About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Media seek to impugn both sides for ugliness in health care debate

August 20, 2009 6:39 pm ET — 49 Comments

In commenting on the tenor of the debate surrounding health care reform, several media figures have suggested that its supporters and opponents are equally detracting from the "seriousness" of the issue or that its supporters are failing to take seriously the critics of health care reform. These media figures have either ignored the false and extreme rhetoric coming from opponents of health care reform or have backed their claims with questionable assertions, such as referring to labor unions as "fringe groups."

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

Media strive to cast pox on both houses

Murphy claims Barney Frank failed to give "serious" answers on the deficit. On the August 19 edition of CNN Newsroom, Patricia Murphy, editor of CitizenJanePolitics.com, responded to a clip of Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) answering questions at an August 18 town hall meeting, saying that she understood why Frank "wrote off" the concerns of a woman comparing health care reform to Nazism, but that Frank should have given "a more serious answer" to a man asking about the rising budget deficit. Frank, however, had answered the man's deficit question by saying that "the biggest single waste of money in one fell swoop in federal history was the war in Iraq. ... You said you're worried about the deficit. Then you said you weren't talking about the war. Who do you think paid for the war? Santa Claus? The deficit was exacerbated by the war." Murphy offered no elaboration as to how citing the costs of the Iraq war did not qualify as a "serious answer" to a question about the deficit.

Yellin put labor unions and tea partiers on the same "fringe." On the August 13 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, national political correspondent Jessica Yellin noted that many of the more vocal participants at health care town halls were "encouraged to attend by groups on the left or the right" and listed among these groups MoveOn.org, "labor unions," Americans for Prosperity, and Tea Party Patriots. Yelling went on to ask: "Are fringe groups taking over the town square, and is this good for our country?"

Rehm equated Pelosi with Palin. On the August 12 broadcast of her NPR program, Diane Rehm said she can't call the national discussion about health care reform a "debate" because "people are so angry, and they're using phrases and they're using loud hollering, screaming trying to drown out the opposition." The examples Rehm offered were "Sarah Palin's comments about [President] Obama's death panel and Nancy Pelosi calling health care critics un-American." This was actually a distortion of Pelosi's August 10 USA Today op-ed, in which she and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) decried efforts to "disrupt public meetings and prevent members of Congress and constituents from conducting a civil dialogue," writing: "Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American."

Scarborough insisted the "uncontrolled rage" is bipartisan. On the August 20 edition of MSNBC's Morning Joe, co-host Joe Scarborough repeatedly insisted that Democrats and Republicans both bear responsibility for the "uncontrolled rage" surrounding the health care debate, to the point that when his guests and co-hosts attempted to talk about the responsibility Republican leaders bear, Scarborough would cut them off and demand that they "talk about Democrats."

From the August 20 edition of Morning Joe:

SCARBOROUGH: I'm just saying, there's all of this uncontrolled rage out there. I think leaders of both parties have to be called on the carpet and distance themselves from the crazy rhetoric that's out there, whether it's coming from Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid calling Americans evil --

MIKA BRZEZINSKI (co-host): Yeah.

SCARBOROUGH: -- or [Rep. Jerrold] Nadler [D-NY] talking about Nazi, fascist tactics or Tom DeLay being a birther or Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin talking about death panels, which clearly -- clearly, clearly, clearly -- is not in this legislation.

BRZEZINSKI: Exactly.

SCARBOROUGH: And so let's get leaders of the Republican Party and Democratic Party showing whether they're true leaders or whether they're going to play to their angriest base.

BRZEZINSKI: All right. Here with us now, editorial writer for The Washington Post and MSNBC contributor Jonathan Capehart. Jonathan, you want to chime in? Any excuse for this?

CAPEHART: I am just -- I'm astounded by that Tom DeLay sound bite. Good Lord. And you know, Joe, I'm sorry, but your one defense of the Republican Party, I think it -- ooh, it's a little lame. These people used to be the leaders in the Republican Party. Newt Gingrich was the speaker of the House. Tom DeLay was in the House leadership. He got the nickname "The Hammer" for a reason. And Sarah Palin was the VP nominee, former governor of Alaska, up until a few -- about a month ago.

SCARBOROUGH: And, Jonathan --

CAPEHART: And so what does it about -- but wait. What does it say that these folks were elected? I mean --

SCARBOROUGH: OK.

CAPEHART: -- these were people that people voted for.

SCARBOROUGH: OK.

CAPEHART: They were leaders in the party.

SCARBOROUGH: And so -- thank you, Jonathan, for bringing this up.

