What Would the Founders Think of ObamaCare?
Is health care a “right?”
The liberal wing of the Democratic Party has long sought to make it so, and they may be on the verge of achieving their goal. Legislation currently winding its way through Congress would effectively make health care (or more properly, health insurance) open to every American citizen via government subsidized dispensation.
Of course, no such “right” is enumerated in our founding documents — or is it?
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. … That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men …
So wrote Thomas Jefferson in the most radical and oft-quoted passage of the Declaration of Independence. An extremely wide reading of these words could conceivably include government-run health care. After all, both “life” and “happiness” are threatened by disease and injury.
(Liberals who would follow down this rhetorical road would do well to tread carefully. The same wide reading of the “life” clause of the Declaration could just as easily be used by conservatives to justify protection of the unborn: if government is justly instituted in part to secure life, then outright abolition of abortion could reasonably be inferred to follow.)
But of course, the founders meant for no such wide-ranging interpretation. Rather, the “life” clause of the Declaration refers to the government’s responsibility simply to not kill its citizens, and to protect them from harming one another. (John Locke certainly inspired Jefferson’s pen with his Second Treatise of Government, where he wrote that “no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions.”) Certainly you will search in vain throughout the Declaration, the Constitution, the Federalist Papers, the minutes of the Constitutional Convention, and the ratification debates which followed for the argument that government should be responsible for every citizen’s medical care.
“Of course, no such “right” is enumerated in our founding documents — or is it?”
Woodwrow Wilson was openly contemptuous of the American Constitution. He considered it outdated and reactionary. Modern man should learn to trust highly credentialed and benevolent bureaucrats to run their lives for them. The Progressive movement caused enormous economic damage. Unfortunately, few citizens are aware of this well documented fact. They have been conned into believing that FDR saved the country during the Great Depression. This myth is so widely held that most Americans jaws drop to the ground whenever you suggest otherwise. We have to get the truth out to them. I am utterly convinced that the United States would be twice as wealthy were it not for the Progressives. Sadly, though, most people have no idea what I’m talking about.
This isn’t in our Constitution either:
“You have no choice..
You will be told when you can live..
Where you can live..
How you can live..
And how and when you will die..”
The American people are just about ready to make this clear to Obama and Congress.
More and more I am marveled at the genious of the founders of this nation and their forethought. There is much going on in this nation that they would take exception to. The thought that government is responsible for the properity and happiness of the people is only one such thing.
The founders didnt trust the masses, which was why only land owners were originally given a vote. It was thought that they would have enough of a stake to do their best to make an informed judgement. Now I can see the wisdom in that. When people today base their votes on 30 second sound bites they here in between reality shows it proves their insight. When people base their vote on the candidate who is more attractive or offers the best freebie or based upon skin color. Now I understand the wisdom of the founders and why we have a Representative Republic and not a democracy. They had it right and from Amendment 11 on (with a few exceptions) we have screwed the document up to such a state that the founders would probably have made it more difficult to amend next time.
Safe to say that our Founders would be disgusted by our cowardice. We have casually traded away our liberties for politicians’’ promises of “safety.”
I believe, and reverently hope that liberty-madness will return. Maybe we have to get a glimpse of the alternative for inspiration.
Why don’t we ask the wise latina? She knows better than these wise white men.
OK, I’ll turn the sarcasm off since health care is an issue worthy of better thinking. Is it a right guaranteed by the constitution? No, but the system we have is pretty good at delivering high quality, effective care.
It could be made better, tort reform would allow doctors to stop practicing defensive medicine and would bring malpractice premiums down. And the discussions about how to increase competition among health insurance companies is a good idea, so I hope the “co-op” language is in a health care bill after the summer recess. Lastly, it would be great if we could find a way to have more people covered for catastrophic events and I think there is broad support for that as well.
…that Americans had gone “liberty-mad.” The madness, it seems, has subsided.
The healthcare push isn’t, of course, the first nail in the coffin.
The insidious infusion of the federal government into ever broader and deeper aspects of American life has been going on for decades.
It goes without saying that the Founders would be turning over in their graves at such a course of events, infused as they were, collectively, with creating limits on size & growth of government, dedicated as they were to the notion of preventing the possibility of a government (having the example of Europe) that would voraciously consume its citizens and attempt to further curtail their liberties with each passing day.
I blame us and our lousy schools where today’s citizenry seem to be brainwashed into the notion that they exist to serve government, instead of the other way around, and are taught little or nothing of the structure of their government and their own rights & responsibilities in this grand American adventure, whose death knell seems to approach nearer with every passing day.
We, the People have, in fact, become We, the Sheeple.
I’m ready, willing, and able to fight again for liberty. If the Left want to descend into socialism then they should confine those efforts to the states they control. Of course the productive portions of their populations will flee to friendlier states. But I suppose that’s the point of a national plan. There is no escape. If this and C&T passes I think the Left will have gone too far. Conservatives won’t just shrug, accept their enslavement, and move on. This may spark forces the Left never contemplated. I hope so.
What would the founders think?
I think their first puzzlement would be voiced as, “When did you start thinking you shouldn’t pay the doctor (yourself) when he took care of you?”
It would take at least 6 months for them to grasp that no one thinks they should pay for a personal service rendered….and then GETS MAD when they can’t the neighbors won’t pay on their behalf.
Patterson seems to be writing with the notion that the progressive-leftists pushing private healthcare destruction care what the founders would think or what the Constitution says. These people start from the premise that the Constitution was flawed and is out-dated and full of individual rights and restriction on government and such nonsense.
“liberty madness”—that’s a good, GOOD phrase:)
“But of course, the founders meant for no such wide-ranging interpretation. Rather, the “life” clause of the Declaration refers to the government’s responsibility simply to not kill its citizens…”
How nauseating is it that a phrase mentioning “the government’s responsibility…to not kill its citizens” is a valid and useful part of presenting an argument in a public discussion about the United States of America?
