Aren't our politicians supposed to do what the people want?

1. 61

   Harvey Stelmanposted 14 years ago

   President Obama is my prime example. Every poll and Town Hall Meeting says the people "do not want his health-care bill." Still he continues to push for it in every possible way.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      LegendaryHeroposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      In their twisted minds they are doing what the people want.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         Harvey Stelmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         leg,
         
         I don't think that's true, they know what they are doing. Passing a Progressive Agenda. They may not know this will probably lead to communism.

         replyreport
   2. 0

      Brenda Durhamposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      He never gives up bullying and trying to tyrannize the nation.
      That's it.
      Any other leader would've already been forced out of office.   But not the liberals' "King" Obama!   He has the backing of other power-grabbing fools like Biden and Pelosi and Reid and on down the line...

      replyreport
      1. 61

         Harvey Stelmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Brenda,
         
         Plase see my answer above. Most know what they are doing, some are still ignorant.

         replyreport
      2. 0

         JeanMeriamposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         It could still be Bush.

         replyreport
   3. 0

      Kenrick Chatmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Several people want health-care reform. The problem is everyone has an opinion regarding what the final bill should look like.
      
      So the Democrats have to stop bickering, make compromises, and pass the Senate version of the health-care bill.
      
      Afterwards, use the majority to make changes to it including adding in some of the Republican-backed ideas.
      
      That's why Obama was elected president. To take a route different from the Republicans since the Republicans want to continue with their same policies...

      replyreport
      1. 61

         Harvey Stelmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Kenrick,
         
         Obama was elected for change, he was not elected for change people didn't want. Health-care is not a Constitutional right.

         replyreport
         1. 74

            Mikel G Robertsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness"  ???

            replyreport
            1. 0

               china manposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Bang on Mikel - but you gotta realise they mean THEIR life, liberty and their happiness

               replyreport
               1. 57

                  Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Who is "they"?

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     china manposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     I read this thread to respond - you could do the same instead of constantly asking me what everyone else is saying

                     replyreport
                     1. 57

                        Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                        We both know why you won't say

                        replyreport
                        1. 0

                           china manposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                           well when the both of you take your pill perhaps you could enlighten me ?

                           replyreport
                           1. 57

                              Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                              So, who is "they"?

                              replyreport
   4. 60

      Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Only the polls you choose (or FOX chooses for you) to pay attention to.  Every component of the current Senate bill is favored by a majority of Americans.

      replyreport
      1. 69

         wyanjenposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         If you could re-phrase this using an alarmist tone, with vague, self-righteous anger and some bizarre statistic that you have completely misinterpreted, you would blend in better.
         'Cause you're sticking out like a sore thumb, being all calm & rational & what-not.
         

         replyreport
         1. 0

            PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            LOL!
            
            

            replyreport
      2. 57

         Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Rasmussen: "52% of U.S. voters continue to oppose the plan proposed by the president and congressional Democrats."
         
         
         NYTimes/CBS: "Americans are concerned that revamping the health care system would reduce the quality of their care, increase their out-of-pocket health costs and tax bills, and limit their options in choosing doctors, treatments and tests, the poll found. 69 percent of respondents in the poll said they were concerned that the quality of their own care would decline if the government created a program"
         
         
         Gallup: "A mere 36 percent of us think the president is doing a good job on the issue. "
         
         CNN/Opinion Research Corporation: "Twenty-five percent of people questioned in the poll say Congress should pass legislation similar to the bills passed by both chambers, with 48 percent saying lawmakers should work on an entirely new bill and a quarter saying Congress should stop all work on health care reform."

         replyreport
      3. 61

         Harvey Stelmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Ron,
         
         Don't be foolish, I pay attention to all polls. If you don't believe me, Google the polls.

         replyreport
   5. 59

      Cly Walshposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Frankly I find it amazing that a country that self imposes the title 'leaders of the free world' and so on to that effect don't have a proper health care system. I've never had to pay to see a doctor, have x-rays or other medical examinations or to go to a hospital in my life, nobody should have to. Had a few operations done including two c-sections and never paid a cent.
      
      I thought this health care reform was something he said he wanted to push if he was voted in? I remember thinking wow it's about time.
      
