happen if all the troops of all the worlds' armies just refused to fight?
If we want them to serve humans, we must come together, & be that which we were created to be, or; continue fighting over things that don't matter, & wallow in our misery forever. It's only a choice, & every human has that choice. ~David
Right again, David.
So many Americans piss and moan about the jobless state of America while they run to WalMart to purchase their allegedly 'lower priced' inventory, the vast majority of which comes from one of the most oppressive governments on the planet: China, but shoud/could be manufactured right here at home, meaning jobs for Americans.
What would happen if Americans - or at least a big majority - just refused to shop at WalMart?
It IS a choice. Yes, a difficult choice that would cause some pain, but that pain would be short lived and would actually produce results compared to the pain we are and will suffer in the long run that will produce no results in favor of the people.
Dear David,
Even if some of us disagree, to some extent, or with some emphasis of what you say, we wouldn't "rip you apart."
The thrust of what you say is important, rational and (I think) I understand what you mean. The thrust of what you say, I agree. We have many choices - and many choices we should be making.
“Kevin, my passion for this topic for the time being has disappeard just as my post did. However, I did say I would respond so here is my unenthusiastic response.”—Suzanne
OK
“I do think there is a potential for people within the Tea Party movement to be swayed in any direction. So long as it is a direction that considers their concerns. There are libertarians, independents, even some from the left who are among the ranks of the tea partiers.”—Suzanne
Perhaps there are some votes there for Obama, but it’s got to be a small number.
You’re one of the more reasonable in the group and you went to the more moderate rallies, and you seem to have a viscerally negative reaction to anything Obama does.
I’m not saying that you were wrong, but you criticized him for the way he noted he Ft Hood shootings. I think you said it seemed creepy or weird or something like that. And then you are angry that he campaigned for Corzine, who campaigned like mad for Obama. That’s a pretty ordinary thing for a president to do for a governor of his party, but that ordinary act angers you.
Right or wrong, you seem to have an emotional dislike of the guy (you're not alone), and anyone who studies voter behavior will tell you that is a big indicator that he won’t get your vote. It’s reasonable for Obama to conclude the potential Obama supporters are few and far between in that crowd.
And then there are the Hitler sign people and the “Socialist” screaming people. That's just a nail in the coffin for making Obama think he has a chance with the group.
“I think we are a somewhat realistic group and while tax cuts are always preferable, sometimes not doable. What concerns tea partiers is the continued spending and the potential of much higher taxes. If the tax situation could be maintained or leveled off that might be enough for right now. The bail-outs of wall street and the auto industry has not done much for the average person. The stimulus has not created jobs. The idea of bigger government but not better government is not encouraging.”—Suzanne
Let me put it this way; if these rally people were willing to give Obama a fair chance, then how can the gripe be that the stimulus package wasn’t working? They were marching in April before almost any of the money was spent. You couldn't know it hadn't worked in April. Heck, much of the money hasn’t even been spent. It doesn’t seem to me that it is really about the stimulus package not working.
And isn’t the “tea party” thing about protesting taxation? Why so much anger at Obama? He hasn’t raised taxes. It makes me doubt that taxes or the stimulus are sincere issues rather than just a general anger.
”The people who attend these parties are not rich...nor poor. They are however teetering on loosing their very existance. Not much is being done to help small business and as I see it this health care legislation will kill it.”—Suzanne
OK, but what were people complaining about in April? There wasn’t a health care bill in April to say it was going to be a disaster. It seems more like just dislike of Obama without giving him a chance.
“As far as me, it is now a personal matter and probably a stupid way to think about President Obama. I really have a problem with how many times he came to New Jersey campaigning for a Governor who has put this State in a dire situation. This situation occurred before the national economic crisis. Corzine was a nightmare for us in this State. When President Obama praised him and said he was a big part of the economic recovery. To me, that was scary. What does President Obama have planned for us, if Corzine was a big part of it?”—Suzanne
It’s pretty much expected that a president campaigns for governors from their party, especially when the governor campaigned as hard as Corzine did for Obama.