If you’re opposed to another revolution, you need to get over it. Fast.
the Pelosi Amendment (proposed) to the preamble of the Constitution:
We the Sheeple of the United States, in Order to form a Level Playing Field, establish Fairness, insure domestic Compliance in saving the environment, provide for those some of us deem Less Fortunate at the expense of those traditionally empowered, promote a Revisionist History, and secure Prosperity and Power for Third World Countries on the necks of ourselves and our Posterity, do discard and abolish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Let’s not put any words in the founders mouths, shall we?
They might not like what they seen in terms of a health care plan, but they’d probably be equally disgusted in how overmedicated this nation is and the stranglehold we’ve allow the many facets of the healthcare industry to put around our necks.
To be fair the founders never intended us to have a permanent standing military, let alone the most powerful such force in the world. The FDA and the Federal Reserve were also things that would have been outside their imagination. They were very, very, very smart men and the Constitution is one of the crowning achievements of rational thought. However, just because something wasn’t needed in 1782 doesn’t necessarily mean it’s unneeded now.
The above statement should in no way be interpreted as support of the Democrats health care plan.
#11 Antaine:
That was brilliant. If only Pelosi could see her own “truth” in front of her long look down her liberally appointed nose.
Good Point Eric Post # 7, Pelosi is trying to control the Producers leaving her state. If she can make the other states like CA , producers have no reason to leave. I’ve always thought CA’s woes was the biggest reason the Health Care Bill is being rushed. Most of the Blue States are broke & they want the rest of us to bail them out.
Meryl:
““When did you start thinking you shouldn’t pay the doctor (yourself) when he took care of you?””
No one is proposing that you shouldn’t “pay” the doctor yourself anymore so than it is today when the insurance company pays the doctor. (the poor not so much today or under Obamacare)
Insurance produces nothing. It is simply the pooling of risks. And our private insurance system sucks at it. Mainly because insurance companies choose to insure only healthy people. And from a business standpoint they are only doing their job. And they are profiting immensely.
Obamacare finally, after 50 years, offers a risk pool that competes with private insurance, is not for profit, and allows open enrollment to any one.
It’s long past that we try it. The rest of the world uses some sort of public plan, and delivers the same level of care for half of what we spend.
Oh, and I might add.
The founders also denied women the right to vote.
And they allowed for slavery.
“is not for profit”
And this is not a virtue! Those entities that do not worry about turning a profit are inevitably inclined to throw money around like a drunken sailor. And why not? It’s not their money. They hearts will never be in cutting costs.
“Those entities that do not worry about turning a profit are inevitably inclined to throw money around like a drunken sailor.”
David Thomson:
Completely false. Do you see or hear of Medicare administrators flying around in private jets.
“the growth in per-person spending for Medicare has been significantly slower than private health insurance over the past 20 years, and its advantage has widened in recent years.”
http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_treatment/archive/2009/07/28/basic-facts-they-re-important.aspx
Well we know this for a fact, the “pursuit of happiness” is a right given in the constitution. And, in my case, in order to pursue happiness I need a yacht, a large bank account and the government off my back.
Since I’m sure there are at least 50% of Americans that also don’t have these things listed above and also would like them – when does the government start funding them for us?
You see, even if “health care” IS a right, the constitution doesn’t assure people money to pay for it anymore than it assures me of money to pay for my pursuit of happiness.
We are also assured religious freedom. Does the government have to build a church and whatever else my religion might dictate I need to worship correctly?
When it comes to healthcare and the Declaration, the applicable phrases are “liberty” and “pursuit of.”
In other words, applying the matter of healthcare to the Declaration’s statement of inalienable rights, we can properly say that all persons are endowed with the inalienable right to seek healthcare (pursuit of happiness) and the right to obtain healthcare free from undue restraints by government (liberty).
America, as envisioned in the Declaration, is a land of OPPORTUNITY, not a land of government-guaranteed outcome.
Usually when one holds a competition, the playing field is fair. Giving one group taxpayers’ money for salaries, office costs, etc. is not a level playing field.
I’m a web developer. Give me a free computer, office, software and no need to make a profit (in other words, I get a wage to feed my family regardless of my business) and I can undercut every single web developer out there. Would that really be competition?
“They hearts will never be in cutting costs.”
David Thomson:
Do you have any evidence that cost that are cut are passed on the consumer by private insurance?
It’s because there isn’t any. Sure they might be good at cutting cost by only insuring healthy people and denying claims. But is that what we really want?
It has only added to their profit. The evidence is in, Medicare and Medicaid’s cost have risen slower than private insurance.
Why do you think that is if private insurance is better at cutting costs?
Sorry forgot link. Medicare and Medicaid cost have risen less than private insurance over the past 20 years.
And they both don’t deny coverage to anyone and deal with the American’s in the poorest of health.
http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_treatment/archive/2009/07/28/basic-facts-they-re-important.aspx
Founding Father John Adams also founded the 1798 Act For The Relief of Sick and Disabled Seamen.
Merchant Seamens pay was docked 20 cents a month (which must have been a princely sum) to pay for their health care. I cannot find the historical text, but nothing I’ve found suggested that they could opt out of that plan. So not only was at least one founding father in favor of increased taxation for health care benefits – they apparently were also in favor of Single Payer health care as well.
@jharp – Good point. Obamacare is akin to the government stepping in and offering low cost insurance to homeowners on the coasts who choose to build their homes on risky parcels of land (areas known to suffer from land/mudslines, wildfires, etc). Why is no one decrying this?
Sure the health care system could be improved… but a government run plan is not an improvement? How many congressman elect to use medicare? Or do they choose a private insurance company? The reason for that is clear. Just as they stick you with that substandard social security the FORCE you to pay into… while they have their own different plan, because they know the plan they stuck you with is worthless…. same thing will occur with medical plan. WITHOUT a doubt.
Big Head,
Here is something on it.
“The President of the United States, John Adams, approved an Act for the relief of sick and disabled seamen in 1798″
http://jhmas.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/pdf_extract/VII/4/428
“Why is no one decrying this?”
You know the answer. This is the “I hate everything Obama” age for our lessor educated fellow Americans.
Jefferson: WTF?
Adams: WTF?
Franklin: WTF?
Washington: WTF?
