"The end of America as you know it"
The right-wing forecast for post-health-care-reform America
From claiming that passing health care reform legislation will signify "the end of America as you know it" to predicting an "insurrection" should health care reform become law, Media Matters takes a look back at the variety of doomsday scenarios right wing media figures offered in the lead-up to the March 21 vote.
Right-wing media's dire predictions: If health reform passes...
Beck: "This is the end of prosperity in America forever ... the end of America as you know it." Telling his audience, "You must not allow this to pass," Beck stated in November 2009 that "they're going to get passed that 60-vote barrier. And they'll get there by people like [Sen.] Joe Lieberman, who's a reasonable guy and has good intent. You'll get passed it by people like that, who say, you know what? Look, we got to be reasonable; we have to have a debate. And then Harry Reid will go for the 51 count and he'll pass this thing. And it will be a nail in the coffin of America." Beck added: "You must -- must get on the phone in your districts. You must wake everybody up you know. This is the end of prosperity in America forever if this bill passes. This is the end of America as you know it." [Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program, 11/19/09]
Beck: President Obama will be able to "control every aspect of your life." Beck "warn[ed]" that if the bill "passes, the country is in real dire trouble." He went on to say: "The pieces that the president needs to control every aspect of your life, to fundamentally transform America, will be finished. He'll have them all," adding: "If health care does not pass, warning, those on the left are going to become violent." [The Glenn Beck Program, 3/5/10]
Beck: "[T]he fundamental transformation of America is complete." Beck also said: "Not only are they doing health care, but they are doing education in this same bill. Education and health care." He added: "It is overwhelming the system. And I'm telling you, if this bill passes -- health care and education all in one bill -- if this passes, the fundamental transformation of America is complete. There's no going back from this point. It must not pass." [The Glenn Beck Program, 3/15/10]
Beck: "If you can be deemed someone who maybe shouldn't have a baby, they can have their people come in." Beck said on his Fox News show: "You know and I know in this 2,300-page bill that includes education, the control that this government has is endless. They will -- if this passes, they will control every aspect of your life." Beck further said: "They will be able to -- there is places in here that if you can be deemed someone who maybe shouldn't have a baby, they can have their people come in. The government is in our homes on this." [Fox News' Glenn Beck, 3/16/10]
Beck: We lose "the Democratic Party to the socialists." On his March 19 Fox News program, Beck stated: "If this passes, I think it makes the election of people like Lindsey Graham, who are the compromise with big government, darn near impossible, because you can't tone this one down. You've got to pull this back by strong constitutionalists. Don't we -- if this passes, don't we lose, really, the Democratic Party to the socialists? And the Republican Party either has to be, you know, real federalists, real people that understand controlled power, or you are going to have a third party?" [Glenn Beck, 3/19/10]
Limbaugh: Bill will "hasten" granny's death. After airing audio clips of Obama saying, "I don't think we're going to be able to eliminate employer coverage immediately" and "I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer universal health care plan," Limbaugh stated: "Yet he's out there saying, 'Oh, these people are throwing every scare tactic in the world; it's a government takeover of health care; granny is gonna die.' It is a government takeover of health care and granny is gonna die. Granny always dies at some point -- we all do. It's gonna be hastened under this bill. And it is a government takeover. They're lying through their teeth." [The Rush Limbaugh Show, 3/19/10]
Limbaugh: "I am leaving the country" if "all that stuff gets implemented." On the March 8 edition of The Rush Limbaugh Show, a caller asked Limbaugh where he would go for health care if the health bill passed and if "private doctors have to go into the federal program." Limbaugh replied, "I don't know" if private practices have been "outlawed in the Senate bill," adding: "I'll just tell you this: If this passes and it's five years from now and all that stuff gets implemented, I am leaving the country. I'll go to Costa Rica." [The Rush Limbaugh Show, 3/8/10]
Morris said he was "100 percent positive" Obama will create panels to "curb medical care to the elderly." On the March 3 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, Fox News contributor Dick Morris said what Obama "has in mind is curbing medical care to the elderly," and that he's "going to set up a panel" to determine treatment. Morris said he's "100 percent positive" this will happen. [Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, 03/03/10]
Fox Business: "Does Obamacare mean millions more jobs destroyed?" During a discussion about the health care bill on the Fox Business Network, an on-screen graphic asked: "Does Obamacare mean millions more jobs destroyed?" [Fox Business' America's Nightly Scoreboard, 03/16/10]
Cramer: "Obamacare will topple the stock market." On the March 18 edition of CNBC's The Kudlow Report, CNBC host Jim Cramer predicted that, in the words of host Larry Kudlow, "Obamacare will topple the stock market." [CNBC's The Kudlow Report, 3/19/10]
Hemmer: "Could people be going to jail for not owning health insurance?" On March 19, Fox News host Bill Hemmer said: "The mandate would tell Americans you've got to buy health insurance, if not you could be fined, and I guess eventually that could lead to prison. I mean, this -- the way you understand it right now, could people be going to jail for not owning health insurance?" [Fox News' America's Newsroom, 03/19/10]
Limbaugh: Democrats will regulate "every aspect of our lives." Limbaugh stated in November 2009: "People have been either unwilling to accept or unwilling to believe just how radically left the current Democrat Party is. There is nothing remotely Democratic about this bunch. There is no democracy going on here." He added: "They don't care what we think ... because they don't think we have the power to stop them. And when this passes, they will have even more power, regulating every aspect of our lives because they believe in their minds and hearts that we have no competence whatsoever to lead our own lives and make our own decisions." [The Rush Limbaugh Show, 11/20/09]
Cal Thomas: The government will deny care to "granny" because "she's costing too much." On March 20, syndicated columnist Cal Thomas said on Fox News: "There has been more baloney sold in Washington today than is available at your local supermarket. The president says they're not going to pull the plug on granny. No, but they will deny her care because she's costing too much and she's too old." [Fox News' America's News HQ, 3/20/10]
