Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Those Socialist Americans

A quarter of the American people (26 percent, to be exact), according to Friday morning’s New York Times/CBS News poll, believe that the health-care reform bills floating around Congress will create governmental death panels, while just 23 percent say they won’t. Another 30 percent believe that the bills will allow federal tax dollars to go towards the purchase of insurance by illegal immigrants, while just 22 percent say they won’t. The right-wing noise machine has evidently reached many right-wing ears.

But here’s the stunner: In the very same poll, respondents were asked whether they favored a Medicare-like public option for everyone. The right-wingers were out there in roughly the same numbers that they registered in answering the other questions: 26 percent of respondents said they opposed the public option. But a whopping 65 supported it.

Think about that. The public option has been demonized non-stop for the past half-year; it’s the key to the Republican charge that instituting such a program is tantamount to bringing socialism to America. They have clearly rallied the Republican base to this position, just as they rallied the base to fear the coming of death panels and publicly-subsidized immigrant care. But whereas pluralities of Americans simply said they didn’t know enough to believe one thing or the other about death panels and immigrant care, virtually all Americans not in the Republican base support the public option.

Here, the question isn’t whether the bills working their way through Congress say X or Y. The question is whether a public option would be a good deal for the American people, and the American people have answered that it would. They have surely heard the claims that it would be the socialist nose in the capitalist tent, and the only logical inference is that they actually support socialism (not too likely) or that they don’t think it would constitute an embrace of socialism -- at least, no more than such other government programs as Medicare or public utilities have constituted that.

Since Republican legislators represent the 26 percent of Americans opposed to the public option, their opposition to same poses no mystery. The conundrum is why some Democrats -- all save those from the most right-wing districts -- oppose it. When The Post’s uber-policy blogger Ezra Klein asked North Dakota Democratic Senator Kent Conrad yesterday why he didn’t support the public option, Conrad replied, “I don't think a government-run plan best fits this culture.” In Conrad’s mind, such as it is, American culture doesn’t seem to be shaped by the American people.

Is the intensity of the support for the public option as great as that of the opposition? Apparently not, at least, not yet. Does a 65-percent-to-26-percent margin nonetheless give the Democrats the ability to defend the public option and actually win support for doing so? It does if they’re any good at their chosen trade.

The American people have just told the Democrats, If you vote for the public option, we’ve got your back. Of course, if Democrats are utterly spineless, having their back yields nothing.

By Harold Meyerson  | September 25, 2009; 3:35 PM ET
Categories:  Meyerson  | Tags:  Harold Meyerson  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: With Iran, 'The Cuban Missile Crisis in Slow Motion'
Next: Israel's Final Warning to the World?

Comments

I too favor the proposed public option. I actually go beyond that to favor a single payer program and the extinction of all private health insurance companies in the US.

Health insurance, like law enforcement, is a natural function for a modern government of an affluent nation.

However, many Americans are very confused about the nature of the public option as proposed so far.

Many seem to be unaware that:

1) Only a small fraction of the public would be eligible to purchase their insurance from the "public option".

2) The "public option" would have a price tag that is intended to similar in magnitude to the private plans with which it would compete.

The idea of the public option is to put an "honest broker" price tag out there so the private insurance companies have less opportunity to game the system.

Posted by: DrVelocity | September 25, 2009 4:17 PM | Report abuse

Perhaps at this late date, Congress can get it's collective head around the Amercan reality, Medicare has been a positive influence in American lives.

Dropping the 'public option' out of the question and substituting Medicare becomes an instant American health insurance winner.

The concept is understood, and it operates today in a public/private synergy that can be massaged into the workable American solution.

Congresscritters of all sorts might want to ponder that reality, and seek to satisfy their employers, 'we the people'.

Written into that poll is a stark reality, there's about 26% of Americans that are solidly against the plan or any other thing that isn't precisely to their making.

Their project, is to find another 26% and then they will be the majority they believe they are today.

I don't predict success in their future, but, Medicare as an Option For All, I see our American Healthcare future.

Posted by: wmc418 | September 25, 2009 4:17 PM | Report abuse

The debate..has only added to my confusion about the core issues of healthcare reform.. I feel powerless to change the minds of my representatives (even if I could be certain of their stance on the packages).. this is a huge problem that won't be solved overnight and won't be without disappointed constituents..

Posted by: newbeeboy | September 25, 2009 4:22 PM | Report abuse

Harold wants all to be sociable. So do I.

I love this new rhetoric.

We can find common ground in ignorance.

Posted by: GaryEMasters | September 25, 2009 4:27 PM | Report abuse

Technically, socialism hits a lot closer to home for most people in this country. If you go to college today chances are you attend a public university. These are institutions in which students are only asked to cover just a portion of their tuition, with the rest covered by your fellow taxpayers in your states, many of whom do not benefit directly from this service. We all benefit from an educated society, just as we all benefit from a healthy one. But even more than health care, where the government is only being asked to cover the insurance that will be used to pay for medical services provided by private hospitals and doctors, in higher education the professors, administrative staff and support staff are all government employees. Critics of health care reform and a public option might want to think about that before they start sounding the alarm about another Red Menace.

Posted by: TedFrier | September 25, 2009 4:29 PM | Report abuse

Public option over my dead body.

I don't own a gun, I will buy one if this goes into affect.

I never have understood milita's. I definatly will embrace them if this goes into affect.

public option equals civil war. I will be the first to arm myself to be a part of that war.

go for it, bring it on. Be warned, you will not need death panels if you put in a public option.

Posted by: LiberalBasher | September 25, 2009 4:31 PM | Report abuse

Medicare was proposed to provide a governmental mechanism to deal with the presumed inability of most of the then relatively few senior citizens to pay for the (on average) large hospital amd other medical expenses incurred in old age when (most) people were presumed to be unable to continue working. They would instead be taxed earlier in life of their incomes each year while still working. That model does not transfer easily to dealing with the medical costs incurred by non-seniors not currently receiving or purchasing health insurance for whatever reasons.

Posted by: eugenelipkowitz | September 25, 2009 4:33 PM | Report abuse

"Public option over my dead body.

I don't own a gun, I will buy one if this goes into affect.

I never have understood milita's. I definatly will embrace them if this goes into affect.

public option equals civil war. I will be the first to arm myself to be a part of that war.

go for it, bring it on. Be warned, you will not need death panels if you put in a public option."

Ahhh...another armchair warrior. I so love listening to people who, in all probability, have never served in a combat unit - much less killed somebody up close and personal in actual combat - talk about civil war against their fellow Americans if some policy initiative comes to pass. Thanks for the laugh, I needed one. The South should feel free to try and secede, again. We can replace your crops and manufacturing base - but you can't replace our tax dollars (From the Republican "revolution" of '94 to 2006, Republicans outspent Democrats by a minimum of 60/40 on earmarks each year).

We should go with a public option. Doctor's fees are out of control. INOVA Fairfax billed me $5,369.30 to circumcise my son. Thank God my wife and I can afford insurance - we ONLY ended up paying $845.60 of that bill.

Posted by: SeaTigr | September 25, 2009 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Hey Liberal Basher... I think you could use some serious psychiatric care right now - assuming it's covered under your private healthcare plan. By the way, liberals own guns too. Some of us are actually quite good with them.

Posted by: debsmyth | September 25, 2009 4:42 PM | Report abuse

LiberalBasher, are you going to take a private or public road on your trip to buy a gun?

Did you learn to read in public school?

Perhaps you went to a Public College.

Do you use Public Utilities? Water? Sewer?

Fire? Police?

How about the Public Military?

The Public also runs NASA.

How something like a Public Option to buy a Medicare like product scares you, is an interesting proposition.

I may be with you that an actual mandate to Americans requiring them to purchase Insurance from a market based company that isn't regulated like a Utility is unconstitutional.

I will agree with anyone who happens to understand the Automobile Insurance analogy is bogus, because driving isn't a right, and there's something about Life, and Liberty being defined as a right that causes me question.

Posted by: wmc418 | September 25, 2009 4:42 PM | Report abuse

We should go with a public option. Doctor's fees are out of control. INOVA Fairfax billed me $5,369.30 to circumcise my son. Thank God my wife and I can afford insurance - we ONLY ended up paying $845.60 of that bill.

---
Thats right, someone that saves your life should not make a decent living.

When your loved one dies because you got a cheap doctor, don't blame anyone but yourself.

Truthfully, I hope its you that dies at the hand of the cheapo. But, who cares.

As long as its a liberal first.

Hope you die slowly like Ted Kennedy.

Whats it matter. You will get your death pannels, staffed by underpaid people who are not qualified. Every death will be your fault and nobody else's.

Again, hope its you and all of your loved ones.

Die liberal. Or better yet.

Want my address? I live in ohio.

Want me to help you die?
Not a threat, just a fact. I don't want an underpaid doctor. I want one that knows he is worth every penny he charges.

fkn liberals. I hate your guts.

I am not racist. I am prejudice. I hate ALL liberals. Black, white, asian, ... what ever. men, women, young, old. doesn't matter. Your liberals. I hate your guts and everything you stand for.

The only good liberal is a fkn dead one and I will glady help do that when you take my life into your hands with your goverment run health care.

Again
die liberal

every one of you

die

Posted by: LiberalBasher | September 25, 2009 4:46 PM | Report abuse

Dr.Velocity is right on target: the Re-pubes of our federal legislatures all seem to be gibbering about something they know virtually nothing about; or they repeatedly state obvious untruths--because they have nothing else of much importance to add to the discussion. Let 'em go the way of the Whigs; we'll all be better off without 'em (as they continue to do little more with their time-in-office than scratch their cojones, then ritually kiss the allegiance-rings they've worn for Uncle Ronnie/GeorgeH.W. and the Bush/Cheney-cabal).

Posted by: marc85 | September 25, 2009 4:46 PM | Report abuse

Eugene, the Medicare model is the best platform that exists to make the transformation.

What many fail to realize is the funding mechanism is in place for all the employed individuals.

All that is left to get that revenue stream pointed correctly is to determine the cost and remember the lessons to be learned will be effencies and scale.

There is a very unhealthy mental attitude fomented by the Right that all Government costs should exist in stasis while the rest of the world moves forward and at rare times backwards.

Most Americans are fed mixed messages and are rarely given continuing lessons in the vast difference between finances of governments and private entities.

Most people never consider any of the worth and value of our public property and inventory, there is no balance sheet.

Only people stating " we're broke" without understanding the concept as it applies to the government.

This misunderstanding hurts the nation.

Posted by: wmc418 | September 25, 2009 4:53 PM | Report abuse

I would suggest that most Americans understand the value of competition in a capitalist system. If government sponsored competition is the only way in insure health insurance providers actually compete, public option is merely a rational choice by freedom loving citizens. Don’t we all agree that competition is necessary for markets to work properly?

Posted by: leyork | September 25, 2009 4:53 PM | Report abuse

Would someone please track down LiberalBasher and get him serious mental-health treatment, Maybe we can pass the hat around to get a pyschiatrist right to his front door, right now.

Posted by: lewfournier1 | September 25, 2009 4:54 PM | Report abuse

I semi-violently oppose the public option because:
--I think it's socialism;
-- I support the free enterprise system for insurance companies to make as much profit out of American people's injury and illness as the companies can;
-- I get a fuzzy warm feeling whenever I hear of a very sick person who is denied coverage by her or his insurance company despite having paid it thousands of dollars in premiums;
-- I love it when I get to finance desperately ill, uninsured patients' care in emergency rooms across the country;
-- I think public option is fascism, and I don't know the difference between that and socialism. But I'm against both;
-- I believe that people who can't find medical treatment must have sinned. They deserve to suffer and die. Better that they do than the rest of us embrace socialism-fascism-big government Obama.
-- I am an unthinking, right-wing follower of Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.

Posted by: jimsteinberg1 | September 25, 2009 4:59 PM | Report abuse

LiberalBasher:
"public option equals civil war. I will be the first to arm myself to be a part of that war."