Madison: Another WTF?
The others: Collective WTF?
@katablog – You’re equating luxury items with healthcare?
If the war on Government subsidized healthcare is to be won, people are going to have to do a better job on convincing why it’s bad.
The people who want/need it aren’t going to feel the affect of the taxation. The “wait for two weeks for an MRI” isn’t any different for the people who have to go to low-income clinics or the few doctors who still pay for medicare/medicaid. And no one will care if George Washington would have approved of Obamacare if they’re suffering from something they can’t afford to fix.
‘The power under the Constitution will always be in the people’ – George Washington
Today, the Government doesn’t listen to the very people who elected and pay them, handsomely might I add.
If this health care system is so fantastic, why hasn’t ONE politician signed on with HR615?
For they know private insurance, i.e. a capitalistic-type model is far superior, sufficient. Yet, were being encouraged for the crumbs? Nope, I too will stick with and pay more for my health insurance. And who truly pays for ALL my insurance.. I do!
This is not, and never has been about health care. This is about power. Unbridled power. The loss of freedom will be drastic.
The obamacrats will tell you what to eat, wear, drink, breath, play and on and on. Whatever these garbage heads deem ‘bad’ will be banned or taxed.
All the new rules will, of course, be about ‘health care’.
If this health care system is so fantastic, why hasn’t ONE politician signed on with HR615?
paul_unalaska:
Because enough Democrats are in the pockets of health care providers to make passage difficult. Max Baucus, a democrat leading the reform in the Senate, received $3,000,000 in campaign contributions fro health care companies who are profiting immensely under the current system.
“For they know private insurance, i.e. a capitalistic-type model is far superior, sufficient. Yet, were being encouraged for the crumbs? Nope, I too will stick with and pay more for my health insurance. And who truly pays for ALL my insurance.. I do!”
paul_unalaska:
The wht do Americans, the only ones with a private capitalistic model, pay twice what the rest of the world pays, for the same level of care.
You obviously are in good health or you’d be singing a different tune.
What would you do if you lost your insurance, millions have, (and insurance companies can drop you) and suffered poor health.
Take a good long look at yourself buddy. You are a classic I’ve got mine, to hell with the rest of them.
And meanwhile you are paying twice what the rest of the world pays, for the same level of care.
I gotta hand to Limbaugh, Hannity, and Fox. They have done a fantastic job of selling the most expensive health care system in the world that delivers no better care than the others that spend half of what we spend.
Health Care for Dummies
I might be willing to really look into supporting the Healthcare bill if two things happen.
Check out my take, and stick around for more good content.
http://libertarianhumor.com/2009/07/29/health-care-simple/
I believe our founding fathers would be disgusted at the state of affairs of America. We have become a nation of “stand by and watch”..complainers.
My niece has medicade. She has less than “great” doctors. However, without the medicade she would have nothing.
Also, medicare/medicade is less(never) likely to get sued by a patient, so they do not have the overhead of dr insurance. Insurance is a “for profit” business!
It’s not the insurance that needs straightening out , it’s the medical community and costs.. Insurance exists to help buffer these costs.
“Health reform could not be more critical,” Mike Duke, president of Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the nation’s largest private employer, said in a letter last month to Obama. “Reforming health care is necessary not just to improve the health of all Americans, but also to remove the burden that is crushing America’s businesses.”
Got that? “The burden that is crushing America’s business”.
And that’s a fact. How can American business compete when our health care costs are double that of the competition?
Please, someone answer me that.
As I posted hours ago and it didn’t through: Patterson is writing as though the progressive leftists care what the founders thought and what the Constitution says. These people start from the a viewpoint that the Constitution was flawed and is outdated and has individual rights and restriction on government and such nonesense.
Even without ObamaCare™ or other Democrat health “reform,” we already have an unlimited federal government, sticking its nose everywhere into everyone’s business. While the Founders might be upset, I doubt they’d be surprised. A lot of their writings suggest that they knew, given time, any government will grow from a servant to a master.
What Would the Founders Think of ObamaCare?
Let me guess – they’d hate it, right?
As I have been posting for hours and not getting though: Patterson writes as though the progressive leftists care what the founders thought and what the Constitution says. These people start from the viewpoint that the Constitution and the men who wrote it were deeply flawed and that it is now outdated and is full of individual rights and restrictions on national government power and such nonsense.
“Deficit neutral” does not exist in government run agencies. The constitutional rewrite or redefinition is from a God-given-right to a man produced entitlement. One’s right to being healthy or unhealthy is a matter of choice. Government run health care is about health control because that is what governments do. If by fixed bayonet they enforce “eat right and exercise” then they may have a chance at improving the economy with health control.
No where in my copy of the constitution does it say that government shall participate and compete in private industry or own an automobile company or tax the breath which we exhale.
It is not just the Federalists: the so called Anti-Federalists worried greatly and deeply about the Constitution and safeguards that any prudent federalist should want in such a creation. Their worry that the Nation State would begin to subsume the power of the States and encroach upon the Liberty of the people was and is well founded.
Reading their works, today, shows them not to be naysayers for the sake of naysaying, but observers of history who found the structure they were presented with to have many flaws. George Mason, who signed the Declaration, would not sign on to the Constitution, would help to draft the Bill of Rights and then not sign on to that as flaws were still not properly addressed. Pointing only to the Federalists misses that they were unable to respond in-full or in-part to the Anti-Federalists in many areas of sovereignty and checks on the National government. They worried that the bounds of government would be ever expanded as, to paraphrase, ‘what legislature has ever been content with the power it is given?’
Thus they sought deeper checks, federalist ones, to keep the legislative branch in its place, as well as the executive and ensure the judicial understood its circumscriptions. Some of the greatest decriers of slaver were Anti-Federalists, pointing out the ill-logic of only giving partial representation to anyone. That would only be answered by the civil war, with hundreds of thousands dead… the structural way the Federalists wanted to attack slavery proved ill-founded and could not do the job. You cannot grant partial representation: a man has all his Liberties and has them recognized… or not. They saw the path of Rome and didn’t wish to step on it, yet a civil war may have been a far better solution for all of the horrors of it.