CAPEHART: That's just one half. The second half, I agree with you.

SCARBOROUGH: Hold -- no, no, hold a second, Jonathan. Because I want to pick apart what you just said. You're right -- Newt Gingrich was speaker of the House. Tom DeLay was majority leader or whip. Sarah Palin was vice president. Harry Reid is --

CAPEHART: Nominee.

SCARBOROUGH: -- is the leader of the United States Senate, and he's calling Americans evil. Is. He's calling Americans evil. Nancy Pelosi is speaker of the House, and she's saying that these people that are going to town hall meetings are using un-American tactics. Jerry Nadler is a --

CAPEHART: Shouting down people at town hall meetings --

SCARBOROUGH: -- a Democratic leader right now --

JOHN RIDLEY (MSNBC contributor): There's a difference between saying --

SCARBOROUGH: -- talking about fascist tactics. So, you actually have people who are running America calling other Americans, quote, "evil." So --

CAPEHART: Well, I just wonder what it says about --

SCARBOROUGH: -- don't tell me that my explanation is lame.

CAPEHART: No, I just wonder what it says that these people had once been elected. Now, the second half of what you said, I completely agree with. Where are the responsible leaders of the Republican Party now --

SCARBOROUGH: Wait a second, Jonathan.

CAPEHART: -- trying to stop the --

SCARBOROUGH: No, no, no.

CAPEHART: Wait, wait --

SCARBOROUGH: Don't -- don't -- no, Jonathan. Don't keep this --

CAPEHART: Trying to stop the conversation about birthers and --

SCARBOROUGH: Jonathan --

CAPEHART: What?

SCARBOROUGH: -- please, don't try to weasel out of this. Don't just talk about --

CAPEHART: I haven't even --

SCARBOROUGH: -- Republicans.

CAPEHART: I haven't even finished.

SCARBOROUGH: Talk about Democrats.

CAPEHART: I didn't get to the Democrats yet.

SCARBOROUGH: Well, no, because you want to go --

CAPEHART: I didn't get to the Democrats yet, Joe.

SCARBOROUGH: Well, why don't you do that now, because you've already talked about the Republicans. Instead of talking about Republicans calling people out --

CAPEHART: Well, look. Look, I think that the Repub--

SCARBOROUGH: -- why don't you answer my question? Do you think Harry Reid's right? Do you think Americans are evil-mongers?

Fox News ignores Nazi rhetoric from protester to attack Democrats

Doocy, Kilmeade defended protester who compared Obama to Hitler against Frank's "rude" response. Frank also fielded a question at the August 18 town hall meeting from a woman who claimed he and Obama support a "Nazi policy" on health care and who held up a sign of Obama with a Hitler mustache. Frank told the woman: "When you ask me that question, I am going to revert to my ethnic heritage and answer your question with a question: On what planet do you spend most of your time?" Fox & Friends co-host Steve Doocy, however, has repeatedly defended the woman, claiming that Frank's response to her was "rude," out of touch, and laden with "attitude." Doocy never noted the content of the woman's question. Fox News' Brian Kilmeade described Frank's behavior as "arrogance" and "smugness," and asked why Frank couldn't have said to the woman, "I understand where you're coming from, but ... "

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by smarshall1432997 (August 20, 2009 7:57 pm ET)
      6 1
      Joe saw some polls that showed "overwhemingly" how most Americans believed that Republicans were behind ALOT of the "ugliness" at Democrats' TownHall Meetings. Now poor Joe and his Republicans want to find a way of sharing this ugliness (by Republicans) with Democrats.

      But wait Joe, before you go on your long, long, long, long way of explaining why blame should be shared by Democrats watch on MSNBC these people: Dylan, Carlos, David & Tamara, Chris, Ed, Keith, and Rachel. Just saying. Wink, wink. LOL

      Report Abuse
      • Author by my4cents (August 20, 2009 9:55 pm ET)
        5  
        Do whatever it takes to kill a good reform, and then blame the other side for it.
        Rush is out there, spewing his venom every day. No regard to the facts, just whatever he can find on planet Uranus. People argue his listener numbers but if he is making the obscene amount of money he is (heil free market) there ought to be a lot of listeners influenced by him and his venom. And it shows, even on this conservative misinformation disseminating web site, when people that can actually type, type in his talking points.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by juliajayne1 (August 20, 2009 11:49 pm ET)
        4  
        Yeah. Like.....Exactly.