Fascinating. You're willing to kill people to prevent the government from providing basic health care for the citizens of the nation.

What other government programs are you ready to kill people over? Medicare? Highways? National Parks?

Posted by: presto668 | September 25, 2009 4:59 PM | Report abuse

I would like to know why a newspaper as respectable as the Washington Post permits blatant DEATH THREATS such as those being spewed forth by "LiberalBasher" to be posted on its discussion boards.

If open threats of violence aren't a sufficient violation of the code ofcConduct for these boards, what in God's name is??

Please, Washington Post, expel this person immediately.

Posted by: Gladiator2008 | September 25, 2009 5:21 PM | Report abuse

If the Democrats screw up the Public Option, then perhaps it's time people should join the Green party, because the Democrat party are just taking liberals for grated. It's not right that the minority of conservative Democrats are calling the shot righ now. It's better if the Green Party grows and work in coalition with the Democrats so liberal issues can be negotiated.

Posted by: pspox | September 25, 2009 5:24 PM | Report abuse

The "public option" idea seems grand until it is actually on paper, in print.
I may take a poll and ask 5000 people if they want the perkins "kids eat free" menu opened to all ages whether or not a paying adult is actually attending the meal... I bet 50-60% would say "sure" but if I said, "would you like the government to drive perkins out of business by demanding that they provide free meals to the public until they have to shut their doors in 1-2 days?", I bet that most people (who are'nt actually beauracrats) would say "no!".
The Medicare rates are a fraction of the actual cost of healthcare, the only logical outcome of a "robust public option based on medicare rates" is a death spiral for the insurers (hundreds of thousands of employees thrown out of work, hundreds of billions in investor's savings wiped out, an inevitable massive increase in the size of the beauracracy) I guess most of the "young rich beauracrats" hobnobbing in Georgetown couldn't care less about insurance company employees or investor's savings because for them there is only one way forward, a constantly expanding beauracracy... So Mr. Meyerson, I guess I have been infected by the "right-wing noise machine" I can hear their cries for a reasonably sized beauracracy. You seem to march to a different drummer, you know your butter is on the beauracracy side of the bread, you will celebrate when he beauracracy assumes control of the nation's healthcare economy. So good for you, have a grand time, I'll just keep sending you and your friends an ever increasing share of my income, I won't ask any questions about what you've done with the "Social security trust fund" or why the nation's credit card is maxxed out... I'll just keep paying the monthly bill... you just party on!
Are those Chinese bondholders going to accept my grandchildren's future income as collateral on your new "cash flow bonds"... well good then, they seem to be much better creditors than those nasty US "shareholders" were, Those bastards actually expected a profit... the Chinese just want "interest".. they know what's best for us, it's good that you and your cohort have turned over our financial management to them... private healthcare in the U.S. that's clearly Unchinese...I mean UnAmerican, yeah that's the ticket, UnAmerican...
Best regards

Posted by: srlabelle2000 | September 25, 2009 5:26 PM | Report abuse

Gladiator et. al. we need LiberalBasher around, just to illustrate that the right wing is comprised of vile hate spewing wing nuts. I am wondering at what point will the GOP finally decent into insane silliness so that nobody will ever again take them seriously.

Posted by: ualec1 | September 25, 2009 5:28 PM | Report abuse

Respectfully...we don't need LiberalBasher's kind around. I'm confident the right wing in this country has done more than enough to make itself appear sufficiently outside the mainstream.

But when I come onto these boards hoping to see an intelligent discussion of the issues, and instead read things like: "Hope you die slowly like Ted Kennedy", "Again, hope its you [that dies] and all of your loved ones.", "Want me to help you die?", and "The only good liberal is a fkn dead one and I will glady help do that" from a poster who concludes with "Again, die liberal, every one of you die"....well, then I tend to think that's just a wee bit over the top.

People like that should not be treated as comic material: they are genuinely dangerous. This person sounds like a potential Timothy McVeigh. And we all remember what he did.


Posted by: Gladiator2008 | September 25, 2009 5:45 PM | Report abuse

I now believe that Abraham Lincoln did us the biggest disservice by keeping the South part of the United States. I seriously hope we can convince those crackers to secede. We don't need them. Ever.

Posted by: GeorgHerbet | September 25, 2009 5:46 PM | Report abuse

Right wing talk radio opposes a public option, so therefore many people oppose it too. But when asked if they favor a plan like Medicare (which is a publicly funded plan), they favor it overwhelmingly. I guess that's why demagoguery works so well, when the public is too stupid to be trusted with a voting franchise. That's why the founding fathers wanted it to be limited to property holders.

Posted by: ripvanwinkleincollege | September 25, 2009 6:07 PM | Report abuse

FORCE HAROLD INTO PUBLIC OPTION/SINGLE-PAYER


But let me take out some life insurance on ol' Harold.

Like MESSIAH -- I like EASY, FREE MONEY!!!

Harold, you IQ-91 -- of course, the public wants free medical care. Who the F wouldn't, you rube.

The question you can't get: WHO'S PAYING???

Good luck, repeating Logic 101. You need it.

Posted by: russpoter | September 25, 2009 6:09 PM | Report abuse

E-verify could become a very significant immigration enforcement weapon, as it’s shown to work extremely well? Opponents have used the courts in erroneous lawsuits as a delaying factor but failed to impress a Maryland federal judge. This application discloses unauthorized immigrants in the workplace, being continually modified in its operation as spreads into the business world. It now has been unleashed on government contractors and subcontractors to locate illegal foreign labor. We should reward those government public servants who have battled outside special interest groups for American workers. But denying elected office to those who tried to kill or weaken its capabilities. Americans should harass their politicians to enact E-Verify permanently and prepare its operational program offering many uses in the incessant law enforcement fight.

In credit practices it could determine a person’s right to buy any vehicle, if in the United Statesillegally. It could also disrupt radical organizations like ACORN that was instrumental in assisting foreign nationals buying house mortgages, which had a major impact in the real estate collapse. E-Verify should also be installed in financial institutions, to stop fraudulent transactions using bogus SS # or IRS ITIN loan identification numbers. E-Verify could help emergency rooms identify illegal immigrants using forged documents and enable law enforcement to track the employer. That business should be forced to pay for the person’s injury or treatment instead of the proverbial taxpayers. Schools, colleges could check new student admittances for their immigration status. The E-Verification identification system could accomplish numerous other extraction processes, in determining a person’s right to government benefits. In addition, I'm for Health Reform and public option for some family members. Illegal immigrants should be exempt, except for emergency hospital access.

DON'T LET E-VERIFY EXPIRE ON SEPTEMBER 30? CALL YOUR LAWMAKER AT 202-224-3121 AND DEMAND OTHER USES. E-VERIFY COULD HAVE A MAJOR IMPACT, IN THE ILLEGAL INVASION OF OUR COUNTRY. CUT-OFF ALL BENEFITS. INSIST ON RESCINDING THE BIRTHRIGHT LAW, APPLICABLE TO ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT MOTHERS. WE NEED NO NEW AMNESTY. WE NEED AMENDMENTS TO THE 1986 LAW FOR ENFORCEMENT, NOT WEAKEN IT. E-VERIFY COULD SAVE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS THAT IS BEING PAID OUT TO ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS IN SANCTUARY CITIES AND STATES. IN ADDITION SAY--NO--TO FOREIGN NATIONALS BEING COUNTED IN THE 2010 CENSUS. GOOGLE-- NUMBERSUSA, JUDICIAL WATCH & CAPSWEB FOR FACTS ON YOUR DOLLARS, STATISTICS, OVERPOPULATION, FAILING INFRASTRUCTURE AND CORRUPTION IN WASHINGTON.

Posted by: infinity555 | September 25, 2009 6:11 PM | Report abuse

LiberalBasher wrote:

"Public option over my dead body.

I don't own a gun, I will buy one if this goes into affect.

I never have understood milita's. I definatly will embrace them if this goes into affect.

public option equals civil war. I will be the first to arm myself to be a part of that war.

go for it, bring it on. Be warned, you will not need death panels if you put in a public option."
-------------------------------------------
I cannot help but think that such anger and wretchedness over a modest government program stems more from pent-up sexual energy than actual outrage or umbrage.

Perhaps LiberalBasher and all of the other right-wing e-hooligans should focus on the quality (and quantity) of their sex life.

Harboring this rage has brought you to the point of threatening people you don't even know.

Maybe some gentle and affectionate loving will help soothe the raucous beast within you.

Re-direct your anger; it's poisoning your mind and body.

Posted by: poitoueksophia | September 25, 2009 6:28 PM | Report abuse

Public option over my dead body.

I don't own a gun, I will buy one if this goes into affect.

I never have understood milita's. I definatly will embrace them if this goes into affect.

public option equals civil war. I will be the first to arm myself to be a part of that war.

go for it, bring it on. Be warned, you will not need death panels if you put in a public option.
============
You sound just like the southerners before the civil war. But just like the south you are out numbered and out gunned. Your best option is to turn the gun on yourself and commit suicide.

Posted by: Frazil | September 25, 2009 6:49 PM | Report abuse

We should go with a public option. Doctor's fees are out of control. INOVA Fairfax billed me $5,369.30 to circumcise my son. Thank God my wife and I can afford insurance - we ONLY ended up paying $845.60 of that bill.

---
Thats right, someone that saves your life should not make a decent living.

When your loved one dies because you got a cheap doctor, don't blame anyone but yourself.

Truthfully, I hope its you that dies at the hand of the cheapo. But, who cares.

As long as its a liberal first.

Hope you die slowly like Ted Kennedy.

Whats it matter. You will get your death pannels, staffed by underpaid people who are not qualified. Every death will be your fault and nobody else's.

Again, hope its you and all of your loved ones.

Die liberal. Or better yet.

Want my address? I live in ohio.

Want me to help you die?
Not a threat, just a fact. I don't want an underpaid doctor. I want one that knows he is worth every penny he charges.

fkn liberals. I hate your guts.

I am not racist. I am prejudice. I hate ALL liberals. Black, white, asian, ... what ever. men, women, young, old. doesn't matter. Your liberals. I hate your guts and everything you stand for.

The only good liberal is a fkn dead one and I will glady help do that when you take my life into your hands with your goverment run health care.

Again
die liberal

every one of you

die

Posted by: LiberalBasher | September 25, 2009 4:46 PM | Report abuse


Perhaps LiberalBasher is unaware that circumcision is not a lifesaving procedure.

Maybe a demonstration is in order?

Posted by: law1946 | September 25, 2009 6:51 PM | Report abuse

The strange thing about all these right-wing people and the GOP itself is that one of the politicians who made a career as an "anti-communist" -- Nixon -- was in favor of having health care similar to what is being proposed now...

Politics being what it is, of course, the GOP will continue to lie and spread fear and the "righteous-reich" wing mouthpieces like Beck and Limbaugh will also spread the lies and fear to create a firestorm of lies to prevent the average American from benefitting from health care reform.

They do this not because they really care about you and me, it's just to their own personal advantage to allow health care reform to happen.

Sad times, indeed, when lies trump the truth....

Posted by: abbydelabbey | September 25, 2009 6:58 PM | Report abuse

If 65% of Americans want the public option then as a democracy that is what America should have.

That some one such as LiberalBasher would rather bring the nation to violence than allow the poor of the nation to get the same level of care that every senator and congress delegate is entitled too; I can only say I am shocked.

When I read these Rabid posts I do not hear a Christian voice among them; instead I hear the screech of hatred of American democracy more akin to Al Qaeda, clearly the corrosive effect of Rush Limbaugh has a lot to answer for.

One cannot but ask are there dark forces within the GOP bent on dividing America as a pretext to succession and a second Civil War?

Posted by: walker1 | September 25, 2009 7:06 PM | Report abuse

FREE BOOZE VIA OBAMA

"If 65% of Americans want the public option then as a democracy that is what America should have."