I do not put words in their mouths: I let them speak for themselves through their writings. I examine what they said and why they said it and what their worries were. And that tells us much about our modern times as those students of history who stood up for a stronger, more federal constitution were not listened to and we have not listened to our fellow citizens of the founding who had problems with it. They did not expect that conversation to ever end so that we could secure the greatest liberty to ourselves: the liberty to be free from government. That is their fear as they stated it many a time…and did so better than I or any modern writer can ever do as they lived in the time of establishing liberty and worried just how we would figure out a way to give that up.
JED:
“One’s right to being healthy or unhealthy is a matter of choice.”
I’ll be sure to let my deaf daughter who is denied equal access to health insurance that’s it high time she changed her mind about being unhealthy.
You are an idiot.
Patterson writes as if progressive-leftists care what the founders thought or what the Constitution says. These people start from the viewpoint that the founders ideas and the Constutiion are flawed and that the Constitution is outdated by being full of individual rights and restrictions on the national government and such nonsense.
jharp…”Obamacare finally, after 50 years, offers a risk pool that competes with private insurance, is not for profit,…”
Since it is “not for profit” it will be impossible for insurance companies as we know them to compete.
And yet, the escalating costs (as documented by the CBO) will be paid for by all taxpayers (in addition to any insurance that they are paying for outside of this plan, since we are assured that we can continue with our own plans).
33.jharp
“the most expensive health care system in the world that delivers no better care than the others that spend half of what we spend.”
What is this statement based on? Sources?
“no better care than….others…that spend half of what we spend”….?
You sure can keep using this phrase (as I notice you do)…but repetition doesn’t improve its level of credibility.
jharp, because I CHOOSE not to pay for those who don’t wish to improve their situation, I’m siding with Limbaugh and Co.?
Quite the analogy.
In no way did I say ‘..to hell with them, I’ve got mine’ mantra. I’m saying to hell with Government controlled anything in mine or my family’s life. Not to mention if my wife and I are successful enough, were to pay for those who continue, generation after generation continue making bad decisions for themselves and their family? Huh-uh.
For those who’d lost health insurance, there are plenty of other companies that offer health incentives. Not to mention the ‘Evil’ system we have in place, for the time being at the least, will not turn away anyone. Though your attempt to placate blame for my being responsible for my family and me, not the world is the reason millions lack motivation to improve facets in their life they lack.
I’m a vet. I’d gone in for routine dental work and that was botched. Nope, the leaches of society who are wanting ‘Reform’ are more than welcome to have a 20 something inexperienced ‘Doc’ work on your mouth, body.
The Gutted Old Party reduced to speaking for dead people. And you wonder why you’re being ignored.
Meryl:
jharp…”Obamacare finally, after 50 years, offers a risk pool that competes with private insurance, is not for profit,…”
Since it is “not for profit” it will be impossible for insurance companies as we know them to compete.
__________________________________________________
So you are openly admitted the public plan will deliver the same quality of care as private plans.
That’s interesting as I thought all along that the government plan would be lousy.
If you want to pay for so the insurers profits are protected, Obama is allowing you to keep your private plan.
“the most expensive health care system in the world that delivers no better care than the others that spend half of what we spend.”
What is this statement based on? Sources?
Here you go. And there are plenty of others. The more well informed in this debate are well aware of the facts I quote. So go ahead and read the link and become one of us.
http://www.kff.org/insurance/snapshot/chcm010307oth.cfm
paul_unalaska:
“jharp, because I CHOOSE not to pay for those who don’t wish to improve their situation, I’m siding with Limbaugh and Co.?”
And who doesn’t want “to improve their situation”? A diabetic who can’t get insurance.? A breast cancer surivor who can’t”? And then suffers a relapse while uninsured?
“In no way did I say ‘..to hell with them, I’ve got mine’ mantra. I’m saying to hell with Government controlled anything in mine or my family’s life.”
So you don’t use the interstate highways and obey the speed limits? Ever visit the national parks? Air traffic control? Post office? Securiteis and Exchange Commission? Consumer Product Safety Commission? Customs?
“For those who’d lost health insurance, there are plenty of other companies that offer health incentives.”
False. Try getting insured after you have survived cancer and your insurer cancels your coverage. Or a heart attack.
“for the time being at the least, will not turn away anyone.”
Flat out False. Try getting radiation for cancer at the ER. Or bypass surgery at the ER.
Think buddy, think.
If they can’t turn anyone away why are American’s shelling out 2,000 a month for insurance.
For a successful man you are unbelievably ill informed.
Obamacare? How about the 16th and 17th Amendments? The Federal Reserve? and most of all, the New Deal which swept away their vision?
Obama is not the problem, merely a symptom a movement (socialist) that has been in place for 100 years.
harpo,
You were banned from Gateway pundit yesterday for doing the same thing on a health care thread that you’ve commenced in this thread – pushing out non-sequitors and strawmen, and becoming increasingly shrill. The insults to folks rejecting your nanny-state position for your arguments has commenced, ‘ill-informed’. It’ll degenerate into calling people teabaggers, liars, ignorant, etc shortly.
You let the cat out of the bag on Gateway Pundit. You claim to be a successful person. You claim to be a comfortably well off. You claim to have a daughter with genetically founded health issues. You claim you had those issues mitigated and corrected to the limit of current medical technology on your insurance plan. Then you claimed that you could not get another health insurance plan at a cost that would not jeopardize your comfortable life when you decided to move.
Your whole schtick is that you are a cheap, vulgar, liar who believes that the government should take from others so that you do not have to take responsibility for what life dealt you and concentrate your own capable resources – if one is to believe that claim – man up and provide for your families needs from your own pocket.
You contribute nothing to any discussion on health care but the Obama talking points. Since they have already been rejected by thinking people here as double speak for socialized medicine, you’ll get nowhere. You’d think you’d learn.
I’m pretty sure the Founders would call for a Tea party, then try most of the government for Treason.
They would think it chews.
The founding fathers would think Obama is a narcissistic racists, and the Americans that elected him deserve what ever he hands out.