        Oh Smarshall, just acting like Mika. Sorry ;-)


        Hey when did Pelosi or Reid call Americans evil, btw? Somehow, I bet that never happened. But I haven't been keeping up with the news. ;-/
        Report Abuse
      • Author by justjoe628 (August 21, 2009 12:29 am ET)
        3 9
        I love the liberal double standard. When conservative stand up and voice the discontent and get a little rowdy, the liberal cry foul. But when liberals do the say thing, well.....disedence is partiotic.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by bip84124092 (August 21, 2009 3:21 am ET)
          1  
          Last time I checked carrying a loaded weapon to townhall meetings was not standing up and voicing dicontent. An AK47 to protest health care reform? That's just standing up and being STUPID.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by John Paradox (August 21, 2009 3:52 am ET)
          6  
          Descending is patriotic?
          Report Abuse
        • Author by Don Hussein Fabuloso (August 21, 2009 1:00 pm ET)
          9 1
          I love the liberal double standard. (Justjoe)

          "Double standard" is one of those terms that wingnuts seem to have a really tough time with. A double standard is when somebody judges two comparable things unfairly because of bias or prejudices.

          A double standard is not being able to see the difference between two very different things.

          Paying more for Filet Mignon than for Baloney is not a double standard.

          Having different reactions to a "Walk to Cure Cancer" charity event and a KKK March is not a double standard.

          In order to show a real double standard here, one would need to show some past issue where liberals, instructed by well-paid corporate interests, were stuffed full of misinformation, and went to GOP town hall meetings with the sole purpose of preventing any discussion of real issues by screaming out this propaganda.

          "Double standard" is a very useful term, when used correctly. PLease stop abusing it.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by foghornleghorn (August 21, 2009 3:31 pm ET)
            1  
            <APPLAUSE>
            Report Abuse
          • Author by justjoe628 (August 22, 2009 1:22 am ET)
              2
            So when a group of protesters is made of people who are given info from, bused in by and paid by ACORN to protest against AIG, it's a legitimate protest. But when real middle class American's protest against something they are opposed to, its fake. Well I found out about a townhall by going to Sheila Jackson Lee's website and found out when the meeting was. When I made and appointment to go to her office, it was throught the Organizing for America website. After I had read ALL of HR 3200. BTW, I knew more about the bill than her staff did. Just because MM tells you something doesn't make it true.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by mikehuck1976 (August 22, 2009 1:11 pm ET)
              1  
              There was an AIG townhall? I think, as usual justjoe, you are confused. You do not seem to know the difference between a protest and a townhall. Take a minute and think about it and then tell us - is there a difference?

              BTW - No one believes you understood more of the bill than her staff did. You don't even understand what a townhall is!
              Report Abuse
              • Author by princeofwheels (August 22, 2009 2:08 pm ET)
                1  
                It amazes me how some many TownHall goers have read the bill, and understand every word of it but cannot see the misinformation given out by the RightWingers.
                Anyone who says they have read and understand the entire bill should then go on to the next one. And then the next one and give classes on the entire array of bills. BS at its finest.
                Report Abuse
        • Author by internet soldier (August 21, 2009 1:00 pm ET)
          5  
          Just listen to Bernie Goldberg; townhalls are not anything goes environments. Shouting speakers down and generally trying to keep them from getting their message out are tactics that dont belong in town halls. You can have a protest anywhere, but when you're at a townhall, you wait for your fricking turn. In many places, courtrooms, theatres etc., standing up and yelling out of turn can get thrown out or arrested. You just don't have the right to yell anywhere. Right wingers can gather and protest any public place they please, but it is anti-democratic to try to shut down town halls.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by wookie (August 21, 2009 3:05 pm ET)
          5  
          I'm pretty sure Cindy Sheehan left her AR15 at home.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by tharri874 (August 20, 2009 9:52 pm ET)
      2  
      They have a point. Why should blame fall only on the perpetrator?