“I tell you, the first person that comes up with a plan to help out the middle-class and small business in a real way, will have my confidence. No one impresses me as of yet to have this ability or desire.”—Suzanne
I believe you mean that sincerely, but I don’t think that is true about the tea bag rally people in general, and I don’t think Obama ever had a fair chance to get that support.
”My first post was soooooo much better. Hope this sort of addresses it.”—Suzanne
Sorry it happened to you. I would have like to read it.
David, I believe 100% in being responsible for your own existence. Good way to be. But the reality is we need medical insurance, car insurance and to pay taxes etc. To just say no...doesn't cut it.
Suzanne, when, where, & why were you taught that medical insurance, car insurance, & taxes were necessary for human existence?
Personally, I think I could do better with the lottery, if I needed to give my power away.
The crust of my thinking is; a) Living in fear serves death. b) serving others is a spiritually satisfying honor. c) a fish doesn't need insurance, etc. to be a fish; why should humans, who are much smarter? d) the box we've created ain't workin, so why stay in that box?
Humans are suppose to be in charge, not government, & insurance giants. For those of us that believe in God; We can put God back in charge. However we want to look at it, we need some soul in our spine, with courage to take back these institutions of fear, & greed.
David, the reality in this world in this day, if you don't have health insurance and get sick or hurt. What the hell do you do?
No, You don't need these things to exist as a human spiritually. I am not following your thinking as far as this is the reality as it exists in our daily lives and what you suggest is wishful thinking.
Kevin, I think we will just have to leave it as it stands. I know what I know and you know what you know. I really have no intent on trying to change anyone's mind. Just wanted to give a different view from my perspective.
I said it was odd the way President Obama reacted to Ft Hood.
Also, I do realize campaigns take place, you missed my point on why it bothers me so.
I can't explain any of this anymore. Everyone is entitled to their view.
Dear David and dear Suzanne,
Would you like to explore your ideas, David, in a separate thread?
I think it could be an interesting thread on its own - discussing your insight into what we need to live and what we do not need.
Please feel free to start that threadand begin that discussion.
Thank you.
Let me put it this way; if these rally people were willing to give Obama a fair chance, then how can the gripe be that the stimulus package wasn’t working? They were marching in April before almost any of the money was spent. You couldn't know it hadn't worked in April. Heck, much of the money hasn’t even been spent. It doesn’t seem to me that it is really about the stimulus package not working.
And isn’t the “tea party” thing about protesting taxation? Why so much anger at Obama? He hasn’t raised taxes. It makes me doubt that taxes or the stimulus are sincere issues rather than just a general anger. ~Kevin
Good points, Kevin
David, the reality in this world in this day, if you don't have health insurance and get sick or hurt. What the hell do you do? ~Suzanne
Go to the emergency room like everyone else who doesn't have medical insurance does, then don't pay your bill like everyone else who doesn't have medical insurance doesn't do.
If everyone dropped their insurance coverage and started doing that, I can well imagine that it would create some "change we can believe in."
As for Obama's reaction to the Ft. Hood shootings... Obama reacted appropriately and sincerely. That Obama didn't drop everything to rush to Ft. Hood in the midst of the aftermath was not only oppropriate behavior for the President of the United States but considerate behavior for the President of the United States - the President of the United States visiting ANYWHERE takes alot of pre-arrival preparation at any given destination not to mention resources. That Obama was there for the Memorial Service, delaying the cermony for nearly an hour because he was spending so much one-on-one time with the victims was also appropriate for the President of the United States.
Many billions upon billions of dollars of stimulus money have not been assigned yet.
So it may be impossible to say, for sure, that the stimulus has totally failed.