      I lived in America for around a year and a half and was quite shocked at the amount of times I heard people say they'd go to the doctors if they could afford it. A good friend of mine over there had a heart attack, needed a bypass and checked herself out of the hospital two days later as she couldn't afford to stay there. Had another heart attack a day later. She's now in debt over $60k just for that. God that's terrible. I needed an x-ray for a suspected broken ankle (thankfully wasn't) and that cost me just over $300.
      
      Medicaid is a shocking system, it's nigh on useless. I met quite a few senior citizens who will put up with miserable ailments just because they can't afford to see a doctor. I'd hate to worry for my family like that especially if my job didn't have any health plan - or a limited one.
      
      Am I just looking at things the wrong way when it comes to health reform for the USA? Why could it possibly not be a good thing? What am I missing?

      replyreport
      1. 62

         ginosblogposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         What is it you are missing. Who do you think payed for you to see the Doctor. It don't just happen my dear naive person. If you have free health care or no care, you are taking out of my pocket to pay for it and I don't know you from Adam! Give me a break. If we had more people like you we would not need Obama to preach government care, would we? I have seen 100's walk into emergency and not pay a dime. I guess that is what you expect. Where did you come from a year and a half ago and why did you come to a country that you hate the health care system?
         We spent 360 BILLION dollars last year on illegals for health care. That is a hell of a lot less than a TRILLION in my book any day! And I don't know where you have been the last year and almost a half, but your President Obama has been wasting millions of tax dollars in meeting after meeting pushing health care, behind closed doors, with bribes since he has been in office. If you have not figured it out by now, it's not about health care, it is about control. Gaining control of the American Citizens. I know I don't expect the government to pay my way. I am a tax payer and support  the American Constitution. You do know what that is, right? I guess that next question is how do you feel about the Constitution?
         http://www.web-by-design.info

         replyreport
   6. 0

      woolman60posted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I keep hearing about the Presidents Health care plan and how America does not want it. Let me ask you this would you vote for McCains Health Care plan, picture that. No matter what the President does someone is not going to like it, and let me ask you this, who can you or I believe in Washington, they confuse us everyday of the week. Maybe they should have a special vote for the people of America, and let us decide if we want it or not.

      replyreport
      1. 57

         Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         The dems would fight any such referrendum tooth and nail.

         replyreport
   7. 60

      qwarkposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Harvey:
      It's shocking to me, as I read thru responses to your question, that no one mentioned the FACT that the USA is a "republic!" it is not a "democracy."
      " I pledge allegiance to the United States Of America and to the REPUBLIC..."
      All it takes is a little research of the differences between a republic and a democracy and your question is answered.
      To be born in and to live life in the USA and not know the difference between the 2 terms is unconscionable! it is proof that our schools are remiss in their responsiblity to teach kids history, civics and constitutional subjects.

      replyreport
   8. 61

      Evan G Rogersposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      The way that it works is that the politicians advertise what they will do before we vote for them. Then when they get in, they do what they said they would.
      
      Obama said he would work for health care. We (fortunately or unfortunately - i happen to be in the latter group) voted him in.
      
      So, now, he's fulfilling his campaign pledge.
      
      This is one of the failures of democracy - you have to vote for a politician's whole package. Walter Block discusses this in many of his online lecutres (check him out on google.com, just type in his name into the video search).
      
      With a free market, you can buy just about anything you want in anyway you want - want a red pen, blue sheet of paper and a bag of cool ranch doritos? no prob. Money is one of the nimblest ways of voting - you vote what you want with your dollars.
      
      With democracy, you have to vote in some guy who may not necessarily be what you want- maybe you agree with his stance on issues 1,3,5, and 7, but not his stance on 2, 4, 6, and 8  - if you want 1, 3, 5, and 7 you have to ALSO vote for 2, 4, 6, and 8. Your vote is not very nimble - one vote encompasses thousands of issues.

      replyreport
   9. 61

      Phoenix 69posted 14 years agoin reply to this

      To answer your simple yes or no question--yes.
      To respond to your comments about the polls--you know what they say--statistics don't lie, people do.
      Having worked in market research I can assure you that polls can be manipulated.
      We voted him into office for SOME reason.

      replyreport
2. 60

   Doug Hughesposted 14 years ago

   According a Harvard Study from last year, 45,000 Americans die each year - who would not otherwise have died - for the lack of access to health care. Put that in perspective - that's like a 9-11 tragedy every month - month after month and it will continue until we act.
   