      Homer: Marge, it takes two to lie - one to lie, and one to listen.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Disputed Zone (August 21, 2009 10:39 am ET)
        3  
        I love that line, but in this case it's conservative leaders lying and the conservative base listening, with the SCLM covering for them.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by donaldmaddog5642 (August 20, 2009 11:14 pm ET)
      6  
      I have watched dozens of these confrontations and in not ONE of them does the Democrat call people names or is rude. By refusing to cower and cringe before the onslaught of vile and loud screams, and just hold their own, the Dems have shown real class and, I fear, too much restraint. The difference is dramatic. Maybe this is a good thing for the public to see and to compare the behavior of the right-wing plants and/or delusional disruptors of town hall meetings. Perhaps some of the more intelligent members of that crowd will feel some shame. .....Nah.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by NoNannyNeeded (August 20, 2009 11:44 pm ET)
          1
        Really? I thought Barney Frank was rude & calling names-and he's a public servant! Dick Durbin says it doesn't matter when people speak up such as calling their representatives. "It only proves you can shut down a swithcboard". Harry Reid calling them 'evil mongers"? How about SEIU showing up & attacking people saying? What about the man who was assulted in a Florida townhall meeting while being stopped from going in? His shirt was torn up & he had scratches. The Obama adminsistration refers to those who dare to speak out are referred to as plants from big insurance & try to dismiss them. The speaker at the AARP meeting in Dallas dismissing it's members. We won't even go into detail about MSNBC's coverage and the language they have used. From various sources, both government & media phrases, have called protesters, "racist", "domestic terrorists", "Un-American", "evil mongers", "angry mob",oh yeah, potential assissins. (don't get me wrong, it's stupid to take your gun to these meetings, but it is legal) A little intellectual honesty please!
        Report Abuse
        • Author by mikehuck1976 (August 22, 2009 1:17 pm ET)
          1  
          Your SEIU BS is on video - we have all seen it, you are lying about it. We know that. It was debunked several news cycles ago. Forget your intellectual honesty, we would settle for any kind of honesty from the right.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by justjoe628 (August 22, 2009 12:54 pm ET)
           
        So Sheila Jackson-Lee was was not rude when she was talking on her cell phone and ignoring the comments of one of her constituents. BTW, that townhall was very respectful and organized. No shouting or interuptions. Except Jackson-Lee on her cell phone. Barney Frank wasn't being rude when he refused to answer a legitimate question, responding only with, "What planet have you been living on." No, that stuff is very professional. Not rude at all. What the liberals don't like is their own tacticas being used against them. Leftist have been doing this stuff for years. And when liberals do it it's called patriotic. But when conservatives do it it's "astroturf."
        Report Abuse
        • Author by mikehuck1976 (August 22, 2009 1:14 pm ET)
             
          Which townhall meetings were disrupted by liberals? And you think asking a Jewish man why he is supporting Nazi legislation is a legitimate question? I think that says all we need to know about you, justjoe.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by eweston8542983 (August 22, 2009 1:17 pm ET)
          1  
          So when did liberal businesses arm their followers with lies transport them them to town hall meeting with instructions to disrupt and do all their lung power can do to prevent any discussion?
          Protests of a lack of voice on important issues is an entirely differant thing.
          David Brock's, "Blinded by the Right." Does give some examples of what you say, ie shouting down conservatives. On a college campus somewhen in the seventies. This disposed him towards the conservative positions. There are parts missing, The organizing monied parties, provided rhetoric and transport.
          Back up your statements, repeat your lies, or maybe come to understand the people who turn your anger on and off like a wall switch.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by wesley (August 20, 2009 11:20 pm ET)
      2 6
      You will rarely get a straight answer from a politician by standing politely and asking your question. What you get is nothing but well rehearsed double talk.

      Want a great laugh? View the following to watch how politicians deal with each other...

      Dope slap...Korean National Assembly...Barney Frank Chairs a Meeting...Bolivian Parliament...Canadian Senate...