Quinn: The government will be able to "commit a violent assault on your body." Referring to the Obamas, radio host Jim Quinn said that "Bolshevik Barbie and our marginally documented president" want "the power to control your body and your life. That's what they want and that's what this is. And if the government can consult a chart that says, 'I'm sorry, you're a little bit too old and a little bit too sick and the protocol for what you've got now isn't approved by the government anyway because it's experimental or it's too expensive -- if you were a little younger, maybe. But we can't give you that, but we can give you a pain pill.' " Quinn added: "Giving the government that power is allowing the government to commit a violent assault on your body -- a violent assault on your most precious possession, which is your life." [Clear Channel's The War Room with Quinn & Rose, 2/26/10]
Quinn: "You are going to see insurrection. You're going to see an uprising." Quinn predicted that "if they pass this thing, you are going to see insurrection. You're going to see an uprising. People are just not going to take this. I mean, your taxes are going to go through the roof. It's going to be a bloodbath when people find out how much this is going to cost and for the first four years, they're not going to get anything." [The War Room, 1/13/10]
Quinn: "The response" to passing health reform "will be insurrection." On his February 16 show, Quinn said Democrats are "so close to an all-encompassing, all-controlling paradigm here by which the government literally owns your body" and that "if they have to die in the fight, they will die in the fight. This is about establishing from now on and forever a socialist state in America, ripping the Constitution to shreds which progressives have hated for over 100 years. This -- they're so close. They ain't giving it up." Quinn concluded: "The response to this, if they do it, will be insurrection." [The War Room, 02/16/10]
Moore: "This is a dark day for America if we pass this bill." Discussing the market reaction to passing the health bill, The Wall Street Journal's Stephen Moore said on Fox News: "I think personally -- I think that the markets have always thought for the last year and a half that eventually this day would come. And I think, by the way, this is a dark day for America if we pass this bill." [America's News HQ, 3/21/10]
IBD poll, Fox News: Doctors will shut down their practices. Several Fox News figures, including Neil Cavuto, Bret Baier, Morris, O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, and Steve Doocy highlighted an Investor's Business Daily/TIPP poll which found that "[t]wo of every three practicing physicians oppose the medical overhaul plan under consideration in Washington, and hundreds of thousands would think about shutting down their practices or retiring early if it were adopted." However, according to statistician Nate Silver, the poll was "simply not credible," and Fox News itself acknowledged that the poll was "not scientific."
Limbaugh: Senate health bill will lead to "250 million uninsured." On his March 8 radio show, Limbaugh claimed Democrats' "plan" in passing reform is to institute a "single-payer" system and that "there is no public option in this, but that's how they're going to get there." Limbaugh also predicted that the health bill would "just destroy private insurance as an option" and "lead very quickly to government-only insurance." Limbaugh continued: "Only idiots would have health insurance under this deal, only blooming idiots. There is literally no reason to have health insurance -- none. ... They say there's 30 million uninsured now, try 250 million uninsured, and every one of them paying a fine to the government for not having insurance." [The Rush Limbaugh Show, 03/08/10]
Claiming that health reform is "all about limiting your rights," Quinn suggested "gay sex" could be prohibited. On January 12, Quinn said the bill is "all about limiting your rights, trust me. It's all about limiting your rights. Yep, wait until what you love starts to impact on their system. That's right. Wait until what you love, whether it's the Second Amendment, or whether it's riding a motorcycle, whether it's being a gay man and engaging in gay sex, which is demonstrably -- at least some of it is -- a rather unsanitary act in many cases, and it could impact on our health care system. Now, I can't imagine the health care system coming after a preferred group, at this point, like gays, but you know what? Sooner or later, when the money starts to run out, they are the government after all, and you're not. [The War Room, 01/12/10]
Quinn: "If they pass health care ... that is the end of the republic." On January 5, Quinn said: "Ladies and gentlemen, you have to understand that we are at a critical and pivotal moment in the history of the United States. If they pass health care, government health care, that is the end of the republic. That is the final nail in the coffin of the individual free human being. Once they own your body, they own everything. Once they can withhold health care from you, because you're too old, because you're too sick, or maybe 'cause they just don't like you -- did you ever think about that?" [The War Room, 01/05/10]
Cal Thomas claimed health reform "is an outrage" and "a sham"; "[e]uthanasia is coming." On Fox News' America's News HQ, Thomas said the health bill is "a triumph of the humanistic, atheistic philosophy. Instead of being endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights, those rights are going to be taken away by bureaucrats who will decide whether you get a hip replacement or a heart bypass, based on your age and your ability to pay more taxes." He continued:
It is an outrage. It is a sham. Euthanasia is coming. You can call them death panels. That's exactly what they're going to be. We are going to really be sorry for this, but, unfortunately, when the guy in the white robe comes to give us our little pill, as President Obama told ABC, the 100-year-old woman who wants to live must get in order to make it equal for everybody and not to spend so much, it will be too late. [America's News HQ, 11/21/09]
Siegel: "[U]nder ObamaCare, guidelines will quickly become mandates." In a November 2009 New York Post column, Marc Siegel wrote that the new mammogram guidelines from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force mean that "under ObamaCare, guidelines will quickly become mandates, and patients will routinely face the choice of paying hundreds of dollars out of pocket or accept higher risks of cancer. It will take government bureaucrats years to admit mistakes, if they ever do -- and by that time thousands of women will have needlessly gotten sick or even died of cancer." He also stated that "All the major 'reform' bills create lots of new panels and other bureaucrats empowered to 'suggest' things doctors shouldn't do -- and even to penalize doctors who order 'too many' tests."