"Go to the emergency room like everyone else who doesn't have medical insurance does, then don't pay your bill like everyone else who doesn't have medical insurance doesn't do." Katii
You CAN do that and if you have no moeny, it will work. But you will be billed and if you have moeny, you will be expected to pay. And if you don't pay, it will be turned over to a collection agency.
People declare bankruptcy because of medical bills. I would NOT recommend the emergency room route.
I couldn't live with myself knowing I skipped out on a bill at the expense of others. Just not who I am.
Eventually if you owe the debt, anything you have, including your home is at risk.
I have a daughter, I am not about to begin to play games with her future.
ps - As a side note, we are having really bad weather. Power on/off (flickering). I may be gone due to this for a while if I don't respond to someone responding to me.
I couldn't live with myself knowing I skipped out on a bill at the expense of others. Just not who I am.
Not being able to pay for medical treatment that shouldn't be so expensive you can't pay for it is not skipping out on a bill. I would not be bothered at all if my non-payment fell on some hospital's 'loss' column - I can't think of a more deserving entity than one that would profit from the suffering of others.
It wouldn't bother me one bit to file bankruptcy over a ridiculous amount of medical bills if that's what the only remedy was for me.
Would you treat your other bills that way Katii?
Just wondering. I have many fmailies and friends in health care and they take great exception to the idea that they should be "volunterring" or "donating" their time and at times money to other people who decide that they deserve a freebie.
One of the reasons that healthcare is high is that all those "losses: end up being paid by people who are paying their bills. And it usually the people like Suzanne or my niece who is still paying on a $26,000 bill from an emergency surgery ten years ago that end up footing the bill.
As for bankruptcy, I hope that I am never in a position to have to resort to that.
Just not me Katii, because in the long run if I have a debt and my home has to go to pay that debt....it will. I am not saying I agree with insurance or the cost of medical care in that statement. I will not burden others with my problems and I am not a huge fan of bankruptcy.
You cannot currently send a star to Suzanne because you have done so within the last week.
Would you treat your other bills that way Katii? ~Nancy
Would you just not seek medical treatment for yourself merely because you didn't have the money to pay for it? I should hope not.
I was very specific in my post above about my feelings on the matter of not being "able" to pay for "medical treatment" so I wonder your questioning, but to answer your question- of course I don't nor would I ever treat any bill that way unless circumstances - beyond my control - forced it upon me. I thank my angels that hasn't ever happened - at least not until the mortgage crisis put our home mortgage underwater and forced us into a short-sale. And while that pisses me off, no, I'm not going to feel 'bad' for our lender merely because it won't make three times over the original loan amount. If fact the lender made money on the deal while we lost our everything (home mortgages are one of the biggest scams ever perpetrated on the public).
Just wondering. I have many fmailies and friends in health care and they take great exception to the idea that they should be "volunterring" or "donating" their time and at times money to other people who decide that they deserve a freebie.
I don't know in what manner your friends or family work in the medical industry, but have they ever not gotten their paychecks because someone couldn't afford to pay their hospital bills? Ever?
One of the reasons that healthcare is high is that all those "losses: end up being paid by people who are paying their bills. And it usually the people like Suzanne or my niece who is still paying on a $26,000 bill from an emergency surgery ten years ago that end up footing the bill.
I view it another way, Nancy. The reason medical care is so expensive and that your niece is still paying off a $26,000 bill for emergency surgery is 1) medical insurance is prohibitively expensive for the average Jane and 2) because hospitals practice in price gouging. Period. I'm sure you are aware that people with medical insurance are being forced into bankruptcy as well. Like my sister for example.
As for bankruptcy, I hope that I am never in a position to have to resort to that.
I'd venture to guess that like you, and myself, the vast majority of people feel the same way. But sometimes shyt happens - sometimes people are forced into bankruptcy because the medical industry practices greed.