FREE BOOZE

FREE DOPE

FREE SEX

FREE CIGARS

That's next, thanks to MESSIAH.

Posted by: russpoter | September 25, 2009 7:20 PM | Report abuse

Hm, hm, hm
Barack Hussein Obama
He cannot do wrong
To him our Rights belong
Barack Hussein Obama
Hm, hm, hm
He's our Fearless leader
He's Black, Muslim and strong
Barack Hussein Obama
Hm, hm, hm
America is good
Our President is even better
Barack Hussein Obama.

Posted by: sperrico | September 25, 2009 7:22 PM | Report abuse

Seriously, someone, W.Post?? L.Basher is either just stirring it up, or, is as dangerous as he sounds, either way he needs to be banned from this discussion site.

Along with that other guy who's in the news this wk., thinking he was parking a bomb in front of a federal building, he's a likely a follower of Beck/Hannity/Limbaugh. These people are brainwashed. I know - I live with one. And by the way, I AM a southerner. We are not ALL stupid. My husband was born and raised in NY city. So there. These nuts are everywhere.

Posted by: debsmyth | September 25, 2009 7:28 PM | Report abuse

An old boss of mine who's testified before the House of Representatives in the past told me that many of the people sitting in that chamber are not the sharpest tacks in the box. So, when you see elected officials engaging in sophmoric antics (displaying communist-looking posters of Obama while referencing ACORN) and consistently telling lies, you know where this is coming from. Just because someone got elected doesn't mean that they're very intelligent.

Posted by: ehperkins1971 | September 25, 2009 7:32 PM | Report abuse

I believe LiberalBashers comments constitute hate speech and the FBI should be made aware of this "loose cannon" and any others like him, liberal or conservative.

If the Washington Post wants to take the liberty of notifying the FBI, I fully encourage it.

Posted by: scadolph | September 25, 2009 7:34 PM | Report abuse

agree with public option, at first did not but it makes sense for all small businesses that currently provide health benefits to their employees. If a public option exists can drop health insurance for employees and save over $100,000 per year.

Posted by: kathymac1 | September 25, 2009 7:58 PM | Report abuse

The biggest fear of any Republican isn't the public option or socialism or any of their other no answers. They fear a government that could actually do something better and more efficiently than private business and they have made their careers based on making certain that can never happen.

Posted by: bcause | September 25, 2009 8:02 PM | Report abuse


Who's kidding who? Everybody knows that Medicare is the bottom of the barrel when it comes to health insurance. Just trying to find a doctor who will take it is a full-time job.

But, if you're out of work and can't afford $1,000/month for a commercial family policy (Heaven help you if one of your kids has asthma or something), Medicare is far far better than nothing.

After all, when you have no insurance, your only one emergency appendectomy away from bankruptcy.

And, if you don't think it can happen to you, think again.

..

Posted by: DEFJAX | September 25, 2009 8:07 PM | Report abuse

I am a conservative for the public option.

I would much rather be taxed by the government for the provision of services, than to have the government tell me I have no choice but to buy a product I don't want from a company I despise.

In my mind it is quite different to require that I buy automobile insurance if I drive, than to require I buy health insurance if I am alive.

If the government can require that I give my money directly to a despicable private company of their choosing than the next time a GM or an AIG or Lehmans is in trouble, the government can simply order me to buy a car, or an insurance policy, or a credit default swap.

Posted by: Don19 | September 25, 2009 8:18 PM | Report abuse

Public option over my dead body.
I don't own a gun, I will buy one if this goes into affect.
I never have understood milita's. I definatly will embrace them if this goes into affect.
public option equals civil war. I will be the first to arm myself to be a part of that war.
go for it, bring it on. Be warned, you will not need death panels if you put in a public option.

Posted by: LiberalBasher | September 25, 2009 4:31 PM
***********************************************************************************
DEMOCRACY! OVER MY DEAD BODY!

Posted by: ORNOT | September 25, 2009 8:38 PM | Report abuse

I cannot help but think that such anger and wretchedness over a modest government program stems more from pent-up sexual energy than actual outrage or umbrage.

Perhaps LiberalBasher and all of the other right-wing e-hooligans should focus on the quality (and quantity) of their sex life.

Harboring this rage has brought you to the point of threatening people you don't even know.

Maybe some gentle and affectionate loving will help soothe the raucous beast within you.

Re-direct your anger; it's poisoning your mind and body.

Posted by: poitoueksophia | September 25, 2009 6:28 PM

==========

Whole lot of self-loathing closet-cases is my guess.

Posted by: js_edit | September 25, 2009 8:38 PM | Report abuse

There is more disolution than ever from the Republican party, confusion & ignorance, Sara Palin & Rush. Do you really believe the American Majority is as stupid to vote for another confused Republican , Wake up

Posted by: alex10111 | September 25, 2009 8:41 PM | Report abuse

Yes, the PUBLIC OPTION is a great idea. And based on many conversations, the American people are behind it … especially middle class families. Sad that the right wing opposes it (and everything else) for selfish political motives. God forbid that the Democrats might get a little credit for doing good after their “leadership” gave us 8 years of war and a busted economy, eh?

Posted by: Limbaugh_is_a_big_fat_idiot | September 25, 2009 8:46 PM | Report abuse

It's nice to see the American people have finally woken up and realized that these health insurance companies are little more than legalized mafia skimming operations. They don't produce any good or service, they just act as middlemen between you and your provider, pocketing huge profits in the process. They are way less efficient than the government would be, judging by Medicare. And it's not hard to see why.

Medicare doesn't need to pay executives many millions of dollars a year in crazy salaries, and they don't need to spend billions producing insipid, pointless advertising to win your business away from the other mafia skimming operations.

DISSOLVE THE HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES. THAT IS THE ANSWER. Since that isn't politically feasible (they own Congress), we at least need a public option to rein in the craziness.

How about it, Congress? Are you with US, or are you with the insurance lobby? Now's your time to take sides. AND WE ARE WATCHING.

Posted by: B2O2 | September 25, 2009 9:19 PM | Report abuse

The gist of the thing is that handing over a captive market to a demonstrably predatory industry has everybody nervous. If your poll numbers are correct, they show a common sense reluctance to buy into a prima facie flawed reform strategy.

Posted by: george22_1999 | September 25, 2009 9:29 PM | Report abuse

"Who's kidding who? Everybody knows that Medicare is the bottom of the barrel when it comes to health insurance. Just trying to find a doctor who will take it is a full-time job." So says DEFJAX.

Sorry about that, chief. I've been on Medicare for almost 5 years, but only last winter did I really need it. And it was there: Lung biopsy (surgeon, anesthesiologist, 3 days in hospital), regular visits to pulmonologist, 4 days in hospital with pneumonia, once a week to pulmonary therapist, etc. all covered by Medicare with no problems. I'm in northern New Jersey, and have not had any problem finding doctors and specialists.

I did have to wait 10 hours in the ER to get a bed, but that is because people without insurance use ER's as PCP's and not only overload the system, but raise the costs for everyone else since they can't pay for it and they must be treated, by law. (Or maybe we should just let them die? After all, they are poor, and that is the most serious crime of all in our world, isn't it?) If you live somewhere like the good ol' American heartland where doctors have the true spirit of free enterprise (making money is the first priority) and can't get one to treat you, why don't you move to the big city? But then you'd have to live next door to Hispanics, Indians, blacks, and Chinese, like I do.

Whatever.

I have a sister and an aged mother, as well as several well-loved cousins and friends in Ohio. I really hope that Liberalbasher is far away from them. At first his rant was amusing, like some crazy old uncle at a party, but after a while he really loses his savor and starts to sound scary. And incoherent grunting gets boringly old pretty fast. Still, I wouldn't want to see him banned. Freedom of expression implies freedom to make an a$$ of yourself, too.

Posted by: jprfrog | September 25, 2009 9:41 PM | Report abuse

PUBLIC OPTION - YES
SINGLE PAYER - YES

Change Accounting Rules back long term investment, pre-Reagan, than short term shareholder dominant accounting rules.

AND Reinsstate The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933.

Doing so .. all this will happen a lot faster.

Fei Hu

Posted by: Fei_Hu | September 25, 2009 9:52 PM | Report abuse

Thing is that now I can get a test or exam I need or an appointment in a reasonable time at a reasonable cost. So I'm not seeing how any of the bills are going to benefit me. Nor do I see when I start under Medicare in a few years the benefit. I'm not willing to jeoprodize my health for anybody else.

As far as the public option goes I feel it's just a precursor to elimination of insurance compsnies or cause for employers to drop coverage. Once the government has control they'll just drive coverage down for "budgetary" reasons.

Posted by: ronjaboy | September 25, 2009 10:17 PM | Report abuse

Harold, you're missing the point. The Democrats in the Senate and House that oppose the public option are not responding to the majority who elected them and are in favor of the option. They are responding to the health industry who are paying in to their fund raising machines. The sad tale here is that voters really have no recourse to punish these cynical hypocrites. Run a leftist against them in the primary, and a Republican will win in the general election. Don't run against them, and they stay in office and get away with giving the equivalent of a finger salute to their constituents.

Posted by: mattislavin | September 25, 2009 10:38 PM | Report abuse

liberalbasher
You go right ahead and arm yourself if the public option is in the health care reform, one less sick repub to deal with. I have just about had my fill of you sick conservatives, keep talking violence and you just might get what you want.

Posted by: shipfreakbo214 | September 25, 2009 10:40 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Meyerson writes,

"Does a 65-percent-to-26-percent margin nonetheless give the Democrats the ability to defend the public option and actually win support for doing so?"
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Actually, Sir, the answer is, "No". The Congress of the US which makes and passes the laws of this great land has every entrance to this august institution barred to the common people. Every door to our representative democracy opens only if you have the access card. How do you get an access card? You contribute mega bucks to them, the more bucks, the better the access card. The card comes in different colors but the gold card is the one most coveted. Ask any Republican. They'll tell you how to get one.


The rich, the wealthy, the corporations... they stole our country a long time ago. Now, try to get it back, if you dare.

Posted by: flamingliberal | September 25, 2009 10:56 PM | Report abuse

Fei Hu:

I have enjoyed your posts in the past. You've not been posting. Hope you are well. Glad you are back.

Posted by: flamingliberal | September 25, 2009 11:03 PM | Report abuse

Many people support the public option, especially for the lower income people who will never be able to afford private insurance premiums regardless of tax breaks and such. I am talking about those people who make too much to qualify for medicaid or other government programs, those in the area in between. Some sort of public option kin to Medicare is definitely needed; however, at this time this country cannot afford a bag of peanuts without borrowing money from Red China. I am a conservative who hopes somebody will clear the Washington D.C. rust out of their brains and meet our problems head on with practical measures. Taking on another trillion dollar project at this time is not feasible. Someone must realize that if we don't get out of this mess brought on by both Democrats and Republicans in past years, the entire economy will collapse and then we will have nothing--no medicare, no medicaid, no social security, no money for defense, no money to rapay the massive deficit, there will be no money for farm subsidies which will mean higher prices for food, there will be no money for food stamps, no money for flood control, no money for anything. I want everyone to have affordable insurance available, but we must get out of the economic pit first. Washington politicians need to get their heads out of their back ends and address the economy first, then they can take action on new costly programs.

Posted by: johntu | September 25, 2009 11:04 PM | Report abuse

LiberalBasher: "Hatred is like taking poison and expecting that your enemy will die."

(Apparently certain entire cultures buy into this belief...)

Posted by: viennatrip | September 25, 2009 11:21 PM | Report abuse

The real success story has been the right wingers equating socialism with communism. They aren't the same folks! Having the government, as opposed to the private sector, providing social infrastructure like roads, education, health and utilities such as water and electricity is socialism. That isn't the same as communism where the ownership of all property belongs to the state, but the big corporates and the right wing shills for the corporates would like you to believe that it is. That's because when private companies own the infrastructure, as they have increasingly done since Reagan and Thatcher privatized everything they could lay their hands on, those companies have a license to print money. The health industry is just one example of how lucrative infrastructure, such as health, can be for private corporations and how disasterous it is for the end users, the community.