   Currently 45 million Americans are without health care. That's 15% of the population - a distinct minority very close to the percent of slaves in the U.S. at the time Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation. So we mull the justice of our president standing up for a minority at the bottom of the economic ladder. I'm proud the Obama's willing to represent the bottom 15% at least part of the time. The GOP is willing to represent the top 15% ALL of the time.
   
   That's what this is about. Money. And a minority at the top who doesn't want to pay a fair share of taxes. Do you know the top 10% of taxpayers make 50% of the income and the top 1% own 70% of all financial assets of America. Those people spent millions spreading lies about 'death panels' and 'socialism' - none of it true.   But based on the results of those lies, the GOP is claiming the polls show no one wants universal health care. Tell that to someone who knows they will die for the lack of it.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Brenda Durhamposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      You're naive if you trust a Harvard study just because it's "Harvard".
      Dratted Obama's from Harvard, and look how he turned out!
      
      And you're comparing the health care issue to 911 and slavery!?????   
      That's twisted.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         Harvey Stelmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Brenda,
         
         I agree with you. You also have to see how the study was conducted. Studies can prove anything. As for the other things..................?

         replyreport
      2. 0

         china manposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         The poster you are referring to is not naive.  It is you who are naive if you think the people and system you defend care anything about its little minions.  You are the people that provide them their wealth, if others are unfortunate enough not to be able to catch the few crumbs from the table, or to principled to lick it from their ass, you should be more tolerant of them.  You are all in the same general boat and with the smallest twist in fortune you can be hanging onto the side of that boat with them.  The real twist is that when trouble hits they can usually be relied on. Outside America you are still judged in a big way by your response to the flooding of your own New Orleans, and seen to be wanting.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            Harvey Stelmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            China,
            
            Get a clue! I am not in a sinking boat, and have even started my own charity, I have MS. I asked a question, and therefore welcome any reply.
            
            I do not care how I am judged by non-Americans. They do not think of my country first.

            replyreport
      3. 0

         PrettyPantherposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Yeah, it's pretty naive to trust a study from an esteemed university.  Much better to just talk out of our @sses.
         
         And, Doug didn't "compare" the health care issue with 911.  He simply made a factual statement.  Many more people die every single year from lack of health care than who died on 9/11. 
         
         Maybe Doug will attempt to get you to see what he meant about standing up for minorities; I'm not going to waste my time on that one with you.

         replyreport
         1. 57

            foreignpressposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            You mean tens of millions of illegals who have no business being here in the first place. Those are not minorities -- they are Mexican nationals under the legal governance of Mexico. We don't provide for them.

            replyreport
   2. 92

      Rochelle Frankposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      But they also pay an overwhelming % of all the taxes paid. If "the rich" weren't making money and paying taxes, there would be no government jobs, public works, medicare, social security, government grants, national parks, interstate highway maintenence, military forces, public utilities or welfare, among other things the government provides.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         Harvey Stelmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Rochelle,
         
         Most don't realize that the rich pay for the County Hospitals.

         replyreport
      2. 61

         Harvey Stelmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Rochelle,
         
         Thanks, now I do not have to answer. I will add that I am well informed on many medical issues. I know CEO'S and more in Pharma. I will say more tomorrow.

         replyreport
   3. 0

      china manposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Absolutely!
      
      For those who twitter on about how the rich pay for stuff - where do you think they get their money from!!   They get their money from people, you are the people and everything you do from waking up (or not waking up in some cases) to going to bed and what you do in bed they get a profit from. Of course it is their responsibility to look after you and the next tiny step down the ladder, the really poor.

      replyreport
      1. 92

         Rochelle Frankposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         You are absolutely right! People make money by providing products and services we all need or want. Some of them make enough money to pay big taxes as well as providing privately funded charities and benefits.  That is not necessarily wrong-- in fact a lot of people are trying to do it. It's called free enterprise or capitalism or liberty, but I guess that is going out of style. Some people want the government to do it.

         replyreport
      2. 57

         Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         "where do you think they get their money from!!   "
         
         
         Profits they make by providing goods that are in demand and employing people?

         replyreport
      3. 61

         Harvey Stelmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         China,
         
         So the rich pay taxes so the poor can have hospitals, schools, police, fire, streets, etc. They are disgusting.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            china manposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Look at it as them returning some small percentage of the uncontrolled profits they make by controlling you -

            replyreport
            1. 57

               Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Who controls you? Are you so easily controled?