      Report Abuse
      • Author by all your eyes (August 20, 2009 11:52 pm ET)
        6  
        Do you have a point?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by John Paradox (August 21, 2009 3:53 am ET)
          5  
          Under his tinfoil hat, probably.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by justjoe628 (August 22, 2009 1:00 pm ET)
              2
            He had a very clear point. Only you liberal don't want to see or hear it, you just want to call names and insult. Those politician hosting town hall meetings had very scripted things to say. They weren't there to give all the info, just the info they wanted the people attending to hear. They have an agenda. Like Pres. Obama's town hall meeting in Montana. During the whole thing he got two, sort of, a little bit tough questions. The rest were underhand, slow pitch right down the middle of the plate. He couldn't have scripted it much better. So if someone has an agenda, and you don't challege that agenda, than nothing is going to get done. People could have just stood by and let them spout lies, but they instead chose to challenge them. So that was his point, you know it. You just don't want to acknowledge it.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by eweston8542983 (August 22, 2009 1:25 pm ET)
              2  
              So presenting your positions and asking the public for their input is being very scripted? Not doubt you have copies of this script. Just as we have copies of Luntz's scripts and examples of their use.
              You have no trust of the interested people showing up being able to spot lies then?
              The proper response to this scripting, lies and proported inability of the populus to discriminate this then is to disallow any discussion? Really?
              Report Abuse
              • Author by mikehuck1976 (August 22, 2009 1:28 pm ET)
                2  
                Excellent point. Clearly, according to the right-wing posters here disallowing the discussion is the American way.
                Report Abuse
      • Author by mikehuck1976 (August 22, 2009 1:19 pm ET)
        2  
        Yeah, I agree wesley and justjoe. You can't get any answers unless you bring your machine gun and call the politican a Nazi. That's how things get worked out - machine guns and Nazis. Man, the right wing has really lost it.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by bip84124092 (August 21, 2009 3:46 am ET)
      1  
      Joe does the same thing every day. When he first started with the Pelosi "un American" lie Mika said that wasn't what she said. Needless to say she caught hell and the next day was agreeing with everything Joe said. There are times when he has to go through so many contortions to make his lies work it's pathetic. The "they did it too" Republican talking point won't work this time. The NY Times Book Review editor was a guest on Morning Joe and was talking about the behaviour of the protestors pulling down the Republican party. Joe cut him off. He said "what about the Democrats, talk about them". The poor man was so shocked at Joe's rudeness he looked like a deer caught in headlights. Joe loves to bring up anything critical of Democrats, and then be intimidating if you don't agree with his spin on things. Pretty soon Joe's going to run out of guests, but he'll always have Mika, Pat Buchanon and Willie Geist.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by NiceguyEddie (August 21, 2009 8:52 am ET)
      8  
      Oh, there's rage on both sides...

      But the thinking person's rage is directed at the currenlty system, for unecessarily killing 18,000 people a year, bankrupting countless more and cancelling policy's right when they're needed the most, so that Insurance CEO's can get paid 10, 15, 25 Million dollars a year.

      The idiot's rage is directed at shullbit, distortions and outright lies: Socialism, Nazism, Death Panels, Rationing, Government taking over Medicare(!!!)...

      Now I've been taken to task recently for stereotyping lib's as smart and con's as dumb, but... Who do YOU THINK the above paragraphs describe?

      The are only two types of conservtaives: Evil and Stupid. One lies and one buys.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by anotheramerican (August 21, 2009 2:26 pm ET)
        1 4
        I find it rather simple headed that so many on the left toss out this stat that the current system is killing off 18,000 people per year. First of all, does anyone know how that stat is derived?

        Many thousands of uninsured people die from drug abuse, aids, genetic makeup, and unhealthy lifestyles. Having government insurance will not necessarily prevent many of those people from from dying.

        The other part is the cost of insuring. Do you think you should pay for those who contract std's and aids through unprotected sex? How about those who take narcotic drugs? What about those who eat too much and develop diabetes or smoke and get cancer?

        I am of the opinion that your hyperbole at the end of your rant adds to the ugliness that is the subject of this topic. It belies an unwillingness to be open minded toward those with whom you disagree when you disparage them in that manner. Do you think that is the case?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by anotheramerican (August 21, 2009 2:30 pm ET)
          1 4
          btw, I am in favor of health insurance reform. I am just not in favor of the government creating another bureaucracy on the failed model of medicare which itself was underfunded by a factor of 10 when it was introduced and now costs over $400 billion per year while heading for bankruptcy.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by foghornleghorn (August 21, 2009 3:35 pm ET)
            4  
            Ask any old person how much they like medicare.

            And then, think for a moment, that maybe, just maybe medicare is unfunded. And maybe, just maybe, that medicare is costly because it insures OLD PEOPLE!!

            And then think, just for a moment, how much more medical care old people need as compared to younger people.

            And...your hatred of anything run by the government is a right-wing canard. Fires get put out, criminals get arrested, and roads get fixed. In case you missed it, government is YOU. Why do you hate your fellow Americans so much?
            Report Abuse
            • Author by anotheramerican (August 21, 2009 4:49 pm ET)
              1 4
              fog,
              Your response doesn't make any sense. I can see you are not up to a serious discussion.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by heru (August 21, 2009 7:39 pm ET)
                3  
                I don't think I should have to pay for the consequences of pre-existing Republican stupidity.
                Report Abuse
              • Author by foghornleghorn (August 22, 2009 5:53 pm ET)
                2  
                Well, AA, if you had taken a few seconds to ask me what doesn't make sense, maybe I could explain it to you.