Posted by: ScottFromOz | September 25, 2009 11:37 PM | Report abuse

I wouldn't worry too much about liberalbasher. Anyone with that much anger inside him is probably headed for one mother of a heart attack or stroke. If there's any justice, when he tries to get treatment, his insurance company will deny the claim because he neglected to disclose a preexisting case of acne.

Posted by: rashomon | September 25, 2009 11:59 PM | Report abuse

Based on past experience, I agree that the Democratic party as an entity doesn't have the backbone to stand for or by much of anything anymore. They used to.

Even now, with 65 percent of the people strongly backing them, and with good majorities in both houses, they just can't dredge up the courage to go for it. They've gotten used to getting away with letting their base down. They've done it time and time again without having to pay too heavy a price. That changed in 1994 when Democrats backed down on healthcare reform ala Clinton and lost control as a result.

You can feel something different in the air this time around though. After 8 years of the Bush administration, the Democratic base is in no mood to just let this one go. Ironicly, this might not be the case if the Obama administration had launched investigations into Bush era lawbreaking. The administration's lack of a response to calls for investigation has left the base angry and unwilling to give more away.

The Public option has become much more than just an option to allow consumers to have a choice. It's come to be a symbol for "real reform". It's also and maybe more importantly a test of Democrats backbones. Failing this test would be a true disaster for Democrats. Passing it is their only option public or private.

Posted by: fredfawcett | September 26, 2009 12:06 AM | Report abuse

Look. I don't have 1,300 plus different private health insurers to pick from. In truth, a lot of insurance at certain company's is 'company' insurance. ... So that narrows it sown to one. ... One so called 'choice'. Big whoop, ... not.
Something like the idea of a public option is the way to go, ... for goodness sakes. 'We' have three golf carts roving around Mars as I type this. ... And one of them is 'stuck' in the 'mud'.

Posted by: deepthroat21 | September 26, 2009 12:22 AM | Report abuse

WoPo says: "User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site...Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site."
******
Really? When?

Posted by: JD15 | September 26, 2009 1:06 AM | Report abuse

A friend sent me an e-mail this week with the published total compensation package of the CEO of UnitedHealth in 2005: in excess of $100 million dollars. My friend then said his weekly deductions from his paycheck for his health insurance with UnitedHealth are 6 times what his weekly deductions for income taxes. He is 56 years old and makes about $45 K/year.
Anyone who doesn't think that the competition with for-profit insurance companies provided by a public option would be a healthy (no pun intended) thing for this country likely has a cool-room-temperature IQ.
And LiberalBasher, I'm not very fond of you and your ilk either. So there.

Posted by: OhioDon | September 26, 2009 1:23 AM | Report abuse

I suspect that many of the obese Americans I see, people who will not or cannot take care of their own bodies, are without insurance. I wonder how these people who--remember--cannot be bothered to go to the gym, treat their own bodies like garbage cans, like cars to be repaired when they break--how will these people respond to the offer of free or subsidized health care? Will they abuse it the way they abuse themselves? Ironically, the same states have the greatest percentage of obese people, the greatest percentage of uninsured people, and the greatest percentage of dittoheads. Just sayin'

Posted by: scientist1 | September 26, 2009 1:30 AM | Report abuse

"Of course, if Democrats are utterly spineless, having their back yields nothing"

BRAVO!

Posted by: JohnDebba | September 26, 2009 1:35 AM | Report abuse

"Public option over my dead body.

I don't own a gun, I will buy one if this goes into affect.

I never have understood milita's. I definatly will embrace them if this goes into affect.

public option equals civil war. I will be the first to arm myself to be a part of that war.

go for it, bring it on. Be warned, you will not need death panels if you put in a public option."
---------------------------------------
Wonder if this poster's health insurance company covers mental health treatment because this person is greatly in need of it

Posted by: tansytoo | September 26, 2009 1:50 AM | Report abuse

way cool, I hope the FBI is reading some of these charming postings like LiberalBasher, threatening "death panels."

Posted by: realadult | September 26, 2009 2:01 AM | Report abuse

WAKE UP LIBERAL SOCIALISTS, YOU ARE EITHER DECEIVED OR YOU ARE IGNORANT!!!!

The Medicare system of health care is outrageously expensive, going bankrupt, and is unsustainable with the baby boomers just beginning to tap into it. Obama knows he must make massive cuts in the costs of Medicare health care for ANY government-run universal health care to be viable.

IT IS AN OUTRIGHT LIE TO SAY THE CURRENT MEDICARE TYPE SERVICES WILL BE AVAILABLE TO ALL CITIZENS WITH A "SINGLE-PAYER" GOVERNMENT-RUN HEALTH CARE.

Obama wanted to have a rush vote on the "Health Care Reform" Bill and sign it into law before the August recess and before people can actually read it and examine the consequences. I can imagine what he may have said in his staff meeting: 'We must sign it into law before the people actually know what's going on'.

Obama explained his plans quite clearly when he said wanted a "single-payer" (government-controlled) health care system and it would have to be incrementally phased in "10, 15 or 20" years under the nose of stupid Americans. Of course, the first step is the PUBLIC OPTION as competition for private insurance companies and unfairly subsidized by the taxpayer. Knock the private companies out of business and, before you know it, all that is left is a money-sucking, inefficient government bureaucracy ran by life-controlling elitists.


Posted by: JimMF | September 26, 2009 2:40 AM | Report abuse

The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter and/or reading most of these posts.

Posted by: mtbunker | September 26, 2009 2:44 AM | Report abuse

For all the Republican whining having "family values" and all the embracing of "Christian beliefs" there seem to be a hellacious number of them running around with hate messages about anyone who is not like them. Fear-mongering their own base brings about rants as those of liberalbasher, who incidentally can't spell one whit. Good grief, they must be damned proud of themselves with a "base" like that!

Posted by: cmkramer | September 26, 2009 3:15 AM | Report abuse

Sorry Rahm sold the "Public Option" to the Hospital Lobby for $155 billion pieces of silver.

Killing drug "Re-Importation" and "Price Negotiation" went to Billy Tauzin and the Drug Lobbyists for a mere $80 billion, and insures the doughnut hole stays open forever.


Posted by: cautious | September 26, 2009 4:11 AM | Report abuse

It should be obvious to anyone that higher taxes, and a more "socialist" approach, to solving the daunting problems of the U.S., as it enters the 21st Century, is the only way to effectively deal with the possible decline of the American Dream.
Capitalism, and stingy dispensation of federal funds, and frankly, the idiocy of always saying: we're not going to tax you more, has had decades and decades of chances to work. The fact is, the country's infrastructure, education, health, environment, defense, national intelligence (i.e., brain power), innovation, etc., have all slipped as we "returned more and more money to the average American." The Average American has become far more stingy and uncaring for the 50 million without health insurance, for instance.
Even with Katrina (see the excellent documentary, "Trouble The Wate") in our recent memory, it appears a selfish, self-absorbed core wants to withhold insurance, and a reduction in terror and anxiety for 50 million of our brothers and sisters. A more socialist state will actually bring us into a new paradigm of excellence in the 21st Century. Either that, or we split apart into:
The 2% with enormous wealth and assets;
Another 50-60% teetering on the edge of bankruptcy and homelessness;
Another 30 something % who are below the poverty line and just hanging on ...
The richest of the rich are growing richer all the time. The rest of us just break even, or are losing ground steadily. That's nuts.
Perhaps we should vote on these question, in a national referendum:
Do we choose to drive farther down the road towards becoming a 'Banana Republic?' If so, should we speed up, or slow down, but nonetheless, pretend we can go on never raising taxes, and expect different results, as a nation?

Posted by: zennhead614wheatland | September 26, 2009 4:29 AM | Report abuse

65% favor the public option? Was this poll taken in Venezuela? Every major poll (other than the Times/CBS) has the majority of Americans opposed to the public option. If you want a peak into reality, check out Rasmussen.

Maybe Meyerson meant to say that 65% of socialists support the public option?

Let’s get real: Congressmen know how to read polls, and they aren't opposed to the public option because 65% of Americans love it.

Posted by: LukeHanson | September 26, 2009 4:31 AM | Report abuse

JimMF wrote:[WAKE UP LIBERAL SOCIALISTS, YOU ARE EITHER DECEIVED OR YOU ARE IGNORANT!!!!

The Medicare system of health care is outrageously expensive, going bankrupt, and is unsustainable with the baby boomers just beginning to tap into it. Obama knows he must make massive cuts in the costs of Medicare health care for ANY government-run universal health care to be viable.

IT IS AN OUTRIGHT LIE TO SAY THE CURRENT MEDICARE TYPE SERVICES WILL BE AVAILABLE TO ALL CITIZENS WITH A "SINGLE-PAYER" GOVERNMENT-RUN HEALTH CARE. "]
===================================
If you'd take the small amount of time required to educate yourself, you'd see the opposite is true.

All other industrialized, advanced, nations have a Universal healthcare system. They ALL provide this at a cost much LOWER than our current costs.
Japan, for example, spends 8% of their GDP on Universal, high quality care. We spend 16% on much lower quality care and have people who are insured going bankrupt every day over unaffordable care.

If we matched Japans 8% budget, we'd save approximately $1 Trillion per year.

NON-profit insurance, mixed with a public option is the proper solution at this time.

The Republicans KNOW if people can begin to afford care, stop becoming disabled for lack of care and stop losing their homes over care...this would be wildly popular solution.

They can't afford this political success from the Democrats. We need to let them know, unless they work for US, they will lose at the polls.
Republicans: Stop LYING and get out of the way of progress.

Posted by: JohnInMI | September 26, 2009 5:13 AM | Report abuse

FOR-profit insurance provides NO service that couldn't be provided better by NON-profit insurance.

If the American people SAVE on their healthcare, that money is available for other needs. There is no logic to suggest that removing the profit motivated insurance companies would have ANY detrimental effect on our economy. Workers employed at non-profit insurance companies are still employed. Doctors, Nurses and hospitals paid by non-profit insurance companies are still paid.

There is NO logical reason to stop this progress.

It's all about profits and Politics. Period.

Posted by: JohnInMI | September 26, 2009 5:24 AM | Report abuse

This site, like many others, demonstrates the right wingnuts' capacity to bully, threaten, distort, and create baseless fears. Liberal Basher and his threat to arm himself and start a civil war are typical. Maybe he'll just stomp his little feet and hold his breath until his face turns blue instead of killing people because he might not get his way.

I thought that the circus-like August townhalls might end up backfiring on the wing nuts. Americans don't like extremism and these meetings reminded too many people of Sarah Palin rallies, without the Valentino and Armani.

The public option is not a government takeover of health care. It's an option that will stimulate competition by offering a less expensive choice. If Medicare can be run on with a 3.5% administrative cost, why should we subsidize health insurance companies whose administrative costs are running around 30% and whose profits increased 400% between 2002 and 2007?

Posted by: BrooklynDemocrat | September 26, 2009 5:37 AM | Report abuse

The public demands the public option.

Physicians favor the public option.

Congress is owned by the health insurance lobby so they "don't think it fits our culture".

GIVE US THE PUBLIC OPTION OR FACE RE-ELECTION WITHOUT US!

Posted by: onestring | September 26, 2009 5:40 AM | Report abuse

THE FACT THAT MANY IN AMERICA, ESPECIALLY IN OUR NATION'S MAJOR CITIES ARE ++++ CONNECTED TO THE SEWER SYSTEM ++++ FOR THE PURPOSE OF CARRYING AWAY TOILET WASTE .....

DOES ++++ NOT ++++ MAKE THOSE SO CONNECTED SOCIALISTS.

-------------------------------------------
THE FACT THAT PEOPLE RECOGNIZE A NEED FOR A MEANINGFUL KIND OF HEALTH CARE THAT THEY CAN AFFORD IN TIMES OF NEED

ALSO DOES ++++ NOT ++++ MAKE THEM SOCIALISTS.