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  china manposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  everyone is controlled by something, it is called society, relationships, etc etc. what controls you?

                  replyreport
                  1. 74

                     Mikel G Robertsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     Money, just like everyone else.

                     replyreport
                  2. 57

                     Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     Who were you referring to when you said, "  the uncontrolled profits they make by controlling you"? Who are "they"?

                     replyreport
            2. 61

               Harvey Stelmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               china, That was a foolish reply.

               replyreport
   4. 0

      A Texanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      "That's what this is about. Money. And a minority at the top who doesn't want to pay a fair share of taxes."
      
      
      The top 5% pay 60% of the Taxes, the "poor" pay 0% in taxes but are receiving 100% of the benefits! I would say they are paying their fair share and then some!

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Kenrick Chatmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Since you think the "poor" is receiving such a great deal... How many of the top 5% would like to trade places with the "poor"?
         
         I pretty sure the top 5% are not going to have to live off of spam and Ramen noodles anytime soon and move in with their parents or friends to pay for health-care reform.

         replyreport
         1. 57

            Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            "to pay for health-care reform."
            
            
            You accidentally put it the right way!

            replyreport
            1. 0

               Kenrick Chatmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Right. As soon as the Bush W "voodoo economics" tax breaks for the wealthy expire and we bring the troops home from Iraq...

               replyreport
               1. 61

                  Harvey Stelmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Kenrick,
                  
                  Those tax cuts got unemployment under 5% until the banking situation, which the Democrat's pushed. Bush is responsible for signing the bills.

                  replyreport
         2. 61

            Harvey Stelmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Ken, How many of the poor would like to change places with the rich? The problem is ability, education, work ethic, etc. People can move up, if they take the proper steps. It does happen!

            replyreport
   5. 61

      Harvey Stelmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Doug,
      
      Do you not believe in Capitalism? Remember, Obama is now making millions a year. The richest people in Congress are Democrat's.

      replyreport
      1. 80

         Uninvited Writerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         I believe the president only makes about $400,000. Less than many ceo's...

         replyreport
         1. 61

            Harvey Stelmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Unin, Probably moe than you you would believe make less. I never made that much, and I know many others. If you start your own company you can name yourself CEO. What if the company fails; like they usually do?

            replyreport
            1. 60

               JON EWALLposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Harvey
               It's the same old story, the middle class ends up paying.
               President Obama is pushing reconciliation at any cost to the democrats.If they try to pass the bill in this manner, I would not be surprised if the people will call for his impeachment.
               President Obama, professor Obama taught constitution law in Chicago.Almost every move he has made attacks the very foundation of our constitution without regard to the voices of the people.
               There are many good democrats in congress that will lose their office in the coming elections.
               It seems that some of them chose to retire rather than vote against the party.

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  Kenrick Chatmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Below is something Fox News does not tell you. All you hear is: if reconciliation is used for an additional small fixer bill to make changes to a large health-care bill that already passed the Senate without reconciliation, the Democrats will suffer during the upcoming elections.
                  
                  Likewise, they want the uninformed individuals to make noise during the upcoming tea parties and town hall meetings while the informed individuals shake their heads in disbelief. 
                  
                  The role for reconciliation
                  
                  "Reconciliation is not being considered for passing comprehensive health-care reform. Major health-care reform legislation passed the Senate without reconciliation on Christmas Eve. If the House now passes that legislation, it can go immediately to President Obama's desk to be signed into law."
                  
                  "What the president and others have suggested is that, after the House acts, reconciliation could then be used to pass a much smaller "fixer" bill to allow for modifications to the comprehensive bill that will have passed under regular order. "
                  
                  "Some question how the then-Republican majority used reconciliation to pass a $1.3 trillion tax cut in 2001 and another $350 billion tax cut in 2003, all entirely unpaid for. These were clear abuses of the process."
                  