"Would you just not seek medical treatment for yourself merely because you didn't have the money to pay for it? I should hope not." - Katii
That is exactly what my husband and I have been doing since February. The only one who gets any medical, eye or dental at this moment is my daughter and it is out of pocket. I am sure many people fall in to this category. And yes, without going in to detail.....there are definitely times we should have gone and it may have an effect down the line. Not a terrific thing at all.
If I have no money for groceries, I eat out of whatever is in the house.
If I had no moeny to pay the doctors bbills, you bet I'd stay as far away as possible.
Just because insurance costs to much is not reason to not pay your bill. YOu are taking it out on the wrong party. It is the insurance companies greed that causes most of the problem.s.
"
I don't know in what manner your friends or family work in the medical industry, but have they ever not gotten their paychecks because someone couldn't afford to pay their hospital bills? Ever?"
Yes as a matter of fact. I know many people with prviate practices of various sorts. One person I know is "owed" a total of 25,000 from two years of non-payments. These were recently turned over to collections and he hope to get about 1/4 of that. One person, who is a well-paid engineer in town, never paid a $750 bill for several appointments and tests.
Another friend has an optomietris in her own practice and gets this all the time. Another friend with her own psychology practice deals with this as well. The practitioners deal with this all the time. The hospital employees might not. BUT they may be forced to have frozen pay or evebn paycuts as a result of negotiations with the insurance companies.
"2) because hospitals practice in price gouging. Period. : I don't even know what you mean by that but I can tell you that my local hospital has had a heck of a timte with the major insuracne company in town. The insurance company forced them to take a pay cut. The hospital tried to go without for months. The insurance company wanted to make more money- how do they do it? By forcing the hopsitals and then the practitionaers to be paid less.
If I have no money for groceries, I eat out of whatever is in the house.
So would I, Nancy, and certainly have, but I don't know what that has to do with seeking medical attention when one needs it and can't afford it.
If I had no moeny to pay the doctors bbills, you bet I'd stay as far away as possible.
I stay as far away from doctors as I can, just on principle. But if my life or one of my loved ones' lives depended on medical treatment nothing is going to stop me from getting it. If I came across someone bleeding in the road I would take them to the nearest emergency room - whether they had 'insurance' or means to pay for treatment or not. Wouldn't you?
Just because insurance costs to much is not reason to not pay your bill. YOu are taking it out on the wrong party. It is the insurance companies greed that causes most of the problem.s.
Again, if my life or one of my loved ones' lives depended on medical treatment nothing is going to stop me from getting it. And I'm pretty sure I pointed to medical insurance being a big part of the problem. In this group, on this subject, I advocate constantly against medical insurance company practices, prices, and profits.
I know many people with prviate practices of various sorts. One person I know is "owed" a total of 25,000 from two years of non-payments ... Another friend has an optomietris in her own practice and gets this all the time. Another friend with her own psychology practice deals with this as well. The practitioners deal with this all the time. The hospital employees might not.
Nancy, I think you are missing my point. Your friends are not employees of hospitals. I'm talking about and specifically have pointed to hospitals and hospital bills.
"2) because hospitals practice in price gouging. Period.
I don't even know what you mean by that
I should amend that to say "hospitals, insurance companies and big-pharma are price gouging." If a hospital is a 'for-profit' hospital and/or has a 'board of directors' I have no sympathy for them. Certainly not when they charge $10 for ONE Tylenol (just one of many, many examples of price gouging).
but I can tell you that my local hospital has had a heck of a timte with the major insuracne company in town. The insurance company forced them to take a pay cut. The hospital tried to go without for months. The insurance company wanted to make more money- how do they do it? By forcing the hopsitals and then the practitionaers to be paid less.
I don't dispute this is a problem - a problem the people involved with said insurance company need to deal with. Perhaps by running said ins. company out of town. What I dispute is people not having access to, or not seeking needed medical attention simply because they can't afford it.