I believe we are in for a difficult time, esp come the 2010 elections..
There are 5 of us that post here. We all feel the same way. obama is to be feared because of the power he has.
Our people in Washington appear to be afraid of this man, ready to roll over and appease him at any cost. He is a narcissistic racists with a lot of backing, and he is doing just as he pleases…
question your elected people when they come home for recess
I believe that the constitution, written circa 1770, actually guarantees the unlimited access to bloodletting, leaches and trepanation.
Our Founders would consider anything of this nature as what it is,a threat to our great nation.
I’m wondering if Now and Then is Sheesh reincarnated.
“the most expensive health care system in the world that delivers no better care than the others that spend half of what we spend.”
Oh… i don’t know, how do the 12 million illegals factor into the equation? I haven’t seen either party eager to close the border. Treatment of illegals is a huge drain on the system. You and I pay for their treatment through OUR premiums. Illegals have killed California and its slowly killing the rest of the country.
BTW. Jharp… plans elsewhere are cheap due to rationing… What economics class did you take that said you can get more for less… either you cut costs through lower treatment standards. Less pay for doctors.. less pay for hospitals.. less testing… the cuts MUST come from somewhere!! You cannot simply wave a wand and say POOF! It’s cheaper!
Another point, my deaf co-worker is just fine with his healthcare. Deaf people ARE NOT excluded from coverage.
49. No, we’re openly accusing the government of planning to cheat. Not only can the government subsidize its own plan with taxpayer money, but it can also burden the private insurers with undue regulation to the point where they collapse under the weight of the regulations. Imagine if the government declared that all private insurance policies must pay for unlimited elective surgery- private insurance would become too expensive to buy!
I heard today on Air America that Republicans are evil because they think health care providers should have ever had a right to make money out of primary care. Basically primary care is a god-given human right and gosh-darnit we’re gonna soak the filthy rich to fund it for everyone!
Commuter:,
Wow. The level of discourse ain’t too good after a few posts calling for details and explanations to the GOP talking points.
I wonder why that is? It couldn’t be you don’t have any answers, could it?
And Commuter, please, learn about tax credits and try to understand that Obama cut taxes for 95 of us.
We’ll all be better off for it.
The Founders would say “Freedom, but no Responsibility”.
We may well be (#33)”paying twice what the rest of the world pays, for the same level of care.”
But when 25% of the nation is obese, 20% smoke, 80% are couch potatoes, 50% are addicted to substances which harm them, and attorneys are getting rich, then I’d say those problems should be addressed before embarking on federalized health care which robs us of even more of our freedoms. Maybe we don’t have a health care problem, maybe we have a responsibility problem.
We may well be (#33)”paying twice what the rest of the world pays, for the same level of care.”
But when 25% of the nation is obese, 20% smoke, 80% are couch potatoes, 50% are addicted to substances which harm them, and attorneys are getting rich, then I’d say those problems should be addressed before embarking on federalized health care which robs us of even more of our freedoms. Maybe we don’t have a health care problem, maybe we have a responsibility problem.
Jul 29, 2009 – 6:17 pm
In other words. Just wait.
It’s been 50 years but in 50 years and 6 months we can get this exactly right.
And we are paying twice as much for the same level of care.
harpo,
Sorry, tool. I’ve been through those points with you several times now. I hand you your a$$ each time, watch you dash around like a headless chicken until even you don’t know what your position is comment to comment, and finally you tell me to go back to rush or hannity or whoever/wherever you and the rest of the discarded tools think would be the primo insult.
Why would I contribute to your capturing of another thread with your endless, inane, parroting of a pack of lies? The only reason would be to lead you down the primrose path to your usual meltdown, but they don’t ban here, and it wouldn’t be a good use of the other readers time to wade through it. Entertaining to be sure, but this is a serious blog.
I note you do not defend yourself against the charge that you got tossed from Gateway Pundit. Smart move on your part, as there’s a record. Of exactly what you wrote about a hearing impaired young man with the courage to stand at a podium and do his best to express his reservations about Obamacare. Of exactly what you said to his mother when she entered the discussion to defend her son and herself from your calumny. Smart moderator there. He banned you, but left your comments up for all to see.
You’re a vile, vulgar, lying, pissant harpo. Normally I wouldn’t point that out. Plenty of your type crawls out of the fever swamps to bother good folks. They have a negative effect on the positions they blather about, so letting them go on about it works out. But I read an eclectic range of blogs, harpo. I may not comment, but I read blogs that present both sides of important questions using factual, rational and considered postings of opinions and analysis.
Both sides, tool. I’ve seen enough of your personal hatred for the same people you expect to part with their hard earned money because you put your hand out. On all manner of blogs. I’ve seen plenty of your juvenile meltdowns manage to get you banned from moderate as well as conservative blogs. (PJM may be the last conservative leaning blog you can still comment on.) But it’s the d**nest thing, harpo. You also manage to get banned from liberal blogs as well. (Note that I said liberal, and not the progressive left clown car blogs, where I’m sure you’ll always be welcome.)
But I am sick and tired of your online ‘teabagging’ ‘redneck’ ‘white trash’ characterizations of your fellow citizens who have the courage to proactively stand at a podium to tell their elected representative what they believe in. And I’m going to chime in, first or last, with all the other good people who feel obligated to force tools like you into a corner and then out the door.
Commuter:
harpo,
You were banned from Gateway pundit yesterday for doing the same thing on a health care thread
____________________________________________________
Really? I didn’t know.
Do you mind if I ask how you knew?
Pretty flattering to hear that you are so interested in my posts.
I say get your party officials to do their Job…This ain’t gonna be no ordinary August recess…
http://www.bloggybayou.com/2009/07/its-on-for-august.html
I sent this link to every GOP county and district chairmen and the Republican Party of Florida HQ
I urge all to do the same in your state.. Our Founding Fathers were more than mere thinkers.. they TOOK ACTION AND ACTIVELY TOOK ON THE WORLD’S SUPERPOWER OF THAT ERA.. We should emulate them….Words are necessary in this battle for hearts and minds, but so is a little ass-chewing of our elected represenatives on this issue….
jharp:
“If you want to pay for so the insurers profits are protected, Obama is allowing you to keep your private plan.”