                  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co … 03248.html

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     JON EWALLposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     Kenrick+Chatman
                     
                     SINCE YOU WATCH FOX NEWS
                     
                     Don't  miss Glen Beck on tues  at 5:00 ET
                     
                     Guaranteed to open your mind to the truth
                     
                     Knowledge is Power

                     replyreport
   6. 62

      ginosblogposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Why are they without health care? Illegal? If they are illegally in the country then that is a risk they took!. If they are to lazy to get health-care, that's another risk and if think they are not going to be sick and don't get health care, that's another risk they took!
      
      If they are paying out the nose for the ex wife to keep their child, party every night with whomever and wait for them to cover the child with health care and they are paying through the nose and can't afford to get health care, then the woman or man with the child needs to give them a break and spend some of the money on the child for a change, would you agree?
      
      What you are suggesting, that the Health-care Bill is much smaller that they want to pass by use of  Reconciliation is much smaller is bunk my friend. It will be just as big and cost just as much to us and our kids and their kids, if we still have a country. The bills that the GOP passed using reconciliation were much, much smaller and did not have the impact that this out of control bill will have. Plus they will ad to it after it is passed.
      
      The way they should do this is one step at a time. Get the corruption out of Medicaid and Medicare, allow folks to buy their prescription drugs across state lines, have no preexisting clause with a waiting period,
      and lower the premiums, make insurance cost effective for the small business', and the cost of the ER's service should be lower. But this be done a step at a time not bankrupting the country with spending what we don't have!
      
      There is health care option all over the country for most situations and with the internet it is very simple to find a solution even if it's nothing but a discount program and I am not a representative of any of these programs.  http://www.ahealthinsurancequotes.com/d … -plans.htm
      
      You pay a small monthly fee and when you need the program it can save you as much as 80% of the doctor's bill and you don't have any preexisting to tend with and you don't have to depend on every ones tax dollars to pay your way pal.
      http://allsolutionsnetwork.com/GW/GW20373/

      replyreport
   7. 0

      Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Healthcare is not healthcare insurance - which is what Obama and the rest of his mob want to shove down our throats. It's a tax bill, not a healthcare bill. If you don't buy health insurance, according to this bill, the IRS will fine you and put liens on you until you pay your tax.
      
      Not quite sure how anyone will get any healthier that way.

      replyreport
      1. 55

         creepyposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         they wont need as many trips to the back doctor
         
         they will be relieved of all that heavy money
         
         that is a good thing
         
         right

         replyreport
   8. 61

      Evan G Rogersposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I understand completely that health care is important and that it saves lives. But Universal Health Care completely ignores economics in every way possible.
      
      I do want everyone to have affordable health care that covers everything they could ever want. I really do want this.
      
      But passing a law to give it to everyone in the U.S. just won't work.
      
      Establishing UHC because we want everyone to live a long time is the same argument - only with much more disastrous consequences- as passing a law to abolish gravity because we all want to fly.
      
      It just can't work.

      replyreport
3. 57

   Sab Ohposted 14 years ago

   " As soon as the tax cuts expire"
   
   
   Great, drive up unemployment and drive down actual tax reciepts even more. Brilliant.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Harvey Stelmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Sab
      
      Unemployment will lead to massive inflation, which will lead to depression which may lead to anarchy. I pray not!

      replyreport
   2. 0

      Kenrick Chatmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      "Cost of the Bush era: $11.5 trillion
      
      Tax cuts and deficit spending: $2 trillion
      
      Kogan estimated the tax cuts have cost the Treasury $1.7 trillion in revenue to date. Of course, that may not be one bit disturbing to the taxpayers who've watched their tax bills go down. The only problem is, the cuts have been critical in opening up the gargantuan budget gap that Obama will face.
      
      Because Bush did not reduce spending, Washington has paid about $265 billion in interest on loans to cover the lost revenue. So the $1.7 trillion in tax cuts really cost around $2 trillion.
      
      "If some of this spending had been paid for by tax increases, then there wouldn't have been interest costs," he said. "But none of it was. We had tax cuts and spending increases."
      
      Iraq and Afghanistan: $3 trillion
      
      But Harvard University professor Linda Bilmes and Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz of Columbia University say the agency is underestimating the tab. In their book, "The Three Trillion Dollar War" they claim Iraq will be far costlier.
      