-------------------------------------------
THE FACT THAT PEOPLE MAY CHOOSE TO RIDE THE BUS OR SUBWAY TO WORK

DOES ++++ NOT ++++ MAKE THEM SOCIALISTS EITHER.

-------------------------------------------
CAN WE STOP PUTTING LABELS ON EVERYONE AND GET ON WITH THE JOB OF RUNNING THE COUNTRY IN AN ECONOMICALLY EFFECTIVE AND MEANINGFUL MANNER.

-------------------------------------------
NEXT THOSE WHO USE TOILET PAPER INSTEAD OF THE NEW JAPANESE 'WASH AND BLOW DRY TOILETS' WILL BE CALLED SOCIALISTS TOO.

AND YET THEY DO NOT SHARE THE PAPER ---- OH YEA, THAT'S CALLED A MORTGAGE !!!

Posted by: brucerealtor@gmail.com | September 26, 2009 5:44 AM | Report abuse

You hit the nail on the head.

America has had creeping socialism ever since FDR in the 1930s. It's a Democrat dream.

Enough already. It's time to stop it cold.

The more socialized America becomes, the weaker it gets. When there's a free lunch available, many will grab it even if it's bean soup.

Look at (once) Great Britain. Ever since the socialists took over that country, the British lion has lost its teeth, one by one.

Now it's a feeble, old has-been. A Euro-weenie wannabe.

Is that what the ObamaNation has in store for America???

Yes! There's no doubt about that.

Posted by: battleground51 | September 26, 2009 6:13 AM | Report abuse

The whole socialist rant coming from the right is, to me, bizarre. They seem quite content to bring big government to Iraq and Afghanistan. I cannot imagine a greater intrusion into the lives of Americans than forcing them to war. I cannot imagine anything more paternalistic than invading a country to bring it democracy.

We do these things to prevent Americans from being killed or injured in a terrorist attack. But conservatives object to paying for the care of Americans who are ill, injured, and dying every day.

Why do they care more for the Democracy in Iraq than the poor in America? With limited funds available, why do they choose to spend money there and not here?

Posted by: Neal3 | September 26, 2009 6:44 AM | Report abuse

I vote that we pay for it with a hefty tax on gasoline. Something between $1 and $2 a gallon. That way, everyone will be paying part of their own health care bill. It would also encourage conservation and more exercise.

Posted by: hipshot | September 26, 2009 6:47 AM | Report abuse

If most want a public option, and most whom I know do not, then they should petition their STATE politicians and let the states craft their own plans and PAY for these plans at the state level. I strongly oppose our money-printing, strong-arm-taxing Federal Government getting any more involved in our health care payment and delivery system than they are presently. Everyone knows this is going to be a budget busting quagmire. If people in North Carolina want public insurance as an option, fine, let us pay for it; I see no reason why citizens in Montana or North Dakota or California, etc., should pay for insurance outside their state borders. Reform is needed to help with pre-existing conditions and costs, but it should not be done on the national level. At what point will the Federal Government start covering our other "needs", such as food? We are 50 individual states, let's remain that way, it has worked well for over 200 years.

Posted by: carolina-born | September 26, 2009 7:02 AM | Report abuse

Vague plans tend to poll better than concrete proposals. We'll see how popular the "public option" remains once voters learn the price tag.

Posted by: VirginiaIndependent | September 26, 2009 7:19 AM | Report abuse

I respect those who actually have a thought that came out of their own heads, but the people parroting the right wing media make me both fearful and sick to my stomach. Instead of keeping government out of business, we should all be worrying about keeping business out of government. Too many of our legislators, both federal and state, are in the pockets of big business.

Posted by: Denny_98 | September 26, 2009 7:26 AM | Report abuse

Many interesting comments here. I oppose any direct involvement of government in health care. I admire the health care industry. I take several pharmaceuticals that have enabled a longer and more pleasant life. They aren't cheap, but what price is too much for enjoying my grandchildren for an additional ten years? Besides, they may be able to develop even better drugs with all that money I send them. Despite all the claims about greedy health care companies, I invested in them and generally didn't see much profit. I watch Americans ship their money off to Asia to pay for electronic trinkets and then borrow from Asia to pay the health care bills. Why not just let the industry grow in quality and take a larger share of the gnp? That way, less of our money will go to the trinkets from Asia and we can market our great health care products.

Oh, and in case nobody has figured it out, liberalbasher is actually a liberal.

Posted by: hipshot | September 26, 2009 7:31 AM | Report abuse

Mr. LiberalBasher,

Thank you for being willing to comment to the Washington Post. However, please understand that the truth is the truth, despite what the motivation of those the won the election are. I believe they really do want to punish achievers and redistribute the largess of our society to those who by their definition are "deserving" from their world view. Unfortunately, the people you are talking about won the last two elections, so your only choice is to follow the health care "reform" and learn how to use it effectively for your own needs. That is what people learned years ago with respect to public school systems, government employment, and social security. Please understand that this health care debate has been around for decades and is not going away regardless of what the re-distributors think. Real "unanticipated" problems are going to arise simply because of the arrogance of the winners of the last two elections and those who supported them. In other words, please be patient and understand that the error in their thoughts will eventually expose themselves. Please understand that likely part of the strategy of those liberals that you bash (perhaps the Washington Post) is to expose your frustrated comments as a way of categorizing, demeaning, and dismissing all of us that don't align with today's prevalent world view as reflected in the last two national elections.

Unfortunately we will have to endure the pain as the health care redistribution process unfolds. Most likely one of the side effects, as is the case with public schools, will be that health care in an area will start to become a component of real estate prices. Over time people will move away from "bad" areas with respect to health care and move to "good" areas. Government policies will try to mitigate this with massive spending in "bad" areas, however such policies will have a minimal effect. In other words, you might have to think twice about where you live. Perhaps you will end up needing to move elsewhere as the bad policies reveal themselves.

Posted by: raym39 | September 26, 2009 7:38 AM | Report abuse

Why is Kent Conrad opposed to a public option in health care? Because he's from a Red State and doesn't want to lose his job! What could be more obvious.

Posted by: Orion838 | September 26, 2009 8:00 AM | Report abuse

Some continue to wonder about the "core" issues of healthcare reform. I see this as the core: It's estimated 45 thousand Americans die prematurely each year because they lack healthcare. 45 thousand. We could also talk about it being the most expensive healthcare system in the world yet no longer giving close to the best results. We could talk about people having to go overseas to afford life saving or life improving surgery or treatment such as hip or knee replacement. We could talk about all those who don't have access to prenatal care and what that means for the child after he or she is born.

This is the healthcare system Republicans call the best in the world. The world and Americans know better. Only the ditto heads believe the Republican nonsense. They confuse liberty with license - the license to profit from the suffering of their fellow Americans.

Posted by: kcbob | September 26, 2009 8:00 AM | Report abuse

Watching from Canada, I am amazed and bewildered by the health-care debate in the U.S.

All this talk of costs for one thing: America spends about 16% of annual GDP on a health care system that leaves tens of millions of its citizens not covered, while Canada spends just 9% of annual GDP on a health care system that covers all its citizens.

Since returning to Canada in 1974 (after 12 years in the US), despite periods of unemployment and low-wage jobs, I've never had to worry about paying for doctor's visits and hospital stays (which included two bouts of surgery).

Posted by: GaryPeschell | September 26, 2009 8:08 AM | Report abuse

Whatever we do, it will be an experiment. However, if we instantiate a big new government bureacracy, it becomes an irreversible expermint. If we don't like the result (maybe the unintended consequences), tough luck.

Posted by: hipshot | September 26, 2009 8:09 AM | Report abuse

LiberalBasher, you have been reported. You are a very angry individual who obviously needs help. No one wants to hurt you, please desist in your rants and threats.

Posted by: swatkins1 | September 26, 2009 8:20 AM | Report abuse

In my previous posting I mentioned that a big government footprint in health care is an irreversible experiment. It looks like most posters here favor that approach. However, note that burning fossil fuels and increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide is also an irreversible experment (at least over the short term). How many of those same posters are against the environmental irreversible experiment?

Posted by: hipshot | September 26, 2009 8:23 AM | Report abuse

People call them 'Death Panels" but, in fact, they are concerned that any bill passed will include a "health commission" which will determine the "most cost effective" treatment for each illness or condition that is covered. The problem most people have is that this treats a group, not an individual and there is no such living entity as a group. There are only individuals when it comes to medicine. Requiring that everyone with a particular problem be treated with identical medical care is actually going to cause thousands of deaths. Also, there is no indication from the past that any program run by a government agency has ever been less expensive than a privately run one. It only adds highly paid middle men to the mix. Even schools in this country were better at educating children before the government stepped in and made taxpayer funded schools mandatory in the 1920s. Toll roads are better maintained than state maintained roads. Honest people realize that there was a reason that the Constitution allowed taxes only for national security.

Posted by: tenshi1 | September 26, 2009 8:32 AM | Report abuse

in a socialist America, that which you own belongs to all of us, meyerson...
are you on board with that...

Posted by: DwightCollins | September 26, 2009 8:45 AM | Report abuse

pardon my cynasism, but what would you expect the majority of people to say if asked: "how do you feel about receiving free health care?"

Unfortunately, the perception among many of our citizens is that Medicare comes free. Many citizens refuse to connect the dots and understand that Medicare is an earned benefit payed for by employer and worker over a lifetime of work and not an entitlement program which somehow mysteriously appears out of government largesse. Or that there are limits on Medicare.

This entire health care debate has been conducted with too much disinformation and appeals to short term greed and self interest. This kind of survey and Mr. Meyerson's analysis is another example of how supporters of "reform" want to appeal to the uneducated and uninformed in our society who really do believe there is a free lunch. Or more accurately, they can have a free lunch if they continue to support elected officals who are willing to redistribute income and borrow into infinity to pay for that lunch.

The only logical and sustainable path to health care cost reduction (which is fundamental to any concept of "reform") is to ask every stakeholder in the process to take a haircut, including those that provide the service and those who receive it. Continuing to hold out "reform" as the magic bullet to curgbing health care costs and, in the process, strongly inferring reform means more health care for less money is just another mind trick which keeps focusing the public in the wrong direction. And it is the reason why the "public option' absent numerous other modifications to the health care system will end up being another massive and unaffordable entitlement program.

Posted by: bobfbell | September 26, 2009 9:03 AM | Report abuse

Socialism is beloved by American leftists from coast to coast. What socialism America now has was brought to you by the Democrats starting with FDR.

They can't get enough of the socialistic stuff. The ObamaNation is merely the newest chapter in the long and failed history of worldwide socialism.

The best and most efficient socialists were the NAZIs. National Socialists. They honed socialism to a fine edge.

The least successful socialist society of recent history seems to be Fidel's Cuba.

The one in between has to be the "evil empire", the U.S.S.R. The Union of Soviet Socialist Republic. It experienced a long slow death.

They that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

If America is truly a great nation, it will throws the Obama/Pelosi bums out before we are forced into deja vu all over again.

Posted by: battleground51 | September 26, 2009 9:14 AM | Report abuse

It's lovely to see those on the right talking about fiscal responsibility. Finally. After 29 years and finally losing power. That seems to be the only time Republicans and the radical right talk about fiscal responsibility.

Under Reagan and Bush 1, the deficit rose 5 trillion. Under Bush 2, another 5 trillion.

Medicare was made less fiscally solvent under Bush 2.

Social Security was not dealt with.

Healthcare was allowed to drift, grow more expensive and cover fewer Americans.

And the economy went to Helena Handbasket.

Candidly, I'm surprised you guys and gals who support the GOP don't finally own up to the embarrassingly bad job you did of managing the economy, healthcare and our social programs. Without admitting what you got wrong, why would anyone think you'll get it right if you're given the power and the opportunity again?