You misunderstand what contributes to high health care costs. Medicare does not pay market value for services, never has. In fact it reimburses at rates far below market value. Health care is a commodity. It has costs that do not change based on what a government program is willing to pay. Therefore those costs must be passed on to those who have the funds to make up for the shortfall, namely private insurance and cash. Obamacare is merely an extension of the Medicare model beyond the elderly and infirm and to all uninsured people.
We can also consider federal and state regulations imposed on health insurers as a contributing factor, but let’s stick to government interference for this argument.
Obamacare may very well “allow” you to keep your private insurance. But when it is implemented it will be impossible to collect enough revenue to pay market value for services that a “free” health care plan will surely drive up demand for. Therefore even more cost burden must be passed along to…guess who? Private insurance and cash. This of course will drive even more consumers to the “cheaper” public option. Let’s also not forget the additional taxes that must be imposed to pay for the public option, driving even more of the middle class into its gaping maw.
This of course is the intent…rendering as many citizens dependent on the government option as possible, so that they are scared into keeping the current power structure intact. Once again, we sacrifice liberty for a little safety.
So what is the solution? Free markets…pure, messy, gloriously free markets. Zero government intervention except in cases of fraud or malpractice. Private insurers may be greedy bastards but at least one maintains the right to vote with one’s dollars, or exit the insurance game completely and go cash. Amazing how well people will take care of themselves once there is no safety net in place.
Obamacare will price the majority out of the marketplace and secure even more obedience to the powermongers in Washington. That is the only thing our “leaders” are after. Never forget that.
“After all, both “life” and “happiness” are threatened by disease and injury.”
Heh. Lack of wealth may also threaten “life” and “happiness”. The government should make every citizens rich then. One can also say that a lack of suitable mates also threaten “life” and “happiness”. So, the government should play matchmakers too. And so on.
With each expansion, it will sound more and more ridiculous, but that should be alright to socialists, leeches and power mad politicians.
“For those who’d lost health insurance, there are plenty of other companies that offer health incentives.”
False. Try getting insured after you have survived cancer and your insurer cancels your coverage. Or a heart attack (In both your examples, the individual can go about legal means if this be the result. Legal or illegal folks.)
What about the illegal who was given a year & a 1/2 of medical service.. and is now suing..?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/03/us/03deport.html?_r=2&sq=Deborah%20Sontag&st=cse&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&scp=2&adxnnlx=1217876736-QTI+OVJJHzYFqD1YYx6EQA
As for your comment regarding highway speed limits, National Parks, et al. the speed limit being raised from 55 to 65 m.p.h. has caused an influx of car related fatalities, injuries. As for my family, we don’t drive. Honest. http://health.usnews.com/articles/health/healthday/2009/07/16/deaths-injuries-increase-with-higher-speed-limits.html
The National Parks, California has threatened to close numerous to offset the debt. I lived in Santa Barbara County for sometime and was disgusted by it.
Air traffic, working in the weather field I work with and alongside airport operations. ATC would run more smoothly and have more modern equipment if it was run by private industry. The U.S. ATC is 80′s, late 90′s equipment.
USPS, Customs – what a joke. Shoddy run programs whereas the employees are mediocre. UPS is a better run outfit and the professionalism is leaps and bounds above the USPS.
I’m a little more then doubting-eyed towards the swine flu (H1N1) epidemic and government-sanctioned vaccination scenario. It seems to be a pretty transparent fear tactic being doctored as a demonstrative incentive for the healthcare referendum. Pair this with the all too convenient implications of the Muslim aversion to eating pork along with the Black Panther crowd’s (along with their sponsors of foreign interests) belief that the CIA (and thus the justifications for biological warfare is occurring beneath the social radars as a domestic population control policy) used heroin and crack to destroy their communities…and you have quite a racist and subversive agenda (if not a religious one) being sown through government agencies.
I don’t care if the Panthers might’ve been right…My life is no payback check for a bunch of street trash…I don’t want a manadatory drug dealer in my life…nor will I sponsor one through taxation…
There’s nothing inspirational or evolutionary with this lame “Song Jiang” Outlaws of the Marsh, “heroes of the common man” fantasy as much as they try and evoke the criminal adolescence of that Chinese book as their “original thought” and IQ. The “Robin Hood” excuse for criminality, the only turd o’thought these folks can stump for sympathies…”See People of Earth, we fight the evil Sheriff!…That’s why you should pay us!” is for the happy meal crowd. If this is their idea of legitimate “political maneuvering” then Politics has no place in the United States…Wait a minute! the Constitution tried to say that!…Wait! Think Twice, parries Black Studies Professor!,the Constitution is a political document!…and so on and so on…Pathetic. ad infinitum…
The United States Presidency under Barrack Obama is unbecomming towards it’s responsibilities of office. It is soliciting fantacisim.
There ain’t no healthcare in a happy meal….
Is it because everyone’s gone out of their freakin’ minds that “healthcare” is even a priority issue? I mean the percentage of those who really clearly need it isn’t so very big next to those who don’t. That’s why it’s such a fleece job. Another insurance scam…evrybody ante up but only one guy wins the pot.
See all jharp posts above for definition of “useless pontification”.
If we apply what we know of the Founders and their writings to Obamacare, we should oppose the bill in it’s current form. The Constitution clearly reserves any power regarding health insurance coverage to the States and the People.
The vast majority of Americans are not against finding a way to help those 15 million uninsured that really need care.
The vast majority of Americans are happy with their health care coverage, but not the costs.
Tort reform (award limits) is shown to lower insurance costs. Allowing health insurance to be purchased from other states will also lower costs through competition.
State and local taxes on health insurance could be set so that those who actually need care were covered.
We don’t need a giant new federal entity that adds to the national debt in order to take care of each other.
The majority of Americans do not want government health care. Period. It is useless to defend it here.
Well said Hawkwatcher. The point of the article, whether national health care is noble, wise or right makes NO difference. THE FACT is it is beyond the powers granted to the federal government of this nation. The powers of congress are VERY specific.