Limbaugh: "Human beings will die earlier than normal" under "freedom killing" and "life threatening" health-care reform. Limbaugh said the "whole bill is about death" and "rationing." He continued: "It is the single greatest tool the government will have to regulate every aspect of behavior. This is a freedom killing, and it is going to end up being a life-threatening bill. Human beings will die earlier than normal, earlier than necessary because of this bill. There will be bureaucratic institutions, bureaucracies, which will make decisions on who gets treated and what kind of treatment they get, and who doesn't get treated. [The Rush Limbaugh Show, 11/09/09]
Baker warned that health reform would lead to euthanasia for overweight people. Guest-hosting The Glenn Beck Program, Chris Baker suggested that health reform will lead to overweight people going to jail or being put to death: "Sir, you're overweight. What? Yes, sir, you are overweight, we're going to have to require you to lose weight. And if you don't lose weight on your own, we're going to send you to a fat camp and make you lose the weight. And if you still don't lose the weight, then you know, we're just going to have to do surg -- we're just going to have to put you in jail. And if you don't lose the weight in jail, sir, I don't know what else to do. Maybe some end-of-life counseling might be good. I mean, I remember a woman that got -- that was greased by Dr. Kevorkian because she was fat." [The Glenn Beck Program, 11/09/09]
Hannity: "If we get nationalized health care, it's over; this is socialism." In November 2009, Hannity said, "When you look at the extreme czars, and you look at Barack Obama, and you look at the Barack Obama that portrayed himself one year ago as a very different candidate, you know, why -- I feel like I have been vindicated. I was excoriated for saying he is far more radical than people know. You know, what do you see about him? Do you think he is far -- do you think he's a socialist? Do you think he's -- because I think this is -- if we get nationalized health care, it's over. This is socialism, and that's a kind word." [Fox News' Hannity, 11/2/09]
Limbaugh: When you turn 65, "hello death panels." In October 2009, Limbaugh told a caller that it's "not good" that she's 50 years old because "if they get it done -- it will not be implemented until 2013 so that Obama will not face a revolt in the 2012 elections. And then when it gets implemented in 2013, you'll still have your private insurance. It's going to take a number of years to force the insurance companies out of business and to force people onto the public option. They're not going to be able to wave a magic wand and have this done overnight, but it will happen. And let's say it happens -- well, Obama's target year, he said it might take 10 to 15 years to totally wipe out private insurance. Now, they're going to try to do it sooner than that, and they might succeed, but 10 to 15 years makes you 65, and 'Hello, death panels.' " [The Rush Limbaugh Show, 10/27/09]
Limbaugh: "Obamacare" will "smother the individual," "aimed at robbing you of your humanity," "all of us will be slaves." Limbaugh asserted that Democrats' goal in passing health care reform is "to smother the individual," and that it's "aimed at robbing you of your humanity and forcing you to bow down to the state. If you feel sick, you need a procedure, need a prescription, you're going to be thinking about the government." Limbaugh claimed that "you are going to be relying on government for your survival," and that people will "need permission from the government" to have treatment. He continued: "It's not going to be a matter of whether you can or cannot pay. It won't be a matter of whether you have coverage or don't have coverage. What'll matter is that all of us will be slaves; we'll become slaves to the arbitrary and inhumane decisions of distant bureaucrats working in Washington where there's no competition, nobody you can go to if you don't like what you hear from the bureaucrats that you have to deal with." [The Rush Limbaugh Show, 09/30/09]
Limbaugh pretends to be a truth-telling Obama: Government won't take over health care, it'll just control it entirely. During a September 2009 broadcast, Limbaugh pretended to show how one of Obama's speeches on health reform "if he were telling the truth, would have gone." Limbaugh said, "We're only cutting over $500 billion from the already bankrupt program because there are other people, apart from our seniors, who need health care, too. Everyone has to sacrifice, particularly mom and dad, granddad, grandmom -- but they won't mind. That doesn't mean, of course, that we're going to ration care. We would never do that. We love our seniors. ... And what's all this talk about the government taking over health care? More fearmongering by the special interests. No, what's going to happen is that we will oversee the insurance companies to make sure they don't cheat and rip you off. That's right. The same politicians and bureaucracy that stole trillions from the Social Security trust fund to pay for ever more spending -- and the same politicians and bureaucracy that stole trillions of dollars from the Medicare trust fund -- will use their carefully honed skills and experience to ensure that the private insurance companies treat you fairly." [The Rush Limbaugh Show, 09/10/09]
Senator Lamar Alexander says if this Bill Passes it will Destroy the Senate.
Can anyone give betting odds on the chance that Senator Alexander will Resign after the HealthCare Bill Passes the Senate?
Or will he just sit there in a Destroyed Senate and Suck from the Government Tit Collecting his Tax Payer Underwritten Paycheck?
Mr. News
The UK on the other hand is near bankruptcy. Using the UK as an example of health care that works is laughable at best.
Well, I feel fine.
An agrarian society where white male land owners are given rights, women are treated as second-class citizens, and blacks are treated as property? Yeah, sorry we haven't kept the original intent intact.
Why this NEED to keep United states intact?? Our founding fathers owned slaves remember? in spite of the "all men are created equal" hypocrisy.
This is the fundamental difference between conservative and liberals. Conservatives feel that they OWE something to dead people who owned slaves.. Liberals feel that they need to IMPROVE ON the situation.. and adapt to the rapidly changing world.
It doesn't matter what the founding fathers had in mind.. what matters is how do we deal with the situation at hand.
In other words, if you do not agree with these posts, or drink the marxist cool-aid, you comments aren't posted. There goes our freedom of speech. No wonder why all these comments were in support of all this corrupt power grabbing presendency.