Posted by: kcbob | September 26, 2009 9:15 AM | Report abuse

23% of the high school students in Oklahoma didn't know who the first president of the United States - the "father of our country" was. It's not too hard to understand why a certain percentage of people believe in "death panels" and don't support the public option and universal health care. They use words like "socialism," "communism," and "fascism" without understanding the concepts. The Democrats have a majority for reason. They'd better get the job done or they'll be out of power again.

Posted by: MNUSA | September 26, 2009 9:34 AM | Report abuse

No, we do not live in a democracy. our founding fathers had disdain for democracy. We have a republic.
Just because 'everyone wants it' doesn't mean we should do it. Most people watch American Idol but don't watch the news. Does that mean that we should abolish the news, cause, well, american idol is more popular?

Medicare has EVERY SINGLE taxpayer paying an exhorbitant amount of money into the system to subsidize it. AND doctors don't get enough, in any case, to pay their bills from it. HOW IS THAT WORKING?

The govt doesn't care about your health care. If they did, they would not be tying this bill to the horrible system of employer sponsored health care. They wouldn't be creating silly rules

They would be opening up clinics and starting to give people health care. But they're not. They're wanting to entrench us in a system that is terrible, and they will watch it implode. Then they'll come by and say: i'm from the government, I'm here to help. No, they just want you to depend on them for everything.
Not something I would like.

Posted by: atlmom1234 | September 26, 2009 9:34 AM | Report abuse

This country would be a better place without republicans.

Posted by: boblund1 | September 26, 2009 9:36 AM | Report abuse

LiberalBasher wrote:

Public option over my dead body.

I don't own a gun, I will buy one if this goes into affect.

I never have understood milita's. I definatly will embrace them if this goes into affect.

public option equals civil war. I will be the first to arm myself to be a part of that war.

go for it, bring it on. Be warned, you will not need death panels if you put in a public option.
-----------------------------------------
This is just crazy talk by someone who has a poor grasp of the English language. Crazy talk doesn't convince anyone of your point of view, it just makes them wish you'd take your pills regularly.

Posted by: MNUSA | September 26, 2009 9:44 AM | Report abuse

Me thinks Mr Myerson pulled his poll numbers out of his rectum. While he castigates "conservatives" as being stupid, he also fails to point out that a goodly number of Democrats do not agree with the public option either. Actually, 95% of so-called poll numbers are made up on the spot, which makes his article worthless.

Posted by: GordonShumway | September 26, 2009 9:46 AM | Report abuse

"They fear a government that could actually do something better and more efficiently than private business and they have made their careers based on making certain that can never happen."

I'm no Republican, BUT PLEASE RE READ WHAT YOU WROTE. Then Name one program that the government runs that is better and more efficient.

Posted by: JDB1 | September 26, 2009 10:06 AM | Report abuse

America is taking it's socialism in small but ever increasing doses. Doses administered by Democrats and heavily sugared to make it go down easy.

Just like the tiny doses of arsenic given to Napolean by a supposedly benevolent friend. The great man slowly and unwittingly expired.

Have you noticed that since post WWII America has slowly grown weak and tired? Following in the footsteps of (once) Great Britain. Our socialist "friends" are administering the "cure".

Will we continue to expire??

Posted by: battleground51 | September 26, 2009 10:08 AM | Report abuse

FORCE HAROLD INTO PUBLIC OPTION/SINGLE-PAYER


But let me take out some life insurance on ol' Harold.

Like MESSIAH -- I like EASY, FREE MONEY!!!

Harold, you IQ-91 -- of course, the public wants free medical care. Who the F wouldn't, you rube.

The question you can't get: WHO'S PAYING???

Good luck, repeating Logic 101. You need it.

Posted by: russpoter | September 26, 2009 10:11 AM | Report abuse

FREE BOOZE VIA OBAMA

"If 65% of Americans want the public option then as a democracy that is what America should have."

FREE BOOZE

FREE DOPE

FREE SEX

FREE CIGARS

That's next, thanks to MESSIAH.

Posted by: russpoter | September 26, 2009 10:13 AM | Report abuse

Poll me on my desire for a comforable life where my food, shelter and medical care is provided and because I don't work, I'm free to do as I please (with a nice little spending allowance), sounds good to me! May I have your credit card Harold, please?

Posted by: MikeMcLamara | September 26, 2009 10:18 AM | Report abuse

In defense of the Public Option, Senator Rockefeller said that the administrator won't operate out of buildings with marble. I would add that those buildings are already paid for by the taxpayers and won't house CEO's with over 20 millions yearly pay, no dividends and summer retreats for boards.

The ferocious attack against the Public Option is based in a guilty complex of private insurers that know their profits in danger when common sense sinks in the minds of the public in general. No one wants a CEO's in the Fire Department, or in FEMA or in the Public Education. Money from taxpayers for Health Care should be invested ONLY in better Health Care!

Posted by: jorgemrn2 | September 26, 2009 10:19 AM | Report abuse

The voices of the radical right wing crazies are trying to rewrite history. Obama took office 9-10 months ago. He was left with two mismanaged wars and an economy on the verge of depression thanks to our Republican friends.

Now the R's in in nonstop complain,lie, and deny mode. Just like they managed the country. Only a small minority of crazies with fictional grievences want to go back to Republican mismanagement and lies. The Republicians are strong, wrong, and everything they touched failed at the waste of lives and treasure that will never be recovered. Have they no shame?

Posted by: fare777 | September 26, 2009 10:26 AM | Report abuse

"... 26 percent of respondents said they opposed the public option. But a whopping 65 supported it."

No kidding!

But that isn't going to stop the "K" Street Lobbyists from spreading lies about the bills, or for that matter, keep Congress from accepting "bribes" from those lobbyists in order to kill these bills.

So once again -- that 65% gets screwed again!

What else is new?


Posted by: helloisanyoneoutthere | September 26, 2009 10:29 AM | Report abuse

It is likely the members of congress did their own poll and the results were different. Showing one poll which may favor the author of this article is misleading. In the medical field they verify results of trials. Does anyone know why they do this? So the author of this article must think that members of congress are stupid. Not if they want to keep their job. Still people in congress do depend on experts in the field and make their decision on the imput they receive. Likely the poll the author mentions had little bearing on the decision made.

Posted by: artg | September 26, 2009 10:30 AM | Report abuse

I just returned to life in the US after living in Beijing for almost five years. At age 69 one reason I returned is because I thought as I grew older I might need more medical attention and I knew I couldn't use my Medicare coverage in China. Just after I returned I scheduled a routine physical so I could get a prescriptions for the medications I had been taking for several years. Metformin and Tennormin, I believe they are called, which I had been taking for high blood pressure and type 2 diabetes.In China I didn't need a prescription and my last prescription was from a California doctor and I now live in Central Illinois.
I didn't know what Medicare would cover. Shortly after my physical, which included a check of my blood pressure, a short interview and blood and urine test I got a bill for $325. Not covered by Medicare. The prescriptions, however, were covered. I had a similar physical two years ago in Beijing. It cost me $8. In Beijing I was able to choose from having a physical as a "regular" patient at a cost of about $2, or choosing to be a VIP patuent for $8.
My doctor in Beijing was at a beautiful, modern hospital, spoke English and was very thorough. The exam included blood and urine tests a chest xray and an EKG.

I am now planning to return to Beijing. I have learned that my Medicare only covers part of any medical expense I might need and that medicare supplement policies are too expensive for a person living on social security. In Beijing not only can I live well on my social security benefits I can work as many hours as I want teaching. In Beijing I can make $20. an hour teaching English or if I,as a retired lawyer, want to teach legal subjects in Beijing I can make as much as $55. an hour.

Beijing is a great place to live even though the weather can be too hot in the Summer and too cold in the winter. The air quality is said to be bad but it didn't seem that bad. The traffic is terrible but taxis are cheap and Beijing has a great subway and bus system.

Both the US and China are "socialist" countries but unlike the US when the Chinese government wants to do something they can do it. On the other hand the US government is totally unable to provide Americans with a health care system that works for everyone. The US also can't seem to stay out of costly and useless wars.

Posted by: jimeglrd8 | September 26, 2009 10:30 AM | Report abuse

The fundamental joke is the entire argument. For essentially we live in a communist dictatorship and these people are fighting the fight of the communist system. When the government sets rates and returns, that's de-facto communism, regardless whatever the people want to call it. And that is what all this talk about safety-nets, "insurance", "mandatory taxes" and "income caps" is all about. Communism.

In the end this is all about a bunch of whiners whining about what sort of communism they will actually have. All while denying that it is communism. This sort of nonsense will do nothing but waste time.

Posted by: dubya1938 | September 26, 2009 10:31 AM | Report abuse

liberralbasher. This is a joke, right? No one can be that stupid. You are just trying to excite people with rhetoric right?

Posted by: kats1233 | September 26, 2009 10:31 AM | Report abuse

That poll has been used ad nauseam. There may not be "death panels" per se, but there certainly will be health care rationing. Anyone who's fool enough to think otherwise deserves what they get - it's just unfortunate that the rest of us will suffer too.
As far as Medicare and Medicaid is concerned, yes, of course, everyone likes it - why not, you're paying little or nothing for health care. But here's the problem: Medicare and Medicaid are both in dire need of financial reform to prevent total collapse.
People who write these articles need a wakeup call. Health care reform or lack of it is ABOUT MONEY. Insurance companies insure risk, not people. And the actuarial calculation will be exactly the same for the government as it is for private industry.

Posted by: jfhorton | September 26, 2009 10:32 AM | Report abuse

What a joke! Sputter, sputter, hiss and cluck, titter, titter, bawl, whine, roll over on the ground kicking you r feet in the air liberalbasher! What a freaking idiot! You're gonna go out and get your gun huh? Over this!?

This is typical of the sick, sh!ta$$ mentality on the right! Bush and Cheney can suck up their emails, barge into their homes violating their 4th amendment rights but a public option is cause to get a gun?

Little wonder that you stupid, stupid morons lost!

Posted by: jaxas | September 26, 2009 10:37 AM | Report abuse

...once the government gets involved in a free-market, it is no longer a free-market. Non free markets are government-controlled, regulated and by extension dictated markets, communist markets, by definition. In that light, capitalism exists in the same sense that it exists in Cuba, in China and in the USSR, and as such, considering the impact of the "security system" we're really no different than the the Nazis, the Soviets, the Red Chinese...we just have a different name and a different place and time. The methods are slightly different, custom, local, the outcomes certainly individual, but the general operation of the country and of the economic system is no different.

We will get nowhere as a country until we end that delusion and accept our true nature.

Posted by: dubya1938 | September 26, 2009 10:40 AM | Report abuse

...our problem is the very nature of civilization itself, of which government is just an extension, a manifestation.

It's like physics. Black holes grow. They do not shrink. They just get bigger and more powerful. The government is much the same. It resists any and all attempts to make it smaller, to bring it under control. Given this it is obvious that at some point the government itself will consume everything around it.

The issue for each of us is what are we going to do as we spend more and more time and energy fending off this massive black hole that we are all building? And what do we do when we get sucked over the event-horizon?

We can, of course, leap over it and try to make the best of it, but in the end we all have to deal with that unavoidable eventuality. We must not ask whether we are better off than we were 5 years ago. We must ask will we be able to survive 5 years from now.

Posted by: dubya1938 | September 26, 2009 10:57 AM | Report abuse

Some of these comments where liberals are blasting conservatives and vice versa and threatening action with guns is just too much. I'm beginning to think people reading the Washington Post are a bunch of thugs. Why can't the Washington Post staff be selective in what is posted and only post those comments that are thoughtful and insightful as well as delivered with civility. Why does the Washington Post just let any and every comment be posted???? I suspect if maybe only 10 percent of the comments were posted that were really thoughtful analysis of the situations being discussed that the newspaper would be of better quality. Of course, not all of the paid columnists always measure up either.