Address the issue at the state level…. that is where it should be.
‘Do you mind if I ask how you knew?’
Did you not read the comment you’re replying to? How dull are you, harpo, to ask this question if you did?
Sharper tools, please.
The Founders also envisioned a nation of yeoman farmers. What would they think of iPods? &c.
The vast majority of insured Americans are happy with their health care??? The uninsured are merely one part of the problem. The other big part are the insured Americans who go bankrupt every year because they need to cover medical costs due to a serious illness
seansarto:
“I mean the percentage of those who really clearly need it isn’t so very big next to those who don’t. Another insurance scam…evrybody ante up but only one guy wins the pot.”
Yep, the guy who gets cancer or needs heart surgery rakes in the pot. And all those who remain healthy are the big losers.
Commuter:
‘Do you mind if I ask how you knew?’
Did you not read the comment you’re replying to? How dull are you, harpo, to ask this question if you did?
_________________________________________________
Yea, I read it, and I re read it and you didn’t answer the question. It’s funny that I didn’t know I was banned, yet you did.
Hmmmm. How do you know this?
And have you figured out what a tax credit is yet? You know, the one that lowered taxes for 95% of us?
paul_unalaska: “For those who’d lost health insurance, there are plenty of other companies that offer health incentives.”
me: False. Try getting insured after you have survived cancer and your insurer cancels your coverage. Or a heart attack
paul_unalaska: What about the illegal who was given a year & a 1/2 of medical service.. and is now suing..?
_________________________________________________
me: You are right. How could I have missed it.
me: Since an illegal was given a year and a 1/2 of medical services and is now suing completely negates the need for insurance for cancer survivors and those who suffer heart attacks.
me: How could I have missed that?
paul_unalaska”(In both your examples, the individual can go about legal means if this be the result. Legal or illegal folks.)
me: You’ll have to explain this one to me. I have no idea what you are getting at. But please, put the bong away first.
41. JED: “No where in my copy of the constitution does it say that government shall participate and compete in private industry or own an automobile company or tax the breath which we exhale.”
And nowhere in my copy of the Constitution does it say that the government shall invest billions of dollars in technologies such as the Internet and personal computers. But the government did it anyway, because they understood that investment of public dollars in technology would create huge gains for American private industry. And because the government did partner with private industry, you now have the luxury of being able to post baseless commments on an extremist right wing website.
I’d love to see you and your ilk give up that luxury in the name of the Constitution.
#36 Jharp:
Wal-mart doesnt pay Health Insurance for most of their employees. They keep most everyone under 40 hours a week to keep from paying benefits. It would be a win, win situation for them. Get the rest of the US to pay Health Insurance for their employees just like CA wants us to do for the illegal immigrants. Pretty shrewd on their part.
‘And nowhere in my copy of the Constitution does it say that the government shall invest billions of dollars in technologies such as the Internet and personal computers. But the government did it anyway, because they understood that investment of public dollars in technology would create huge gains for American private industry.’
You’re right, the Constitution doesn’t say that. But you’re wrong in saying that the government did it because they understood etc. The internet grew out of the ARPnet, which was a DoD initiative. Electronic computing traces it’s birth to ballistics programs funded by military budgets.
So both your examples come from the military, which IS provided for in the Constitution, as it makes provisions for government functions servicing the common public good. The military, treaties with foreign powers, interstate commerce etc. And those functions themselves are predicated on the common sense realization of the founding fathers that the individual is not capable of defending his rights in all cases and that some functions must necessarily be exercised by the government the representative of the rights of all citizens collectively.
Rights do not come from the government. Rights are not dispensed by any government. And rights are not granted by the government. Rights come from the individual willing to exercise and defend them. The founding fathers understood that. The Constitution is limited to safeguarding individual rights. ‘Shall make no law etc etc’. The Bill Of Rights is an enumeration of the rights recognized as both inviolable and guaranteed by the government, not rights extended by the government to the people.
Health Care is not a right and that argument cannot be made in the debate over Obamacare. The only constitutionally supported intrusion of the government into the issue based on ‘rights’ is to ensure that no citizen is prevented from seeking out health insurance, nor forced to seek out health insurance, nor punished for not doing so.
‘It’s funny that I didn’t know I was banned, yet you did.
Hmmmm. How do you know this?’
There you go, lying again harpo. You knew d**ned well you were banned on Gateway Pundit and for the same reason I know it. Because you were cut off in the middle of the usual meltdown and the reason given, written in plain english on Gateway Pundit, was that Jharp has been banned by the moderator.
Or then again, considering your level of reading comprehension perhaps you do not understand that ‘Jharp has been banned’ means that Jharp has been banned.
Sharper tools please. Or at least not the plastic pre-school play tool kind.
Commuter:
“written in plain english on Gateway Pundit, was that Jharp has been banned by the moderator.”
You are a liar. No such thing was posted by any moderator.
So how do you know I was banned?
85. Commuter:
“You’re right, the Constitution doesn’t say that. But you’re wrong in saying that the government did it because they understood etc. The internet grew out of the ARPnet, which was a DoD initiative. Electronic computing traces it’s birth to ballistics programs funded by military budgets.”
Big deal. My point remains that this was a partnership between federal government and private industry that produced powerful and lucrative results that benefit private industry. Without federal government investment, there would be no Internet or personal computers.
“So both your examples come from the military, which IS provided for in the Constitution, as it makes provisions for government functions servicing the common public good. The military, treaties with foreign powers, interstate commerce etc. And those functions themselves are predicated on the common sense realization of the founding fathers that the individual is not capable of defending his rights in all cases and that some functions must necessarily be exercised by the government the representative of the rights of all citizens collectively. “
Here is where your argument collapses. You write that “[the Constitution] makes provisions for government functions servicing the common public good”, yet you seemed to be very tunnel-visioned in your interpretation of your own words. To you, it seems, only military investment is a “common good”; whereas investment in the health and well being of the citizens of our nation is not a “common good”. In essence, your very shoddy argument is that the Internet is a common good worth investing in but that health of the American people is not.”