                But you're too busy searching wingnut websites for your next cut-and-paste parade.
                Report Abuse
      • Author by justjoe628 (August 22, 2009 1:09 pm ET)
           
        Eddie, your problem is you are a liberal. There are definitely some problems with healthcare that need to be addressed. But, this legislation only corrects some of them. Insurance companies shouldn't be able to drop people so easily and they should have to cover pre-existing conditions. On that we can agree. But why was one of the first things that was removed from the first bill (HR 3200), provisions that would prevent doctors from owning hospitals and prevent self referals? A practice that results in multipe, not needed tests that cost the system millions. Why was there an additions $245B in reimbursment to doctors through medicare and medicaid? Because the dems needed to throw a bone to the AMA to get its backing. Those are two very legitimate cost savings that should be incuded, but weren't. Why does there need to be a public option? How much is it going to cost to even get that thing off the ground? The government is literally starting a new insurance company. Is that cost effective. of course not. Because this isn't really about healthcare cost. If it was, there would be REAL cost saving programs instead of anti-competative practices that give the public option unfair advantages and will eventually drive private insurance comanies out of business.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by mikehuck1976 (August 22, 2009 1:21 pm ET)
          1  
          So, you want to abolish Medicare? And Medicaid? And Social Security?

          If not, then why do you support such Nazi legislation?
          Report Abuse
        • Author by foghornleghorn (August 22, 2009 5:56 pm ET)
             
          and will eventually drive private insurance comanies out of business.

          There it is folks. Unrequited love of insurance companies.

          Hey joe - you know where most of the savings are gonna come from? From not paying 30 cents of every dollar of premiums to subsidize CEO salaries and HMO profits.

          I'll ask Rep. Weiner's questions yet again - what do insurance companies bring to the table in regards to patient care?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by justjoe628 (August 22, 2009 6:26 pm ET)
               
            Well try paying cash for a triple bypass and then see what they bring. Why do you ahve car insurance. Because you don't want to pay $3000 for a new bumper is someone hits you. Why do you have homeowners insurance? So if your house burns down, you can have a place to live. Why do you have insurance? So you don't have to pay so much for healthcare. You think if we completely get rid of the insurance business all together we'd be better off. Where are the thousands fo people who work in that industry going to go. I guess they could work for the government. Why don't you find out what percentage of GDP England, Canada and all those other counties with single payers systems pay for healthcare based on their population and then compare that number to the US GDP and population and see how HUGE that number is. I blows $1.042T out of the water and the US economy could not take it. But then thats what libs want isn't it. For everyone to rely on the government for everything.
            Report Abuse
    • Author by fairliberal (August 21, 2009 10:44 am ET)
        5
      Myth # 1---This is a good plan.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by vhw28672478 (August 21, 2009 11:14 am ET)
        2 2
        Free market health care do not work
        Report Abuse
      • Author by congero6189599 (August 21, 2009 12:45 pm ET)
        2  
        Myth#2---you have a point
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Don Hussein Fabuloso (August 21, 2009 1:03 pm ET)
          4 1
          I think he's referring to his plan to post a comment.

          BTW, FAILLIB, I missed it the first time, but somebody linked to the thread where you used the phony Paris Business Review site as a defense of BilldO Reilly.

          Outstanding FAIL !
          Report Abuse
          • Author by mikehuck1976 (August 22, 2009 1:22 pm ET)
            1  
            It was awesome. She thought is was a real site and supported her hero Bill O'Reilly. It was a classic!
            Report Abuse
    • Author by justjoe628 (August 22, 2009 3:29 pm ET)
         
      Got to this link.

      http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/06/01/090601fa_fact_gawande

      It's a very good piece out of the New Yorker magazine that outlines some true problems with the high cost of healthcare. Something none of the current legislation addresses.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Disputed Zone (August 23, 2009 4:17 am ET)
           
        Thanks for the link. The article makes the case that the high costs are due to the overuse of medicine by doctors who are paid for the quantity of care rather than the quality. The good news is that costs can be greatly reduced by eliminating unnecessary care. The author notes that one part of the legislation, comparative effectiveness research, will help do just that. In fact, the author recommends extending the concept to compare the ways that different communities deal with costs to determine what works best. Sounds like a good idea.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by justjoe628 (August 23, 2009 4:08 pm ET)
             
          And now the CBO comes out with new 10 yr deficit projections, upping it from $7.1T to $9T. So how are the dems gonna spin this one. This CBO is believable when they say HR 3200 will only add $239B to the deficit but are wrong about adding $2T to their projections. Can't have your cake and eat it too dems.
          Report Abuse