America is being turned into a European socialist nation.... a place where personal growth and prosperity is now limited to the dictator in the white house. America is being dumbed down, our kids can no longer hold a candle to other nations in the fields of mathematics and science due to liberal thinking. No one should be incentivized to excell. Evertyone is equal. No one should be declared a winner or loser. We all tried hard, that is what's important. But I'm sure you agree, this is all happening by design. Keep the people stupid and you can control them better. God forbid we hold people accountable for their decisions. God forbid we reward those who work hard and exceed. These people might want to keep what they earn. These people might be able to enjoy life more than someone who made the decision to do nothing with their life.
So go ahead, block my comments. Post a meaningless blog that does nothing but raise mediocracy to new heights.
I would say, Have a great life.... but I'll save that for someone who still believes in Freedom.
People who bash this way of thinking are leeches on society. Worthless... period.
But if this means Rush Limbaugh is leaving, then it was well worth it. I'll gladly pay a tax for that.
Of course, he'd obviously be greatly compromising any claim to be "in touch" with America if he's decidedly absent.
You're absolutely right. And we will not fall of a cliff as a country because of this bill, just ridiculous political apocalyptic nonsense from those opposed to anything Obama wants or does. Their fear mongering is boring.
Change, it's what Obama campaigned on and what we are getting. He won by a huge margin, people wanted the change back in November 08, they voted for it enthusiastically, he delivered. Time till tell how it will all work out but it's only fair to give it time. I give Obama a great deal of credit, he worked really hard and staked at least his first two years of his presidency on it. I believe he is sincere. I hope for all of our sakes that it turns out to be a really good thing for our country.
Keep it up!
I think this bill is a framework for the future. It will, I hope, get better rather than worse. Congress and future administrations will be inclined to attempt refinements. My hope is that those refinements serve the people and the economy and not partisan political interests.
It's not a complicated concept.
Many children ARE in school until that point in time, and so are unable to receive employer-based healthcare insurance. So those children can continue to be covered by their parent's insurance - right now, that can't happen.
Some other children may leave high school or college and not find employment for a while, or not find substantial employment for a while, and may need that safety net of health insurance. Typically with that kind of insurance, parents are paying an additional premium to cover their dependent children, so that coverage is being paid for, and the insurance will cover those kids should they need medical care.
You're the one making stupid comments based upon your prejudice against this bill rather than upon the facts.
Oh, and a parent has kids until those kids die. Once the child is born, it's always your child, no matter what their age, so your 'argument' above that a 26 year old is NOT a kid is ludicrous, and again is just a bogus argument fueled by your politically partisan bigotry and not based upon facts.
Anyone who chooses not to buy insurance is an idiot. To think that you, or your family, won't get sick or injured, or, if you do, that you could just pay out of pocket? That's insanity.
And those fools who don't buy insurance deserve to be treated when they do get sick and/or injured. We all deserve that.
So, if we need a mandate to protect people, then so be it.
Tax-cut and spend much?
50+ direct warnings and still you folks ignored the threat to our country before 9/11?
Collapse of the economy as we "stayed the course?"
You make us laugh.
Go look up the word "delusional", once you understand what it means you will then know what you suffer from. Both programs are bankrupt and wrought with fraud enough to make Bernie Madoff look like a saint.
How? Which exact provisions are you against? What parts do you think are going to be more expensive than projections predict?
Can you please tell us *precisely why* you say that?
I'm not being facetious, I would really like to know your reasoning.
I don't like the fact that the gov. will be over-taxing the rich to help pay for it. (and, believe me, I'm not one of the rich)
I don't like the gov. mandates to purchase insurance.
Eventually, when the deficit reductions don't pan out, we will be forced to find more ways to pay for it, like higher taxes and pulling money from other government programs.
I think this bill will be used as a "foot in the door" to eventually get a universal single-payer system, which I am against.
Finally, I am generally against entitlement programs which is I think this will turn into.
I hope this answers your question. I don't expect most here to agree since there doesn't seem to be much love here for free-markets and capitalism.
I am considered a top income bracket and I am fine with being taxed progressively. Also, there is absolutely no reason why after the inital $100,000 I am no longer taxed for Social Security. It makes absolutely no sense.
I guess you missed the fact that exploding health care costs is one of the main reasons we're financially fragile right now.
This helps contain those costs. And yes, hopefully it is a foot in the door for single payer. The insurance companies had their chance, and they blew it with their greed.
That being said, as Refresh said as well, if they can hype this incredible amount of rhetoric and hyperbole, then others should call them out on their nonsense.
The fact that Murdoch does not hold his own news fantasy models to any standards at all, let's them lie and gin-up hatred of liberals and Democrats is the lack of accountability that is appalling.
http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/decdoc/public_and_broadcasting.html#_Toc202587541
In particular “rigging or slanting the news is a most heinous act against the public interest.” Stations should be held accountable for consistent abuses of this. I find it interesting that Limbaugh et al. claim to be "entertainers" rather than political commentators or journalists - presumably so that those stations that broadcast there delusions can avoid being held to journalistic standards.
My ideal revolution would be an end to the corportocracy that runs this country through FOX Propaganda and the votes it can buy at the state and federal level. That would be a revolution worth having.
And if this health coverage reform is the first shot fired, then I say bring it on!
They sold out the masses to prop up the few.
They added another "entitlement" we have to pay for.
They added another burdon on businesses (so much for building jobs).
Congratulations on your sell-out!
What part of the constitution was trampled on?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCqQRflUWd4
Funny!
I just wanted to know if the tea baggers had something specific in mind (something procedual in the bill's passage, for example), or they are "just talking tea-bagger."
Hey, boom-boom: You want "trampling on the Constitution? Chew on
this:
How does this bill sell out the masses? Because we now can cover the rest of our countrymen and women? If that is selling out, then I'm sold.
