Comments on: Schumer: no need for bipartisanship on health care.

By: bk

bk — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 03:33:35 +0000

They’ve seen what’s happened with banks and cars. They figure they’ll try to squeeze out a few bread crumbs rather than get completely steamrolled.

By: smagar

smagar — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 03:22:16 +0000

He’s trying to get a few Senate Republicans to go along with him. By making it sound as if he’ll steamroller them unless they do things his way, he’s probably hoping a few will blink.

We already know that you can make George Voinovich cry…that’s one right there. The Porkulus sisters make three.

By: cannedjam

cannedjam — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 03:01:12 +0000

dismantling of insurance based on market forces and the installation of universal health charity, under the guise of “fairness” all while refusing to call a spade a spade, eventually leaving us with a single payer system.

By eliminating the assessment of risk, the assigning of costs based on that risk, and by preventing insurers from determining pre-existing conditions, you transform insurance into charity. And if you allow one system that does just that, and leave intact another parallel system, you are left with an overall system in which one group of people are paying twice, once for their own private health care and once again for everyone else in the other system. That will not last, it has nothing to do with competition, it is simply economics 101, even if the private sector is a better system no one could afford to pay for both; their only choice would be to abandon the one that is not mandated.

This really makes me sick (no pun intended)

By: Rapunzel46

Rapunzel46 — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 02:52:20 +0000

and intimidation….. congress holds the purse strings for much of this industry — too much of this industry.

By: red4ever

red4ever — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 02:46:43 +0000

WAPO is reporting breaking news that the major hospitals and the Senate Finance Committee reached an agreement to take less in Medicare payments over the next 10 years. which means the rest of us pay more to make up the losses.

By: smitch61

smitch61 — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 02:20:18 +0000

He does not have the votes, and we will fight it all the way….to make sure he does not have the votes. Public option is socialism..

YES YOU CAN??

NOT WITHOUT THE FIGHT!!

By: penguin2

penguin2 — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 01:21:22 +0000

my skin crawls. There is just something “evil” that emanates from him. My husband feels the same way. But, I think I get that feeling because I fear him. That’s what the leftists have done. Created a state of fear, by seeming all powerful.

By: Fred Maidment

Fred Maidment — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 01:11:36 +0000

Isn’t that just a farce.

No, I didn’t miss a question mark. That’s a statement.

If the government is involved, it means the private sector can’t do the job. By definition, the playing field cannot be level for two reasons: 1) The government is providing a service that the private sector cannot provide profitably and 2) the government has no incentive to make a profit, so it can break even or lose money as long as it likes.

If the playing field is level, then normal market competition is all that is necessary, and the government option isn’t, making it redundant.

This “level playing field” garbage is just that, and it needs to stop. It’s an outright lie, and anyone with even a basic understanding of economics should get why.

By: ceili_dancer

ceili_dancer — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:59:25 +0000

n/t

By: bobojake

bobojake — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:52:36 +0000

with your banking scandal. When does the hearings under oath start for your fraudulent actions in the obama-schummmmmmmer, geithner, banking scandal.
Democrats the NO-NO-ACCOUNTIBILITY PARTY.
We will stop this freight train, it is the mafia in disguise and we know it.
No more foney fraudulent programs out of you schummmmmmmmmmmmer.

By: harpsichord

harpsichord — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:46:02 +0000

Probably a European socialist spellingl.

By: IJB

IJB — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:23:31 +0000

Let me spell it out for him:

HE DOESN’T HAVE THE VOTES!

First, they can’t count on Byrd & Kennedy (unless they know something we don’t, and I doubt they do).

Second, they can’t count on at least the half-a-dozen ‘Red State’ Dems that Moe listed. (And that may be the *lower* limit, not the upper limit, of potential defectors.)

Maybe this is just a bargaining position on his part.

But, if not, I’m going to seriously start to question Schumer’s sanity - maybe his megalomania has finally gone to his head (and rotted away his brain…).

By: marshmom

marshmom — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:22:38 +0000

It kinda makes you wonder if they know something we don’t–good or bad.
I know that the Clinton administration ran into fierce opposition from the US Chamber of Commerce and they’re standing firm once again, but can they still make a difference? I surely hope someone can.
The AMA has made it clear what their objectives are for health care reform, but they haven’t exactly “come out” against any one idea that the admin. is pushing, which, I think, is bad. They’re too worried about affecting their “pull” if they speak out against this new public option. Heaven forbid they make any enemies in the process.
I’m pretty convinced, however that they won’t have a solid 60 vote for health care. They hardly get that number for any bill.
You can bet that no matter what, I’m burning up the phone lines to my senators………but then again, I live in Alabama. My senators always vote with the Republican majority.

By: DONTREADONME

DONTREADONME — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:15:31 +0000

provide better coverage and service then the private insurance companies, I guess 34% of Americans believe PBS is better than say Fox, ABC, CBS or NBC.

Really, I mean really, someone in this country has greatly failed the American public in teaching them what you get with Government run health care, anyone, Bueller, Bueller, Bueller. Thats it, 34% of Americans are stupid sheeple!

By: DavidSage

DavidSage — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:09:50 +0000

I’m amazed the health care industry hasn’t started a major public relations campaign at putting the brakes on this, We’re talking about TRILLIONS of dollars that are going to be taken away from these private sector companies.

Right now, they should be spending millions of dollars running ads, especially in districts where politicians are vulnerable. This is their very survival that is on the line, it would be an investment worth making to try and stop this.

Is someone asleep at the switch?