      Modern technology and medicine have kept U.S. deaths in these conflicts low, compared with previous wars, but tens of thousands of wounded soldiers will require taxpayer-supplied health care for years, said Bilmes, who served as an assistant secretary of commerce in the Clinton administration. Factoring in those benefits, replacement of worn-out hardware and other hidden bills, Bilmes and Stiglitz believe the real price for Iraq is $3 trillion.
      
      That money hasn't been reinvested in the U.S. economy as mush as possibly expected, partly because of outsourcing by U.S. companies, Bilmes said."
      
      http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/In … eTopAnchor

      replyreport
      1. 60

         JON EWALLposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Kenrick
         Bush is gone, the democrats are still in control of congress (congress spends the money) and now we have  since 2009 a 100% democrat controlled government.
         Bush left office with a $1.3 trillion deficit of which $700 trillion was the financial bailout of the banking ,automaker and insurance companies.
         The government owns stock in the billions in some of those entities.
         After reading your replies to many of the hubs, I gotta tell you that you need to watch more of C-Span, Fox News and read more of the business sections of your local newspaper.
         You are getting information partially distorted by your sources, the reason that the president comments on Fox News is that they show both sides of the spectrum.
         A report that you will unlikely see (if you do see it ) what the Obama administration stated that the deficit in 10 years would be $8.5 trillion, CBO reported on Friday the deficit will be $9.3 trillion. Tell me whose numbers can we trust?
         The fact that more people are not buying insurance, makes the costs of insurance  go up. Insurance companies profit margins are between 2 to 4% of which the government gets a portion in taxes.
         Let's recognize who are the bad guys, the government by not moving on the jobs issues certainly is part of the problems.
         I suggest you read the bill  ( 2700 pages ) and recognize that there are many parts that are not acceptable to the American people.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Kenrick Chatmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Once the tax cuts roll back, we bring our troops home from Iraq, the economy including consumer and business spending rebounds, consistent monthly job gains occur, the health-care bill is implemented, other areas of spending is reduced... we will start to generate more revenue than we spend helping to reduce the deficit...
            
            Of course if the US did not have to, we would not use TARP and the stimulus bill (adding to the large deficit Bush passed on) to battle the worst economic recession since the Great Depression.
            
            As time goes on, you will see further improvement in the economy... However, you have to be patient... Once Obama 8 years in office are over, then we can access his performance... Thus far he is doing a good job:
            
            -stock market has rebounded
            -the economy has stabilized
            -the stimulus has added up to 2.1M jobs and should have a greater impact in 2010
            -monthly net job losses are on the verge of monthly net job gains
            -health care bills have passed both the House and Senate
            -the final health care fixer or modification bill should pass shortly
            -our reputation around the world has improved
            -the Democrats are fighting to help the unemployed who lost their jobs due to the recession by pushing to extend unemployment benefits and COBRA subsidies through the end of 2010
            -we are on pace to reduce the number of troops in Iraq to 50K later this year
            -the Job bills should pass soon
            -the administration is consistently pressuring banks to lend to reputable small businesses
            -the administration has been pressuring bank executives to tie pay and bonuses to performance of their companies
            -relief has been provided to qualified homeowners in foreclosure via loan modifications
            -and etcetera
            
            And more good things are ahead and more challenges to tackle.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               JON EWALLposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               kenrick
               
               What are you smoking or drinking?  You're in some kind of fairyland if you believe what you have written.
               The stimulus bill was $787billion as is now $862 billion   went up
               Unemployment is 9.7nationally but in all truthfulness is 16.7%
                 Note ! when the Dem's took over in 2007 it was 4.6%
               Letting the bush cuts end will increase taxes = more unemployment
               and more foreclosures.
               Government controls  and directives have  caused the mortgage problems
               The jobs bill added another $100+ billion to the debt
               that's all borrowed money   not interest free
               You are a very intelligent man but I can't understand on how you can't get your facts right.Watch fox ''we report the news, you decide '' not the news explaining what the news ( commentary ) is all about. The Saturday early business programs (liberals and conservative guests ) will set you free to become a wizard. Straight forward no politics, just the facts.
               PS your comments after viewing the shows.

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  Kenrick Chatmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  What Democrat-crafted economic bills did George W sign into law during 2007-2009?
                  
