Gibson claims "a lot of people are very uncomfortable" with the "idea" of "government insurance"
June 24, 2009 11:06 pm ET
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
Only 70% of Americans support a public option. This spells trouble.
That means 30% of Americans don't support a public option, and, worse yet, only 70% approve. So, you can do the wingnut math.
charlie gibson logic.
Now, when they face the prospect of having to compete with this inept government--ON A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD--,they stand like proud conservatives, united...
And then run and hide under the kitchen table, whining they can't compete with the government.
I notice cons keep saying we are the greatest country in the world and hate our government because it is sooooo bad. I suppose there is some logic in there somewhere but I cant see it.
I'm really getting sick and tired (of literally being sick and tired all the time) of these right-wing corporate whores that lie, distort, and BS about my ability to get health-care!
The issue over universal single payer health-care insurance IS NOT ABOUT HEALTH-CARE... it is about everyone being able to access all that great health-care!
This may have been on another thread that I missed, but did anyone see The View this morning... that blond dummy of the right, who is pregnant was showing off her hospital room and all the extravagances that she will enjoy while having her kid.
I wonder if they even realized the utter lack of giving a crap that display was?
I am sick of Hannity saying "We have the best health-care in the world, that's why everyone comes here for health-care." This stupid a-- NO one is saying we do not have great Doctors and facilities. We are screaming that too many of us can not afford it or get to it! Too many of those in office have that Hannity mentality.
On one hand, they're saying that it's unfair because private insurance can't compete with public insurance.
On the other hand they say the government is bad, the government screws up everything it touches, and that a public insurance option would be an abysmal failure that costs too much.
So if the private insurers get squeezed by competition from a public option, wouldn't that logically mean that the public option is effective, attracting customers, and WORKING???
Them lazy Mexicans are coming here and taking jobs from hard-working Americans.
And what's even sader, this guy has a staff.
Mr. News
Hal Turner pulling a Savage
They just keep on rolling.
The President is a powerful and persuasive speaker, and after watching him last night, I have absolutely no doubt as to his sincerity on this matter... when the first questioner raised the fear about the difference between physicians 'over-treating' patients ("padding their bill"), and between making sensible decisions about unnecessary treatments, and about who decides what's unnecessary and necessary (and the question was meant to raise the fear that the government would deny people coverage for some treatments, and in so doing kill them, all to save money), the President quickly brought his own experience into the matter, and mentioned how his grandmother, who'd already been diagnosed with terminal cancer, had fallen and broken her hip, and there was the decision to be made, whether to subject the woman to the extraordinary physical trauma of a hip replacement, and put her life at risk during that surgery, or determine that perhaps it made no sense to even try and replace her hip, as she was in the final months of her life anyway (according to her doctors, due to her cancer)... if the woman had no one to stand up for her in this simple matter of what was and was not a necessary surgery, she'd have been scheduled for a hip replacement immediately, and more than likely not survived the physical trauma of that surgery, and died, but at the same time there'd have been the surgery to pay for, tens of thousands of dollars, her medical bill would have been "padded", even the mortician's fees would have had to be paid...
"End of life medical care" is what they call it, and it's a cash cow to hospitals, as they pad the bills like crazy and over-treat patients greedily, while they lie there in hospital beds, sometimes not even conscious, in the final few months of their lives (and Medicare expenses to the government are extraordinary in this regard, a very large share, more than a quarter I think of Medicare expenses, go to treating people in the final four months of their lives)... it's padding the bill like crazy, it's like beat the clock before they die, and bill bill bill, through unnecessary treatments...
The President knew all about this, and I'm sure that frustrated the woman who asked the question, in order to raise the fear.
Also, I love the modern gadgetry of the television remote control, especially the mute button... it means that I didn't have to listen to charles gibson last night... every time he opened his mouth, I pressed a button and saw the word "MUTE" on the screen, and waited for gibson to appear to stop talking, and then pressed the button again, to listen to President Obama speak...
I love being able to do that.
But when the president of the AMA stood to ask a question (and he's typical of the American People I guess), and raised the talking point about "bureaucrats", before I could mute charles gibson, I heard him say he wanted to go to a commercial...
What a slimy and clever thing that was he did, purposely disassociating a question from it's answer, by pausing to take a break while the question about "bureaucrats" hung in the air... it intentionally disconnected and distanced the President's response from that question, that question asked by that typical American who happened to be the president of the AMA.
Slimeballs.
There's also the matter of how Republicans in the U.S. Senate stand in the way of Public Health Insurance, and how Senate Democrats may compromise with them, in order to pass some kind of "health care reform"... they don't have to do that, you know... they don't have to compromise just for the sake of compromising, and just for the sake of saying "there, we did something at least, it's not what the People want, but at least it's something, even if it's just a compromise"... we can wait until the 2010 elections you know, they aren't that far away... there's no real sense of urgency here, there's not a house on fire or a ship sinking...
You have noticed that the ranks of Republicans have been dwindling in the U.S. Senate during the past two elections, haven't you?
Let's not compromise on this matter just to suit Republicans, and hand them a victory just for the sake of saying we did something... yeah, something that disagrees with more than seventy percent of the American People!
Let's fight this right to the 2010 election!
It's just around the corner... let's fire a few more Republicans from the U.S. Senate!
It's getting to be an easy habit with us, we love doing it!
We love firing Republicans from Congress!
Again, there's no house on fire or ship sinking, Senate Democrats do not have to compromise just for the sake of doing something, for the sake of doing anything... the 2010 election is just 17 months away, let's fight every month from now until then... we can win this one, easily too, unless Senate Democrats give up and give in and lie down, as though they didn't know how many Americans are behind this issue, and that those Americans will be voting on it themselves, in just seventeen months.