Entitlement that we have to pay for. This is false. There are mechanisms and real taxes in there that will, yes, pay for this, but the cost to the majority of the country is going to be nil. And, as I've said before, if my tax bills goes up slightly because of this, I'm more than OK with that, as long as every can get coverage.
What burden on business are you talking about? Large companies in the US already provide insurance for their employees by and far, and smaller businesses are going to get tax cuts and breaks in order TO provide for their employees. Is that so tough to understand?
Again, what was sold out?
This is already in the works once the bill is signed, being led by Virginia as well as about a dozen other states at this time. I do not think they'll win, but nonetheless it is being challenged.
Penalizing 300 million people with threats of fines and jail to support 30 million people is flat out wrong.
Taxing health care devices is going to effect everyone who gets treatment. You think the companies or hospitals are going to pick up the tab and not pass along the costs?
It's fine that you feel that way. However, you certainly do not speak for everyone.
If a business could already offer that to their employees, then they would. Benefits attract the best personnel, so if a company is not offering that - its most likely because they cannot afford to. So what do you think requiring them to do so is going to to? Yep, reduction in work force to offset the cost increase.
Large companies have been scaling back what kind of insurance they offer every few years when the contracts are renegotiated. If you make the costs higher for them, then your level of insurance will decrease, or you can kiss your pay increases goodbye.
The many for the sake of the few. All this talk from Democrats on "majority should rule. You only should need 51 votes to pass a bill". Well if thats true, none of the polls showed over 51% support for this bill...and since when does penalizing 90% of the country to pay for 10% show true democracy?
There were many polls, where if you broke down the different things being offered in this bill, and asked folks if they wanted those separate items, most of the time, a majority said yes.
Where the majority said no, was when it was referred to a democratic health care reform, or Obamacare, leaving out the context of what was actually in the bill.
We don't live in a direct democracy. We live in a representative republic (which is a type of a democracy). Our Senators and Congresspeople represent us, and those are the votes that are required to pass something.
When the Civil Rights bill was passed, a majority of Americans didn't want that either. Same for voting rights for women. Same for slavery.
This bill will be for the good of ALL Americans, not just the 30 million who don't have insurance now.
Yeah, we know the Demoncrats in Congress also didn't want it as well. Right around when Senator Robert Byrd was a member of good standing in the KKK.
As someone else sez on this Board, "Speaking truth to power".
Btw, You voted for him so YOU fix it! And, You wanted Obamacare so live with it!
No , the KKK'ers and the Neo-Nazis are more closely aligned with conservatism and the republican party. They are YOURS now and last Saturdays demonstrations made that if I could use a phrase from one of your hero's "crystal clear."
For hopefully the final time, the ONLY poll that mattered was taken in November, 2008. We don't govern by polls.
You really need to bone up on your civics.
only people who don't want insurance will be penalized through their taxes... there is no threat of jail unless they refuse to pay their taxes, I'm pretty sure not paying taxes can get you thrown in jail but that was already law before this bill!
The 300 million are not threatened with fines and jail. They have healthcare. It is the remainder of the 30 million that DO NOT get healthcare that will be fined. I doubt anyone will go to jail.
"Taxing health care devices is going to effect everyone who gets treatment. You think the companies or hospitals are going to pick up the tab and not pass along the costs? "
Have you seen the "get your scooter free" commercials? They deserve to be taxed. Besides, the free market will compell them to swallow the taxes.
"It's fine that you feel that way. However, you certainly do not speak for everyone."
Just pretend your taxes go to pay for B-2 bombers. I'll pretend mine go to helping my fellow Americans.
"If a business could already offer that to their employees, then they would. Benefits attract the best personnel, so if a company is not offering that - its most likely because they cannot afford to."
Tell that to everyone who works a Walmart. Tell that to everyone who works at Mc D's. Tell that to everyone who is kept to minimal hours so they don't get benefits.
"So what do you think requiring them to do so is going to to? Yep, reduction in work force to offset the cost increase."
Not if they want to maintain there production levels. Do you really think they are going to forgo increased revenues because the cost of business went up?
"Large companies have been scaling back what kind of insurance they offer every few years when the contracts are renegotiated. If you make the costs higher for them, then your level of insurance will decrease, or you can kiss your pay increases goodbye. "
What the hell do you think has been going on for the last decade?
Yep, "a few" million. Like 30+ million to be precise.
kcboomer whined some more :"They added another burdon on businesses"
Hey now that you mention it, I think I *will* have a bourbon to celebrate this great victory for the people of the USA!
LOL!~ ;p
New York Times
Abuse of Executive Privilege
Published: July 1, 2007
After six years of kowtowing to the White House, Congress is finally challenging President Bush’s campaign to trample all legal and constitutional restraints on his power.
Congressional committees have issued subpoenas for documents and witnesses in two major cases and have asked for the first — and likely not the last — criminal investigation of an executive branch official who might have lied to Congress.
Predictably, the White House is claiming executive privilege and refusing to cooperate with the legitimate Congressional investigations, one springing from Mr. Bush’s decision to spy on Americans without a warrant and the other from the purge of United States attorneys.
The courts have recognized a president’s limited right to keep the White House’s internal deliberations private. But it is far from an absolute right, and Mr. Bush’s claim of executive privilege in the attorneys scandal is especially ludicrous…
Speaking of ludicrous (as well as the abuse of privilege and power)…
Even by the New York Times standards this “editorial” is hilarious for its lack of facts and abundance of spittle.
I guess the only way they can justify their endless treacheries is to proclaim the rest of the world wrong.
Clearly their irrational hatred for Mr. Bush and our country borders on the insane.
But perhaps it’s just their way of celebrating the Fourth.
Of course had they been around at the time they would have been working for King George.
It’s a Times tradition.