Posted by: jack71 | September 26, 2009 10:59 AM | Report abuse

"Since Republican legislators represent the 26 percent of Americans opposed to the public option, their opposition to same poses no mystery. The conundrum is why some Democrats -- all save those from the most right-wing districts -- oppose it."


Uhhhhh, campaign contributions? Corrupt bastards. Mostly senators from low population states. The heartland I believe they call it.

Posted by: jhadv | September 26, 2009 11:03 AM | Report abuse

I think that this article misrepresents these polls. What percentage of responders also said that health care reform needs to be Deficit neutral?

If you have 65% saying yes to a public option and 65% saying that health care reform should contain a public option, the right questions then become:

Do you favor a Public Option even if it raises your taxes significantly?

and

Do you favor a Public Option that will add between 1 and 3 trillion dollars to the national Debt over the next 10 years?

So basically the numbers in the poll Meyerson is citing don't really mean anything. Take California as a case study, people there voted themselves more government services, and voted at the same time to pay less taxes. A usefull poll would have given the people taking the polls a trade off.

Posted by: DCDave11 | September 26, 2009 11:05 AM | Report abuse

Sorry that second line should read:

If you have 65% saying yes to a public option and 65% saying that health care reform should not increase the National Debt, the right questions then become

Posted by: DCDave11 | September 26, 2009 11:07 AM | Report abuse


***We should go with a public option. Doctor's fees are out of control. INOVA Fairfax billed me $5,369.30 to circumcise my son. Thank God my wife and I can afford insurance - we ONLY ended up paying $845.60 of that bill.***

---
Thats right, someone that saves your life should not make a decent living.
++++++++++++++++++++

uh, i hadn't realized a circumsion was a life or death issue.

the republican grasp on reality reflected perfectly in that comment.

Posted by: mycomment | September 26, 2009 11:25 AM | Report abuse


According to ABC News polling director Gary Langer, there are "five essential ingredients in conducting a good poll on the public option:"
1. Make clear that the 'public option' refers unambiguously to a type of health insurance, and not the actual provision of health care services by the government.
2. Make clear that by "public", you mean "government".
3. Avoid using the term 'Medicare' when referring to the public option.
4. Make clear that the public option is, in fact, an option, and that private insurance is also an option.
5. Ask in clear and unambiguous terms whether the respondent supports the public option -- not how important they think it is.
Support Oppose No opin. Wording
8/17 ABC/Post 52 46 2 “gov’t create”
8/17 NBC/WSJ 43 47 10 “administered” by fed gov’t
8/11 Kaiser 59 38 3 “similar to Medicare”
8/3 Quinnipiac 62 32 6 “gov’t… insurance plan”
7/28 CBS/NYT 66 27 7 “like… Medicare”
7/28 Time 56 36 8 “gov’t-sponsored”
7/26 Pew 52 37 10 “gov’t… insurance plan”
7/22 Fox 44 48 7 “gov’t-run”

Sorry libs, your attempts at deception are too easily exposed

Posted by: 2xy4k9 | September 26, 2009 11:26 AM | Report abuse

OK you don't want a public option.

when you turn 65, reject Medicare coverage.

It is that simple...Medicare is government paid health coverage.

The public option being floated around is NOT single payer. And do you honestly believe anyone at a poverty level income...there are tens of millions right now and more every day...are going to be able to buy into a public option? NO they can't afford it....and they make too much $$$ for Medicaid.

The public option will do ntohing more than create a whole new level of paper pushers verifying incomes, checking incomes, making sure nobody exceeds income limits, tracking providers, hospitals, drugs, prescriptions. Another huge expense.

Foolish very foolish.

Posted by: pperlo | September 26, 2009 11:27 AM | Report abuse

I just have to make this comment -

Yesterday my husband and I got our flu shots at Walgreen's Pharmacy. Because we are both covered under Medicare, we didn't pay a single dime for it.

Other people paid $24.99 for their shots.
Oh that terrible social program Medicare?

Posted by: gerimay | September 26, 2009 11:45 AM | Report abuse

I don't know where you get you figures. Every poll I have seen in the past few months is overwhelmingly against a public option. The fastest growing part of our society in the past year is government jobs.The massive jobs created by government heath care is almost beyond imagination, all unionized of course. We can't pay for this unless we gut Medicare which covers seniors who do get sick the most and who no longer work.You cannot find a doctor to see you with Medicare alone and must have Medicare Advantage which they want to take away. How about some self responsibility for those who are looking for a handout and those who chose not to insure and that includes every last illegal who should carry an ID card or no care should be provided. They should have to pay for care along with every one else. Lets get some help for the truly poor, get some regulation on rates and denial,across state line compitition, TORT reform then leave it alone.

Posted by: katie6 | September 26, 2009 11:56 AM | Report abuse

After your defense of ACORN didn't you feel like a fool? Aren't you enmbarrassed to keep writing here?

Isn't the POST embarrassed to HAVE you writing here?

Posted by: mftill | September 26, 2009 11:58 AM | Report abuse

P.S.: Both you and the POST Company SHOULD be embarrassed. But perhpas neither you nor they have any shame.

Posted by: mftill | September 26, 2009 12:06 PM | Report abuse

"But here’s the stunner: In the very same poll, respondents were asked whether they favored a Medicare-like public option for everyone. The right-wingers were out there in roughly the same numbers that they registered in answering the other questions: 26 percent of respondents said they opposed the public option. But a whopping 65 supported it."
-----------
Here's reading between the lines of the poll results -
About 25percent of all Americans will vote Republican. That would be the Far out Right, Mega Business, and the Republican Staffers that depend on the Party for their income.
The other 75percent of all Americans walk with both feet on the ground and can think clearly.

Posted by: JoeNTx | September 26, 2009 12:18 PM | Report abuse

This is crazy, business has always had complete communism support from the government, we the citizens just pay for everything that benifits business,they pay very little in taxes then complain that we are not educated enough to fill thier job positions, while we the citizens are stuck with little or nothing. the citizens need a single payer health care system run by OUR government period, this government belongs to each and every citizen not just a few. Citizens have RIGHTS and BUSINESS do not. And any elected representives of the people who they serve who dose not understand this must be removed from office.

Posted by: johnanddiane | September 26, 2009 12:28 PM | Report abuse

I just have to make this comment -

Yesterday my husband and I got our flu shots at Walgreen's Pharmacy. Because we are both covered under Medicare, we didn't pay a single dime for it.

Other people paid $24.99 for their shots.
Oh that terrible social program Medicare?


--------------------------------------
Draw the dots together madam, you paid nothing for your shots because the people who paid $24.99 for their shots paid for yours through their taxes. I have not noticed a great speckled bird coming down to give free shots anywhere around the area.

Posted by: Paladin7b | September 26, 2009 12:55 PM | Report abuse

The reason why Americans give confusing answers to polling questions about health care reform is that the Democrats have failed to state clearly what they plan to do.

Instead of harping on "public option", they should be saying "Medicare for anyone". If, indeed, that's what it is. I heard last night that the proposal in the Senate Finance Committee would force people who are currently insured to stay with their insurance company even if they are being screwed silly by them.

If there is a "public option", whatever that means, it should be available to anyone who wants it and it should be a not-for-profit system administered and regulated by the US Government. Also, the cowards in the US Congress need to get their spines together and pass legislation that deals with our pressing problems IMMEDIATELY, not 4 years down the road. A lot can happen in 4 years, and I think that a lot of our elected officials believe we will forget about it and it's just going away.

Of course, if you wait 4 years, that gives jokers like Glenn Beck a 4 year lease on life. He'll have something to rail about for another 4 years. Maybe he'll even boil another frog.

www.glennbeckreport.com

-Wexler

Posted by: WWWexler | September 26, 2009 12:56 PM | Report abuse

And here's another part of the poll must important, who do you trust to fix health care? Democrats 69% republicans...the usual 26% Isn't it bad enough republicans have destroyed America's economy the last 8 years, now they want to destroy a great opportunity to overhaul our health care system. If we do not have the public option, nothing will work. And if nothing else works the republicans can blame the democrats. However if democrats put in the public option and it works...stick a fork in the republican party for a long long time folks.

Posted by: kubrickstan | September 26, 2009 12:57 PM | Report abuse

Me thinks Mr Myerson pulled his poll numbers out of his rectum. While he castigates "conservatives" as being stupid, he also fails to point out that a goodly number of Democrats do not agree with the public option either. Actually, 95% of so-called poll numbers are made up on the spot, which makes his article worthless.

Posted by: GordonShumway | September 26, 2009 9:46 AM | Report abuse


95%? Really? Who's your source for that number Gordie? Might you be the least little bit of a liar?

Posted by: law1946 | September 26, 2009 1:01 PM | Report abuse

A friend sent me an e-mail this week with the published total compensation package of the CEO of UnitedHealth in 2005: in excess of $100 million dollars. My friend then said his weekly deductions from his paycheck for his health insurance with UnitedHealth are 6 times what his weekly deductions for income taxes. He is 56 years old and makes about $45 K/year.
Anyone who doesn't think that the competition with for-profit insurance companies provided by a public option would be a healthy (no pun intended) thing for this country likely has a cool-room-temperature IQ.
And LiberalBasher, I'm not very fond of you and your ilk either. So there.

Posted by: OhioDon | September 26, 2009 1:23 AM | Report abuse

------------------------------------------
In the words of Bob Uecker, the figures are just a biiit outside (Figures are 2009 figures)

Current compensation for the CEO--3.2 million (.01% of the company's earnings)
(163rd of Fortune 500 companies)

Current profit for top five CEOs--24.9 mllion (tied for 164th of all Fortune 500 companies)

Current Profit on revenues for United Health Care (3.7%) (Tied for 252nd of Fortune 500 companies).

And where exactly have you had a public copmany compete with private companies and increased the level of competition (VA does not count, Department of Veterans Affairs is a part of the explicit duty of the governmetn set forth in the Consittution, there never was a private competitor at any time. Answers from Huffington or Kos do not count. National Parks don't work (750 million deficit, 2 billion debt). Medicare (running out of money--bankrupt per trustees). Social Security, same.

So the example that you can provide that a public option will increase competition and hold down prices is??? ______________.

Posted by: Paladin7b | September 26, 2009 1:15 PM | Report abuse

It's amazing to me how little coverage the corporate media have given to the fact that by a huge majority the American people favor the public option, just as it amazes me that our elected officials, including even Obama, barely mention this fact. I guess they're all afraid of incurring the wrath of the right-wing noise machine and that corporate campaign funds and free lunches will dry up. The 65% of the people who favor the public option pretty obviously doesn't include the people who have bought and paid for our government. I think an equally high percentage would favor simply expanding Medicare to cover everyone in a single-payor system, but, of course, even the discussion of this option is verboten in our corporate media environment.

Posted by: ejs2 | September 26, 2009 1:25 PM | Report abuse

On a logical basis a single payer system is correct. But we continue to debate the issues not because of logic but because of trust. Those who trust the government want a single payer, those who do not do not. In the end we are avoiding the important discussions as to what are the specifics. In the mean time single interest groups on both sides cloud the issues with heated rhetoric that really is a change of subject - from what is in the "plan" to who gets what they want. I personally believe Obama has good intentions but by the time these are fron ended by Pelosi, Reid, unions, tort lawyers, doctors, for profit hospitals, drug companies, etc. I do not trust anyone. I think if everyone would take a "time out" and start small, covering those who are not covered but want coverage, we might get there in increments. Perhaps we should remember the old saw - How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time!

Posted by: fcrucian | September 26, 2009 1:28 PM | Report abuse

This site, like many others, demonstrates the right wingnuts' capacity to bully, threaten, distort, and create baseless fears. Liberal Basher and his threat to arm himself and start a civil war are typical. Maybe he'll just stomp his little feet and hold his breath until his face turns blue instead of killing people because he might not get his way.

I thought that the circus-like August townhalls might end up backfiring on the wing nuts. Americans don't like extremism and these meetings reminded too many people of Sarah Palin rallies, without the Valentino and Armani.