                  Unfortunately, tough decisions have to be made to combat the rising deficit...

                  replyreport
               2. 61

                  Evan G Rogersposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Jon, I agree with what you've written, but I think it's hopeless to assume that Republicans are better than Democrats in this instance.
                  
                  I know you didn't come out and say that R'S are better, but you did say the 'bush tax cuts'.
                  
                  The simple truth is that both parties are god awful when it comes to economics.

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     china manposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     Maybe more accurate the other way around - the economics are god awful for both parties.  After a few decades of bubbles and crashes of ever increasing severity surely it is time to rethink the economic model. This one requires everything to expand infinitely which is both unnecessary for the social needs of peoples and constantly requires new grist for the mill. Wars could be thought of as just another way of creating new markets in the current models.

                     replyreport
            2. 0

               sneakorocksolidposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               C'mon Kenrick we all know you voted for Mccain!

               replyreport
               1. 57

                  Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  I think he wrote in Chavez

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     sneakorocksolidposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     Now thats funny! Good job Sab!

                     replyreport
4. 60

   kephriraposted 14 years ago

   Didn't you (the American people, not you personally) elect him in the knowledge that healthcare reform was one of the things he said he was going to do? Politicians are obliged to do what they said they were going to do when they were campaigning to be elected.

   replyreport
   1. 57

      Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Lots of people want healthcare reform, but the majority do not want the mess currently being shoved down our throats by arrogant politicians who are essentially about to vote themselves out of office.

      replyreport
   2. 61

      Harvey Stelmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Kep,
      
      Unfortunately we (the American people) fell for his B.S. campaign.  Our President is mostly smoke and mirrors, and a fantastic liar. I figured him out way before he campaigned for President, at least most others understand him now.
      
      If we follow him we will end up a socialist country headed for communism.

      replyreport
5. 60

   Doug Hughesposted 14 years ago

   A lot of people believe the lies that have been pushed by the GOP and insurance industry over the last year. Rather than leave that as a subjective statement, I will give a few examples.
   
   Sarah Palin and the 'death panel' lie. A lot of elderly people will never consult their doctor about the living will or advance directives or hospice, convinced that 'they' are out to kill them.
   
   The GOP sent out a 'survey' last year - one question asked if the republican voter is concerned that democrats will use party affiliation to discriminate in 'health rationing'. No basis for the accusation.
   
   The release of a pamphlet on end-of-life options for veterans prompted ridiculous cries of 'euthanasia' from GOP sources. No basis for the accusation.
   
   Last week Michele Bachmann claimed that patients in Japan are frightened to complain about health care waits in Japan or they will be put on 'a list' delaying health care further. Media checks could find no source for or evidence supporting the claim which seems to be a figment of her imagination.
   
   There are claims that premiums would go up, when the average premium for almost all Americans would go down. (according to the CBO)
   
   There are claims it would drive unemployment up - when the obvious truth is the opposite. Provide health care for 30 million Americans and it's a boon for health care. Add 30 million people to the insured and it's a boon for the insurance industry. None of the jobs created can be outsourced.
   
   The overall result of the propaganda has been to shake the confidence of the voter. They don't know what's true, let alone what's in the bill. The scare tactic have done what they were designed to do - frightened the crap out of folks. The democrats in congress who worked on the bill for a year know the truth about what they are doing and they aren't going to be governed by the effects of the lies. The results will bear out the value.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Harvey Stelmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Doug,
      
      Prime Minister of Canada goes to USA for surgery.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         JeanMeriamposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         No. It was not the Prime Minister of Canada. It was the premiere of a small, poverty stricken province who most likely did not want to wait his turn. We have some of the best cardiac care in the world.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            From a recent "Investor's Business Daily" article, from a survey by the United Nations International Health Organization:
             
             Percentage of men and women who survived a cancer five years after diagnosis:
             U.S.    65%
             England 46%
             Canada 42%
             
             Percentage of patients diagnosed with diabetes who received treatment within six months:
             U.S.    93%
             England 15%
             Canada 43%
             
             Percentage of seniors needing hip replacement who received it within six months:
             U.S.    90%
             England 15%
             Canada 43%
             
             Percentage referred to a medical specialist that see one within one month:
             U.S.    77%
             England 40%
             Canada 43%
             
             Number of MRI scanners (a prime diagnostic tool) per million people:
             U.S.    71%
             England 14%
             Canada 18%
             
             Percentage of seniors (65+), with low income, who say they are in "excellent health":
             U.S.    12%
             England  2%
             Canada  6%

            replyreport
            1. 60

               Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Interesting that we are doing so well with seniors - (2 of the categories you cite) when that's the result of the 'socialistic' medicine of Medicare. The other categories say we are dong well with people who have insurance - but the analysis doesn't measure how dismal our system is for people without insurance.
               