By the way, as we were the first to point out, this is how the New York Times handled Bill Clinton’s firing of all of the US Attorneys:
ATTORNEY GENERAL SEEKS RESIGNATIONS FROM PROSECUTORS
By DAVID JOHNSTON,
March 24, 1993
Attorney General Janet Reno today demanded the prompt resignation of all United States Attorneys, leading the Federal prosecutor in the District of Columbia to suggest that the order could be tied to his long-running investigation of Representative Dan Rostenkowski, a crucial ally of President Clinton.
Jay B. Stephens, the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, who is a Bush Administration holdover, said he had advised the Justice Department that he was within 30 days of making a “critical decision” in the Rostenkowski case when Ms. Reno directed him and other United States Attorneys to submit their resignations, effective in a matter of days.
While prosecutors are routinely replaced after a change in Administration, Ms. Reno’s order accelerated what had been expected to be a leisurely changeover…
All 93 United States Attorneys knew they would be asked to step down, since all are Republican holdovers, and 16 have resigned so far. But the process generally takes much longer and had usually been carried out without the involvement of the Attorney General. ..
Ms. Reno is under pressure to assert her control over appointments at the Justice Department. She was Mr. Clinton’s third choice for Attorney General and arrived after most of the department’s senior positions were already filled by the White House…
United States Attorneys are appointed to serve four-year terms at the pleasure of the President. It was unclear whether Ms. Reno initiated the request for resignations or whether it was pressed on her by the White House. The Attorney General said it was a “joint decision.” …
There was no outrage whatsoever.
But that was then, and this is now.
Your text to link here...
All in all, this legislation is really just a few fly farts in a hurricane when you think about how far we have to go before we catch up to the rest of the "civilized" world with regard to providing adequate health care to our citizenry.
And, anyone who thinks that health care is not part of the "common good" needs to buy a dictionary.
And read it.
The only that MIGHT end is the neo-con, neo-libertarian nonsense that have gripped our economy for two or three generations now. And seeing as how it led to nothing more than crippling debt, a flatening of the stock market, no good manufacturing jobs left, a budget nightmware, high unemployment and the biggest banking crisis since the great depression, I say, "GOOD RIDDANCE."
--------------------------------------------------------------
"End of America as you know it." You heard it here folks.
A: Order anything you like and the guy behind you has to pay for it.
Q: Have you heard about the McDonald's new Bush Big Gov Repub Value Meal?
A: Ask the guy behind you to lend you the money to pay for it.
A: Because we have to pay for that, the right wing doesn't want to pay for health care.
Forcing people to buy a product which they do not want, and perhaps from companies they do not want to buy it from.
The constituents were not overwhelmingly against it. The only constituents who were overwhelmingly against this bill are the town hall screamers, the idiotic racist teabaggers, and the ant-abortion zealots.
Of course, that ridiculous statement will go unchallenged as most liberal assertions do around here. But if you have some documentation to back up what you say above, why don't you provide it?
You don't. More intellectual dishonesty that you so often rail against. Heal thyself.
Nice baseless useless rant though.
Really? Considering what I wrote above about Obama and this health care bill, only someone who has a clear one sided view of things would say what you just did. Sorry if I don't take what you say too seriously.
Considering your reputation at this site that is a compliment.
If you poll people on the substance of the bill, and the features and functionality in the bill, there's not much that is objectionable except to the people who reject it because of who it's coming from. Most of the inclusions are things that Republicans have supported in the past.
The people that Foghorn listed above are the ones who object due to their personal prejudices rather than on substance.
Indeed, the wholesale irrelevance of public opinion was a central tenet of GOP rule for eight years, as illustrated by this classic exchange between Dick Cheney and ABC News' Martha Radditz in May, 2008, regarding the administration's escalation of the war at exactly the same time that public demands for withdrawal were at their height:
RADDATZ: Two-third of Americans say it’s not worth fighting.
CHENEY: So?
RADDATZ: So? You don’t care what the American people think?
CHENEY: No. I think you cannot be blown off course by the fluctuations in the public opinion polls.
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/
You hyprocrite!
The bill was voted on and passed by members of the House of Representatives and the United States Senate. They are our elected representatives. So, you're wrong.
"Voting yes for this bill while your constituents are overwhelmingly against it."
Depends on the polls you're reading. Regardless, it's a non issue. We are a Republic. Popular vote does not decide every issue, or did you miss the results of the 2000 election?
"Forcing people to buy a product which they do not want, and perhaps from companies they do not want to buy it from."
I've got some problem with this as well, but there's precedent. If you drive a car you're required to have some kind of insurance policy or at least be able to prove you can be held financially responsible for any accidents you cause. Last I heard that's not been overturned by any courts.
Nice try. Come again when you've got some facts.
Difference being you're not required to drive a car. So you do not have to have insurance.
Nevertheless, you were making the case that this bill was unconstitutional. Nothing of what you said supported that argument.
Bad, bad analogy.
Still not a perfect analogy, but closer.
If you HAVE a life, then you have to have insurance.
When the Fed's start making dead people buy health insurance, let me know. Otherwise, your analogy is a MASSIVE FAIL.
To simplify for some on this Board, car insurance is required before and while you drive a car, but health insurance can be obtained AFYER one is sick (you can pay a fine in lieu of having health insurance). For example, say it is discovered you have cancer which is treatable but have been paying the yearly penalty of around $2,000.00 (of which the 16,000 new IRS agents will be auditing - but that's another issue). And lets say the cost for multiple operations and treatments adds up to %500,000.00, which is very plausible. The person then gets health insurance, as required by this new HCR Bill, and the insurance company pays the $500K. The insurance companies will have to factor these cases, which will be thousands, into their premiums so YOU will be paying higher premiums. Get it?
OMG how terrible! Gotta keep those profits up even if it means people die right?
I figured this would be way too difficult for many of you MMFA regulars to understand. In my post I described another difference between car and health insurance.