“Health Care is not a right and that argument cannot be made in the debate over Obamacare. The only constitutionally supported intrusion of the government into the issue based on ‘rights’ is to ensure that no citizen is prevented from seeking out health insurance, nor forced to seek out health insurance, nor punished for not doing so.”
Health care is not a right just as much as access to the Internet is not a right. Yet, if you’re going to define Internet as a common good, as you do above, there is no reason that health care should not be defined as a common good also. The Constitution clearly provides for it.
‘You are a liar. No such thing was posted by any moderator.’
There you go again, harpo. The reading comprehension thing and the roclivity to call anyone a liar who writes something you can’t comprehend.
Read it again.
Oh, and by the way, the post you started having your meltdown in on Gateway Pundit and then mysteriously disappeared before you got your usual tantrum cooking on all cylinders was called: ‘Local Deaf Student Asks Dem Officials: Will Disabled People Like Me Get Shut Out Under Obamacare? (Video)’.
In the post just after it, called: ‘American Health Care Spending Slowed Considerably in Recent Years’, we have the reason about halfway down the thread.
‘BTW, jharp and joe were banned, per MidWestEng.
Hooray!’
MidWestEng is a moderator on Gateway Pundit.
Anything else, tool?
proclivity
Mike W:
‘To you, it seems, only military investment is a “common good”; whereas investment in the health and well being of the citizens of our nation is not a “common good”. In essence, your very shoddy argument is that the Internet is a common good worth investing in but that health of the American people is not.”’
Couple of things wrong with this. For one, as I mentioned foreign treaties, interstate commerce, and used ‘etc’ in the same sentence the I also mentioned the military as a function for the common good, the first part of the first sentence in what I quoted above is false. The second part is false also, as that’s an assumption on your part. Not something I said.
So, in essence, you misrepresented what I wrote, drew your own assumptions from that misrepresentation, and came to a very shoddy conclusion that my argument was something other than the one I made. Then addressed that argument.
And no, I did not define the Internet as a common good. I defined it, and personal computing, as a byproduct of the efforts of the military, which is provided for in the Constitution as a function for the common good.
Commuter:
“For one, as I mentioned foreign treaties, interstate commerce, and used ‘etc’ in the same sentence the I also mentioned the military as a function for the common good, the first part of the first sentence in what I quoted above is false.”
After reading 6 times, and re reading the supporting posts, I have no idea what you are talking about.
I thought Mike W’s post was quite clear and quite accurate. As matter of fact, I don’t recall seeing the point made so clearly and succinctly.
Your argument is full of holes, Commuter, big gaping holes. And Mike W. made them quite obvious.
harpo,
Not sure my response got through, so here it is again.
““written in plain english on Gateway Pundit, was that Jharp has been banned by the moderator.
You are a liar. No such thing was posted by any moderator.”
This is tiresome. I am not a liar because you cannot understand plain english. I did not say that written in plain english by the moderator, was that jharp was banned. I said that “written in plain english on Gateway Pundit, was that Jharp has been banned by the moderator.”
Look in the comments in the post after the one you were shut off in. About halfway down. Where it is written in plain english that jharp (plus someone else named joe) was banned by MidWestEng. MidWestEng is a moderator there.
‘So how do you know I was banned?’
I know because “written in plain english on Gateway Pundit, was that Jharp has been banned by the moderator.”
So now you have been told once again how I know. Anything else?
‘After reading 6 times, and re reading the supporting posts, I have no idea what you are talking about.’
No doubt. Your reading comprehension, as has been pointed out, is markedly poor.
Commuter:
“Look in the comments in the post after the one you were shut off in.”
Thank you. And I stand corrected. You didn’t lie.
Since your reference was to a thread I knew nothing about and based on your past history I hope you can understand.
Commuter:
‘After reading 6 times, and re reading the supporting posts, I have no idea what you are talking about.’
No doubt. Your reading comprehension, as has been pointed out, is markedly poor.
_______________________________________________________
Alright, I give. My reading comprehension lacks what it takes to comprehend your post.
So please explain what you wrote.
_____________________________________________.
“For one, as I mentioned foreign treaties, interstate commerce, and used ‘etc’ in the same sentence the I also mentioned the military as a function for the common good, the first part of the first sentence in what I quoted above is false.”
———————————————–
I figure you owe me after all the trouble I went through to explain tax credits and how Obama cut taxes for 95% of us.
‘Since your reference was to a thread I knew nothing about and based on your past history I hope you can understand.’
I understand that you never bothered to check your facts before opening your yap and starting to rev up a tantrum. Very much in line with your past and current history. Fortunately, on fewer and fewer sites as time goes on. And please refer to first paragraph in comment #66.
‘So please explain what you wrote.’
I realize that there is a typo and I mistakenly used the word sentence instead of paragraph, but if that’s what’s keeping you from comprehending it after reading it 6 times… Well, tool, I’ll try using small words in the vernacular you hear everyday so you might comprehend (no guarantees on that though).
This guy, he, like, he goes around saying I said some stuff I didn’t. So, ya know, like I told everyone the stuff HE said. Then, ummm, ya, I even TOLD guy EXACTLY why first part of first sentence of stuff he said was not true. So, like, guy needs to read my stuff before being such a dweeb. Plus, like, ya know, I think he might even be the same guy that’s really into that teabagging stuff. Gross.
That help, tool?
A one question poll. Please Vote your own beliefs .
This is a none party affiliated and bias poll done by AT&T / Yahoo in fact Yahoo leans Left . Please pass this around even to your Senators and Congressman . Since the media is mute on these well known numbers shown at Town Hall meeting .
The results will surprise you!
Your Chance To Vote On Obama’s Performance on Economy-AT&T/Yahoo Poll.
Cut and PASTE ..VOTE AND SEND ON .
http://js.polls.yahoo.com/quiz/quiziframe.php?poll_id=46067
Vote: Then pass it on.
Yeah, I know the above posts are three months old and all, but I just can’t help noticing that “Commuter” sounds like an angry, helpless, desperate wienie.