               An interesting post - I applaud anyone who can make an argument with honest facts.

               replyreport
            2. 61

               Harvey Stelmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               X,
               
               I don't know why anyone would want such a great system!

               replyreport
         2. 61

            Harvey Stelmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Jean,
            
            Sorry for the mistake; but he wouldn't have to wait "his turn" in the USA. Wait; he didn't!

            replyreport
   2. 60

      JON EWALLposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      80Doug
      
      YOU FORGET THAT THE FINAL BILL ISN'T WRITTEN YET FOR THE CBO to under score the  cost of the bill. Obama has yet to write his bill to be considered.
      Question ? Will the leaders of both houses ( democrats ) allow 72 hours to review the bill before it can be debated as promised?
      The CBO requires more than 72 hours to grade it ( that's a fact)
      
      Wake up ! The people need jobs first, what is this congress doing to get us jobs?    NOTHING but spending with no results in the private sector.

      replyreport
6. 0

   china manposted 14 years ago

   To stay with the post - in a Democracy we elect our leaders and in doing so give them the mandate to govern us. This means that the majority of people agree to let the elected leader lead.
   
   backbiting and backstabbing after the event is counter productive and divisive - the time to convince people is before.
   
   This is the hegemony of western societies - we know we are fed lies and BS ans so we look for other ways of deciding our relative godd and bad - and the anti-Obama faction on here seems to include all the racists and general hate mongers so I guess this means he is a good guy.

   replyreport
   1. 57

      Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Um, no. Electing someone doesn't mean we then have any obligation or expectation to shut up and go away until the next election. That's sure as hell not gonna happen in America. Paying attention and making our voices heard is what we are supposed to be doing. Elected officials need to be constantly reminded of who they work for.
      
      
      at the PRC-speak about "hegemony." I think your programming is complete.
      
      
      Have you seen anyone here make any racist comments about Obama? I haven't.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         china manposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         still reading what you want into what I say - try reading before typing is good.  And go look up hegemony in the meantime.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Maybe if you didn't want to change the meaning of what you post after the fact, no one would "read into it" what they think you mean

            replyreport
            1. 0

               china manposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               I think I post clearly enough - I just don;t like others trying to put words into my quotes

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  YOU think you post clearly enough, so, I guess that's enough

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     china manposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     yes - I think so, maybe you and the troll who follows me around - that the post you answered was for could both go for reading lessons? unless you are the same person of course

                     replyreport
         2. 57

            Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            "go look up hegemony in the meantime"
            
            
            Gee thanks, I ain't never hurd o' wurd be'fo!
            
            
            

            replyreport
   2. 61

      Harvey Stelmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      China,
      
      So you support everything every President has done!

      replyreport
7. 0

   Madame Xposted 14 years ago

   

   replyreport
8. 0

   ralwusposted 14 years ago

   Harvey, who put that silly notion in yer head?

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Harvey Stelmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      ral,
      
      Which one; there are so many.

      replyreport
9. 61

   logic,commonsenseposted 14 years ago

   Politicians only do what they perceive people want them to do.  If you have an agenda, and give money to a politician, he will assume that your agenda is what the people want.  The best way to get their attention is to vote them out.  A 2x4 upside the head, while may be the preferred method, will still not have the effect of being voted out of office.

   replyreport
10. 81

    earnestshubposted 14 years ago

    Yes, if they can ever find out what it is the people want! We get the politics we deserve. Voting is free.

    replyreport
    1. 57

       Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       "Yes, if they can ever find out what it is the people want!"
       
       
       It is the responsibility of the people to let them know, and of certain arrogant SOBs to actually give a damn.

       replyreport
    2. 61

       Harvey Stelmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       earnest,
       
       In many places in our country that is not necessarily the case. Unions now pressure pressure workers, you want something, you vote this way, I can rezone your business, etc.

       replyreport