Here, I'll try again: Health industry profits are very low. In spite of you thinking Obama can fabricate money, someone (not Obama), will have to pay for the cost of expensive procedures of those getting insurance at the last minute to pay for same. This someone will be others who have been paying premiums. If current premiums are not enough (which it obviously won't be), the insurance carriers will increase their rates, especially since they have a very small margin (3.3%).
In other words those that have been paying premiums have to pay for those that haven't been. Get it?
------------------------------------
As the table above of Profit Margins by Industry shows (click to enlarge, data here for the most recent quarter), the industry "Health Care Plans" ranks #86 by profit margin (profits/revenue) at 3.3%. Measured by profit margin, there are 85 industries more profitable than Health Care Plans (included Cigna (CI), Aetna (AET), WellPoint (WLP), HealthSpring (HS), etc.).
http://seekingalpha.com/article/155858-health-insurance-industry-s-profit-margins-rank-86
Compare that with 3-5 cents by the evil, tyrannical, government-run health care that right now, RIGHT NOW, insures millions of Americans.
We are forced to buy products we don't want, from companies we may not want to buy from all of the time. Car insurance for one.
But it's not a right to not want to buy health insurance.
Now, what about this bill is un-Constitutional?
You were wrong about taxation without representation. The only people currently living in the US that can claim that, are the folks who live in DC proper.
If you decide you want to die, then once you die, the gov't, I promise you, won't require that you have health insurance!
Another profound statement courtesy of DD. How would we survive without her wisdom and guidance?
You mean like Halliburton and Blackwater right?
In the health care case, they are taking our dollars...then telling us to use more of our own money to buy something we may or may not want.
"Article 1.
Section 8: The Congress shall have power To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;
To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;
To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;
To establish post offices and post roads;
To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;
To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;
To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;
To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;
To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;
To provide and maintain a navy;
To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;
To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;—And
To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof."
Now, just where, oh where, do we find the stuff about being exempt from all of that stuff if we don't want it?
Well, I'm sorry you feel that way. I assume you'll be leaving the country. Echoing what I said to another poster yesterday, good luck on finding an industrialized nation that doesn't have a Universal Health Care System.
Ok, so when polls came back that said that an OVERWHELMINGmajority of self-identified Republicans wanted the Public Option, and other polls showed a clear majority (even IF it WAS under 50%) wanted Reform, that they really were saying they didn't want it. OK, I get it. Kinda like Larry Craig saying he's NOT gay. Like when a politician who fights to enact anti-gay legislation in his state, is forced to admit he himself is gay, that didn't happen.
Do you understand hypocrisy?
And as for no taxation without representation, do you even know what the history behind that battle cry is? I doubt it, otherwise, you wouldn't say it.
When we were colonies to England, we were taxed without even being allowed a representative in Parliament. You, on the other hand, have not only a congressmaan, but two senators. And it's not just you. EVERYONE in America has them. And when a congressman and a senator is elected, it is a statement from his/her constituency that they want what that person stands for. I elected Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio because i do believe in "Government-run" healthcare, even if it's because Nixon didn't. I elected Obama for the same reason, plus I didn't want "Dubbaya" Lite or the Crazy Alaskan. I would GLADLY pay more in taxes if it meant that your parents didn't have to worry about their medical bills, or even you. I believe we should do as much as we can for each other, and now we need the government, because the private sector sure-as-heck hasn't fixed the problem.
You do realize that the folks, the majority of folks, who don't have insurance are good hard working Americans, who either are not covered through where they work, or cannot afford to pay for health insurance out of their own pockets.
For example. I have a friend, he went to culinary school. He graduated with honors and has, what is considered, a pretty decent job at a restaurant in the town we live in. He works over 60 hours per week, and can't afford to purchase health insurance on his own. He definitely can't afford it for both him, and his wife (who also works in the food industry).
Why can't we help out folks like this? It's not a free handout, as most of us, won't see any difference in our tax rates, unless you're making a ton o' money already.
Their responsibility is to work as hard as they can to become a giver. Not everyone can do it.
They pay a price if they don't. Do you really think being poor is easy? I suggest you have never been poor if you do.
I have met him before and I am not afraid.
Do you have any idea how pathetic you sound? I doubt it.
You can dance around it all day long, but so far you have not provided one shred of responsibility for those who take. Not one. Except to say it's hard. It's not hard to remain dependent if that is what you want. It's hard to remain dependent if you're bound and determined not to remain that way.
Your responsibility to work hard is something I have said repeatedly on this website and it is often, almost always, replied to with something like "well that's not enough, or your stupid work hard stuff is just stupid" So now when asked, THAT is your answer.
Yet now you bring it up as a responsibility.
That is rich!
Your hero, Rush Limbaugh, was on unemployment benefits at one point. And it didn't make him a moocher, did it?
...that is all.
It can not be a responsibility and a goal.
"but so far you have not provided one shred of responsibility for those who take."
Their reponsibility is to become a giver to help other takers.
Bill Gates started out life pretty good compared to most Americans. Yet he has no problem giving Billions to help his fellow man.
Are you seriously suggesting that your giving of pennies to your fellow man is too much of a burden? Sounds to me like you are the taker. Sounds to me you want the fruits of this country without paying the small price it costs. That my friend is stealing.
Their money? They have none.
Their possessions? They have none.
All they have left is their ability to work up the ladder and become one of us. Well, not you, because you're a stealer and we don't want them to become one of you.
The earners - Their responsibility is to give otherwise they are greedy stealers.
The non earners - No responsibility.
Thanks for the input.
I hate making difficult decisions!!
Why don't you cut a deal with your company to take you off of their benefits package, and then you'll get paid more. I've known some folks that have worked out this deal with their employers.