That is exactly what my husband and I have been doing since February. ~Suzanne
All I can say, Suzanne, is that I sincerely hope you and your husband are not so foolish as to not seek medical attention if you need it - for any reason, including not being able to pay for it. But I seriously doubt that if you or your husband's life was in the balance you wouldn't be heading for the emergency room of the nearest hospital (that wouldn't turn you away for not having insurance) for treatment - as I believe you should.
Foolish is a rough word. Thankfully no life threatening events have occurred because than in order to pay the bills, my home would more than likely have to go. There has certainly been a life altering injury that has occurred that went without medical treatment. The effects of that remain to be seen and are lived with daily. No easy choices.
The same happened to my husband when we were without insurance. Luckily the broken finger was only a pinky and he could sort of set it himself. Well, that wasn't exactly life altering since it was a pinky.
You have a bit of stomach pain, or whatever, They run somes tests. You now have bills to pay. You also find out you have cancer, as a result of the tests. You now are uninsurable. You have more bills to bpay than you will EVER be able to pay.
If you felt ill and suspected something, get insurance first.+
Was it Obama that said something insurance companies had the highest profit margin of anyone? Then I see stats that say they have a 2.2% profit margin; 35th in the list of fortune 500 companies. I had a friend who owned a restaurant that had a profit margin almost that high. So who's right here? Aren't a lot of health insurance companies non-profit? I don't know I'm just asking.
When I go to a doctor or talk to one I ask why things are expensive. Invariably malpractice insurance and the resulting defensive medicine is mentioned. One doctor in town has to keep paying malpractice insurance for another 9 years even though he's retired; this is because any former patient under the age of 18 can come back and sue him. This is obviously a problem. Why not fix that problem first?
Foolish is a rough word. ~Suzanne
Perhaps, and I truly did not mean any offense. But in my mind it would be foolish to decide to 'die' rather than seek help merely becaue they didn't have medical insurance. Suzanne, I wasn't suggesting we run to the emergency room for non-life threatening situations. I wouldn't do that for a broken pinky either - but if I needed a doctor's attention for something minor v. life threatening, I'd borrow the money from somewhere to pay for a visit to a doctor's office. I am not advocating going to an emergency room for any health issues that could be treated at a doctor's office.
You have a bit of stomach pain, or whatever, They run somes tests. You now have bills to pay. ~Nancy
Nancy, I would have to already feel like I was "dying" before I'd go to an emergency room - with or without insurance. That has been the case exactly once in my life, when I had food poisoning, and I would have died without medical attention.
You also find out you have cancer, as a result of the tests. You now are uninsurable. You have more bills to bpay than you will EVER be able to pay. ~Nancy
If this current bill passes into law, and the bill hasn't been amended otherwise since the printing of the following summary, the denial of ins. coverage for "pre-existing" health issues change so we won't have to suffer - or die - because of that problem.
PREPARED BY THE HOUSE COMMITTEES ON WAYS AND MEANS, ENERGY AND COMMERCE, AND EDUCATION AND LABOR JULY 14, 2009
Guaranteed coverage and insurance market reforms. Insurance companies will no longer be able to engage in discriminatory practices that enable them to refuse to sell or renew policies today due to an individual’s health status. In addition, they can no longer exclude coverage of treatments for pre-existing health conditions. The bill also protects consumers by prohibiting lifetime and annual limits on benefits. It also limits the ability of insurance companies to charge higher rates due to health status, gender, or other factors. Under the proposal, premiums can vary based only on age (no more than 2:1), geography and family size.
There is no question that our system has people in a terrible, and IMO, a position that is inhumane - even when they DO have insurance. As I mentioned before, people who do have insurance are still billed into bankruptcy! Something has to give and so far Congress has not addressed that problem at all - in fact they 'plan' for medical costs to increase.
But I am not going to risk my LIFE or anyone elses merely because there's no insurance. 
I'd rather be bankrupt than dead, and if some doctor or hospital would rather let me DIE than get paid - fuk them and may they burn in hell.
