About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Morris says he's "100 percent positive" that Obama will create panels that will "curb[] medical care to the elderly"

March 03, 2010 9:46 pm ET

From the March 3 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:

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.

EMBED

Previously:

Morris, Fox & Friends now claiming health care bill has "de facto death panel"

Dick Morris: Health care reform board "effectively is euthanasia"

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by cindermaker (March 03, 2010 9:54 pm ET)
      3  
      Morris is freakin' neo-con nut job. I am less willing to listen to him than anyone else on Fox, aside from Beck.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Bobby Jindal fan (March 04, 2010 1:18 am ET)
          5
        You are not willing to listen to any Fox commentator. Prove me wrong, which Fox commentator do you find persuasive?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by rms (March 04, 2010 7:42 am ET)
          2  
          Willing to listen to and being persuasive are two different things, you realize.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by CharleeW (March 05, 2010 2:46 pm ET)
             
          None, for sure. Think about it. Dick Morris who is an admitted "toe-sucker"(like I needed to know that), Newt Gringrich, The Disgraced ex-Speaker of the House: thrown out for adulterous affairs while married, and then there is the "Artful Dodger" the illustrious Carl Rove, who would not testify before congress and without dispute, outed Valerie Plane and ruined her career. Then there is the movie star, The infamous Sarah, and now Liz Cheney, who even the conservatives are coming down on for her "McCarthyism". NONE. I expect more out of news commentators if I am going to believe them.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by anandhababu (March 04, 2010 10:00 am ET)
           
        dont loose for any one,all the best
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Bongo Fury (March 03, 2010 9:58 pm ET)
      1  
      Thank heavens no more Beck repeats.This is the same Dick Morris that was Clintons top advisor?This guy is prognosticating failure by Obama without proof,unless malice is truth.Why can't Billbo go after intelligent dems?Yaaargh!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by soze169880 (March 03, 2010 10:17 pm ET)
      2  
      Can we get enough signatures to make Morris pull a Jesus Quintana, and have to knock on every door in New York to tell people he gets off sucking on toes? At the very least it would keep him from his next scheduled appearance.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by The_Cat (March 03, 2010 10:52 pm ET)
      3  
      Uhhhhh, Dick? What you believe is completely irrelevant and unimportant. George W. Bush believed that there were WMDs in Iraq. See how that works? So, what can you PROVE, Dick? That's the much better question here. Can you prove your assertion? Got any facts, any evidence?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (March 03, 2010 10:52 pm ET)
      3  
      And I'm 100% positive that Dick Morris is a toe-sucking, money-grubbing, pasty little fat fraud...
      Report Abuse
    • Author by John Paradox (March 03, 2010 10:55 pm ET)
      4 1
      Whew... considering how accurate Morris has been (never compared with Madame Cleo), there's 0% chance of that 'curbing' taking place.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by blk-in-alabam (March 03, 2010 11:23 pm ET)
      1  
      Dick Morris knows to be a good republican/actor in the Reagan tradition,all you have to do is read/repeat the script.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by mjh (March 04, 2010 2:24 am ET)
      1  
      Morris says he's "100 percent positive" that Obama will create panels that will "curb[] medical care to the elderly"



      Yeah, right, 'lil dick -- just as you were "100 percent positive" the 2008 US Presidential race would be an epic contest between Condi Rice and Hillary Clinton {positive enough to write a book about it.}

      How'd that work out?

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Sharpe (March 04, 2010 2:34 am ET)
      2  
      This from the party that would prefer medicare didnt even exist and is now talking about how we need to phase it out. Im suure they are so concerned. Morris is right about the medicare cuts but we don't know what it is they are cutting. I believe it was targeting the waste spent in medicare advantage which certainly has plenty of wasted spending to target. These cuts will not force america's elderly to see their physician less often or make their doctor less available, I am positive of that.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by MaineiacMan (March 04, 2010 9:28 am ET)
        2
      How can he NOT ration healthcare, when he is funding this monstrosity with about 50% in new taxes and 50% in cuts to medicare/medicade?

      Obama is clever though, get AARP to go along with him on his healthcare plan because they'll be selling supplimental health insurance to seniors.

      Special interests anyone?

      Report Abuse
    • Author by OTP (March 04, 2010 9:41 am ET)
        2
      Fact of the matter is that as "health care" becomes more government oriented, both the quality or care and the quantity of care will suffer.

      No government run (or meddled) health care system has EVER worked without some sort of rationing, be it long waits or minimal visit time...

      So we have a chance to have health care reform, BUT it MUST include ALL cost cutting measures available, including REAL litigation (or tort) reform, regardless of how little (54Billion over 10 years) it will save... I just can't comprehend WHY you "progressives" insist on paying the Huge corporate law firms with wealthy CEOs and lawyers that comand HUGE salaries (John Edwards)...

      It makes it really hard to take the "progressive" health care reform seriously wile ignoring this issue.

      I know President Obama has sorta made a play towards this but we need REAL reform in this area... others too.... but this is a show stopper...
      Report Abuse
      • Author by blk-in-alabam (March 04, 2010 10:25 am ET)
           
        You numbers on tort reform savings may not be correct.Most numbers worked up by bias sources assume that nobody ever has a real reason to sue a doctor or hospital for damage they have done.The laws are already tilted in favor or doctors.For each lawsuit that does get through there are many that do not.There are people who have really been messed up by doctors and hospitals.Because of loopholes in the law their only justice is to suffer.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by OTP (March 04, 2010 11:20 am ET)
            1
          The 54 Billion is a CBO "estimate".. My point is that we should look at ALL areas for savings... CLEARLY patients need to be able to sue for errors. However tot reform, or something should also force unqualified providers out of health care.

          Even MORE clear is that lawyers (who provide NO direct medical benefit) suck resources from both deserving patients (those who have had errors), and health care in general. My concern is that this area is TOTALLY overlooked. The Only 'honest" reason I've heard is from of all people "Howard Dean". He (paraphrased) said that President Obama doesn't want to have to "fight" the trial lawyers too... BUT this would bring conservatives to the table...

          Report Abuse
      • Author by angels4light (March 04, 2010 10:52 am ET)
           
        The 4 decades old solution in Hawaii is just a fluke because it has worked so well for more than 4 decades?
        Report Abuse