Thing is, my friends, who work hard, week in, and week out, is just the opposite of what you guys are always talking about. The folks who want something for free, who won't work for what they're getting. Well, as aforementioned, they are working hard, and STILL can't afford to get health care. If one of them gets sick, or injured, guess what happens to them? Sure, they'll get treatment, but then spend the rest of their lives maybe trying to pay back what they owe, or claim bankruptcy. Is it so bad to help them defray their costs for health care? Apparently, in conservative world, yes, yes it is.
That's just tragic really.
It's easy to see why this is. If I can convince myself and others that your misfortunes are all of your own doing (or not doing), then I absolve myself of any moral responsibility.
I can then protest, with a clean conscience, my 3% tax increase that will put off me buying my fifth Nissan Gt-r. so some lowlife scumbag can get cancer treatment.
I'll take fries with that.
Don't worry... that will only happen if they do it like Robert Reich wants to do it...
...or if Ezekiel Emanuel has anything to say about it...
or if we follow Tom Daschle's plan.
Screw the individual... ALL HAIL THE RECIPIENT!
What makes him think they would have him and I wonder if Beck can fit in his suitcase?
Nope.
No room for Beck.
Too many sex toys.
And Rush says "government run" health care means dying sooner. I'm sure that's why the UK beats the US in almost any health statistic that matters according to the WHO (life expectancy, infant mortality, cancer mortality rate, years of quality life.....)
I fail to see what you found as ridiculous in his observations and warnings. Yet you found them more ridiculous than the assertions of shredding the constitution,dems want to turn restaurants into soup kitchens,blah,blah,blah? You have sunk to another low, I'am sure you haven't reached bottom yet but you are staring worms in the face.
You are a pathetic partisan moron. Discussions with you are and have been a waste of my time.
Yeah! You tell 'em doggy! Can't wait to see 'em all jailed after you demand it!
Limbaugh: "Human Beings Will Die Earlier Than Normal"
Does that include you, El Rushbo?
10,000,000,000,000,000...
9,999,999,999,999,999...
9,999,999,999,999,998...
9,999,999,999,999,997...
You might want to pack a lunch, this could take a while.
Limbaugh: "I am leaving the country" if "all that stuff gets implemented." Limbaugh must be made to keep this promise!!!
GO!! NOW!!!!!!
No Americans are going to have health insurance and the government is controlling our lives, people will lose their jobs and there will be no healthcare for the elderly. There will be death panels and everybody will be slaves. Euthinasia is coming the the republic is ending.
Aren't these the sections of the conservative plan revealed at CPAC?
one size fits all !!!!!! the bush tax honeymoon is comming to an end...........
The American as we know it simply wasn't working. The results are in and grand conservative trickle down, deregulte everything, socialism for the wealthy, economics experiment was an enormous failure.
Wow, first I will get to lose my excellent employer provided healthcare for an inferior product plagued by shortages of manpower and supplies AND I will most certainly get to pay more for it than the almost $2000 per year I currently pay for 1 person. Luckily, due to punitive taxes on pharmaceutical companies, I will also get to pay more for prescription and otc medications not included in the above figure.
Maybe if I am really blessed, sometime in the near future I will require the assistance of some type of medical device that has become prohibitively expensive (again) due to punitive taxes but is not covered on my new inferior medical plan because it is so expensive. Besides, I'm getting older now - 52 after all. So I shouldn't expect to get that costly stuff. Ditto the expensive preventative care like mammograms, pap smears, or colonoscopy. Why should I spend those resources when, if something comes back positive, it will take so long to get in to see a specialist I will die waiting? Heck, if they can do it in Canada and England we can, too. Hope that doesn't happen before I get to try out that cool microchip I.D. thingy.
The icing on the cake is the forty percent tax I will get to pay on my insurance benefits since my fantastic medical field salary of $45,000 per year is too high for the government exchange. Oh well, maybe I'll be really lucky and lose my job due to the cutbacks we will have at the hospital.
Golly, I sure hope this program works out so well for everyone else in the country!
GET A CLUE, PEOPLE - READ THE BILL!!
What Beck and Limbaugh ought to do is wait a few months and then, once it is clear that the disaster they predicted isn't going to happen, SHUT THE HELL UP. For good. With this crazy rhetoric, they wend all in on this one. When they lose, they should have to pay up, shut up, and go home.
But no. They'll find something else to transfer this apocalyptic nonsense to, and all of their listeners/viewers will once again forget that their arm-flapping and screaming turned out to be for nothing. Again.
For example, shouldn't there have been a formal and public review of Medicare (and all spending bills) years after it was enacted to formally inform the people as to how close it came to its pre-law projections? Were we lied to when we were told it would cost X but in reality it cost 10 times X?
With respect to the new Healthcare Bill, what is the impact to the deficit/debt if Immigration Reform eventually makes 11,000,000, mostly low-income people, eligible for the program? I will bet you that the CBO will never be asked that question except maybe in secret.
If you look at other countries, and why they protest (religion, peace, persecution, and hunger)... The right is making us look like we have to overthrow our own Government just because our country passed a NATIONAL HEALTH CARE BILL!!!!
Why is personal responibility a four letter word. This country's integrity and greatness has peaked and now it's heading downhill. In 35 years or so when the illegal immigrants are the majority in this country you will see it's rapid decline to a second rate country.
The path to power isn't paved with lamentations, it is paved with the rose petals of victory. Figure out how to win, blubbering GOP nabobs, and you might once again see the sun shine. Till then...
SUCK IT!
Sorry, my usual elegance has abandoned me. I'm just too giddy for words!
Randy
The constitution is gone
Freedom is gone
Civility and civilization is gone
I guess my new job will be working on a collective farm
No more sunrises
Only guns, guns and more guns
I am very sad for the complete ending of all that is good and right in this country
Who knew helping poor and sick people like Christians should do would be the end of America. :(