The public option is not a government takeover of health care. It's an option that will stimulate competition by offering a less expensive choice. If Medicare can be run on with a 3.5% administrative cost, why should we subsidize health insurance companies whose administrative costs are running around 30% and whose profits increased 400% between 2002 and 2007?


=====================================
Could be that Medicare contracts out most administrative costs to a private company? (CMS)???
Could be that the 3% only includes direct costs which can be assigned to medicare patients and not such trivial matters as (taxation to collect payments for claims (add 11%), borrowing money to pay claims (add 5%). Amount needed to actually build a real reserv3e to pay claims instead of relying on Treasury IOUs (add 3%, being consderative). Let's add a discount that Medicare has in its costs of 3% (premium fees paid on health insurance policies to states)

Even the numbers from the MEdicare Trustees belie the three percent number, at best, per the Medicare Trustees, if you only count direct administrative costs, the number is 5% now, and is increasing. The 3% figure, measuring what it is supposed to measure, understates costs by 66%.

30% figures are the figures used by small health insurance companies, not the larger companies. It is being conveniently used to stretch the figures over all insurance companies. A review by the neutral Office of Economic Community Development (a neutral government survey group in Europe), says that both Medicare and large insurance have about 11% administrative costs if all costs are figured in.

Posted by: Paladin7b | September 26, 2009 1:34 PM | Report abuse

"This country would be a better place without republicans.
Posted by: boblund1 | September 26, 2009 9:36 AM | Report abuse"

then may I suggest we find a place, large enough with equal sides for a battle...
one one side the liberals...
on the other the Conservatives...
the WH grants an open pardon to all participants...
and lets go at it...
the party left standing gets to decide on how America is rules...

my money is on the Conservatives...
and we choose to rule by the constitution of the United States...

Posted by: DwightCollins | September 26, 2009 1:34 PM | Report abuse

Unfortunately, the master GOP disaster words still block progress "socialism, communism, abortion, taxes, atheism, Muslim",etc.

But thanks, Mr. Meyerson, for your straight talk. You have a very high batting average for stating the facts.

Posted by: lufrank1 | September 26, 2009 1:42 PM | Report abuse

MediCare? You're joking right? That insurance program that is so expensive they're trying to scale it back in the Senate bill. The program that's broke. That program intractably rife with waste and fraud? It must be intractably rife or someone would have already extracted the savings.

Posted by: MaDr | September 26, 2009 1:45 PM | Report abuse

I want the same health care benefits at the federal civil servants.

Can someone tell me why Senator Warner (D-Va) came out against the public option?

Posted by: AD11 | September 26, 2009 2:04 PM | Report abuse

To Liberal Basher...

So how much are you being paid to advocate violence against your fellow citizens?

I know Bin Laden is rich, so I am just wondering how much money he is paying you to make asinine comments about getting ready for the upcoming civil war.

Perhaps YOU fail to understand that YOU are in the minority.

So buy your gun and hole up in your house with your paranoid delusions.

You are concerned about the Public Option when you lack anything beyond a rudimentary knowledge of the American English language.

I support more education to combat ignorance.

I also support your right to purchase a firearm.

Statistically it is more likely to be the cause of your own death.

Ask yourself if you are able to afford all the ammunition you will need to be a one-person death panel...

Notice how I am not anonymous...

Hide behind your anonymity and knowledge that the public option is a support of life while you advocate death,

So have no fear about a death panel.

YOU are the death panelist.

Posted by: AnthonyGualtieri-NOTanonymous | September 26, 2009 2:23 PM | Report abuse

To Liberal Basher...

So how much are you being paid to advocate violence against your fellow citizens?

I know Bin Laden is rich, so I am just wondering how much money he is paying you to make asinine comments about getting ready for the upcoming civil war.

Perhaps YOU fail to understand that YOU are in the minority.

So buy your gun and hole up in your house with your paranoid delusions.

You are concerned about the Public Option when you lack anything beyond a rudimentary knowledge of the American English language.

I support more education to combat ignorance.

I also support your right to purchase a firearm.

Statistically it is more likely to be the cause of your own death.

Ask yourself if you are able to afford all the ammunition you will need to be a one-person death panel...

Notice how I am not anonymous...

Hide behind your anonymity and knowledge that the public option is a support of life while you advocate death,

So have no fear about a death panel.

YOU are the death panelist.

Posted by: AnthonyGualtieri-NOTanonymous | September 26, 2009 2:23 PM | Report abuse

IF Democrats cannot pass the Public Option with their majority status and a Dem president, they will be voted out of office in no time. This scenario already happened once during the Clinton administration. It will happen again. GOP vs. DNC? Dumb or dumber? They are just like me.

Posted by: dummy4peace | September 26, 2009 2:52 PM | Report abuse

Right wingers who say that the Medicare program pays out money to corrupt practitioners is totally correct. But the process involved in producing their cherished war machines is so thoroughly corrupt, that the fraud and waste involved there would pay for a good part of any national health plan. The answer is to be a LOT more aggressive in uncovering and prosecuting fraud and eliminating waste in all our government programs. Don't hold your breath though- politicians all know their campaign funds would dry up if they got serious about putting white collar dirtballs into the same holes they put crack dealers and pimps. The sadder fact yet is that anti-corruption candidates would lose reelection because the American public would believe whatever hysterical lies the vested interests churned out.

Posted by: psst_limbaugh_keep-ranting_satan | September 26, 2009 2:54 PM | Report abuse

"Draw the dots together madam, you paid nothing for your shots because the people who paid $24.99 for their shots paid for yours through their taxes."

No, she paid nothing for the shots because she went to a place where they offered her free shots.

What is paid for with tax dollars? That's a whole 'nother question.

Why those tax dollars are spent on whatever they are spent on, and how the rate is determined? Yet a third question.

But if you are happy to take a simplistic view, then you will be happy with a simplistic explanation. Even if it's totally wrong.

Posted by: dubya1938 | September 26, 2009 3:32 PM | Report abuse

There is no legislation on offer for a Medicare-like public option.

That's why Obama says the public option will only enroll 5% of the population at a maximum.

Posted by: lambert_strether | September 26, 2009 3:36 PM | Report abuse

The public option could be such a simple plan, I wish conservatives realized that. It would be the most economical too. But they won't consider it at all, and they won't agree or compromise on anything.

So instead we're getting these convoluted plans from the politicians owned by the insurance companies that will probably do little to help the American public. The conservatives are going to get what they really want the least, tax dollars going to an inefficient system.

Sorry conservatives, screaming: WELL I DON"T WANT MY MONEY GOING TO THE GOVERNMENT IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!, doesn't serve you the best. Also, it shows you have no understanding of how much the government already pays out to all the health care players in the current setup. The majority of Americans want something in place, why would you not try to find the most efficient plan? In the end you would save the tax payers (and you) the most money.

(ohh, and I'm pretty sure Liberal Basher is some kind of automated bot setup by the Post to elicit responses from insulted readers)

Posted by: jeremyisett | September 26, 2009 3:45 PM | Report abuse

Those of you who think all those without insurance should be covered, why don't you get together, " chip in " out of your own pockets and cover them ? No...?

Posted by: clankie | September 26, 2009 4:00 PM | Report abuse

I am all for public option. I am all for reforming Health Care. BUT, we have 1600 poisoned marines here in this recent CNN article and they can't get medical care. Maybe we should start in small steps and give anyone that served in the armed forces the option for public affordable health insurance.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/09/25/marines.breast.cancer.folo/index.html

Posted by: ski2day9 | September 26, 2009 4:10 PM | Report abuse

"Perhaps YOU fail to understand that YOU are in the minority."

That only matters to people who believe that the majority opinion is significant.

To those that dismiss the majority opinion out of hand, who dismiss any opinion other than their own, who, to put it midly, think that it's flat-out stupid, it's irrelevant.

Posted by: dubya1938 | September 26, 2009 4:14 PM | Report abuse

...in fact, repeatedly, that is what this boils down to. For one, we do not live by majority-rule. Second, the majority-opinion today is hardly going to be the majority opinion tomorrow because the argument will shift.

Yelling and screaming about something today is a guaranteed way to marginalize yourself because no one in power is going to sit there and listen to you yell and scream at them and then do what you want. You become the poster-child for the reason that they are in office and not you. The more effort that you put into promoting your opinion, the more people will reject it, for a variety of reasons. If it can't stand on its own two feet then it will fall. There will always be someone out there who will scream louder and longer who will topple it if the only thing going for it is sheer force.

Posted by: dubya1938 | September 26, 2009 4:18 PM | Report abuse

Public option over my dead body.
I don't own a gun, I will buy one if this goes into affect.
I never have understood milita's. I definatly will embrace them if this goes into affect.
public option equals civil war. I will be the first to arm myself to be a part of that war.
go for it, bring it on. Be warned, you will not need death panels if you put in a public option.
Posted by: LiberalBasher | September 25, 2009 4:31 PM | Report abuse


Over your dead body? Fine by me, you laughable windbag.

What war do you think is actually going to happen if the public option becomes law? What militia are you going to join? What purpose will you serve in doing that? Are you going to storm a hospital, shoot up your Congressman’s office? Fire on a crowd?

You gutless, pathetic coward. Making threats of violence in a blog under a pseudonym.

Be warned my @ss. I look forward to the day when pathetic semiliterate eccentrics like you are finally rendered extinct by common sense.


Posted by: dfc102 | September 26, 2009 4:33 PM | Report abuse

Maybe we can root out abuses by multiplying systems and laws and go back to feudalism. You'll have to guard the castle a certain number of days to maintain your benefits. Vassals won't be able to transmit inheritance to lepers.

Posted by: Dermitt | September 26, 2009 4:34 PM | Report abuse

What is so different about Democrats today that they can't stand up and do the right thing? I guess they are so used to getting beat they can't believe they won. They are just a bunch of mealy mouth little whiners who won't get reelected because nobody thinks that they will do what they say. It's pathetic.

Posted by: cat001 | September 26, 2009 4:34 PM | Report abuse

I'm 50 and I want to be able to buy Medicare now, for me and for my spouse and children.

I want single payer national health insurance, or at least, an OPTION to purchase with my own money a public insurance plan.

Posted by: mike777r | September 26, 2009 4:35 PM | Report abuse

There is a % of the population impervious to reason. They're the sort that lynches Census workers in Kentucky and thinks Obama is an agent working for Al Qaeda. Forget reasoning with them. They just need to be isolated in the hills.

The best thing Washington could do on this issue is to help the states set up coops and/or single payer in the states which want that. This way it's a state issue and the states which prefer expensive private insurance and uninsured citizens can continue to have that and the rest of the country can move on. State coops could combine into regional plans.

The hillbillies who don't like it can move out of blue states and into the red, where they can cherish their firepower and sleep easily knowing they won't be insured against their will.

America is a multiplicity of little countries and we're not going to come to agreement on this so it's time to stop letting the capitalist warriors hold everyone else back. Let them live with free market love on their own.

Posted by: Matthew_DC | September 26, 2009 4:48 PM | Report abuse

I think Republicans should be forced to accept the falsehoods they've cynically used to scare the bejeezus out of people. In other words, Republican grandmothers would be set adrift on ice floes if they come down with anything worse than a bad cold. No Republican would receive expensive brain surgery. Instead, more cost-effective Canadian lobotomies would send them home with a smile on their face.

Posted by: tontosage | September 26, 2009 5:12 PM | Report abuse

"Who's kidding who? Everybody knows that Medicare is the bottom of the barrel when it comes to health insurance. Just trying to find a doctor who will take it is a full-time job." So says DEFJAX."

Just try to take it away from seniors like Senator Colburn wants to do.

Posted by: knjincvc | September 26, 2009 5:15 PM | Report abuse

"Public option over my dead body. I don't own a gun, I will buy one if this goes into affect. I never have understood milita's. I definatly will embrace them if this goes into affect.public option equals civil war. I will be the first to arm myself to be a part of that war. “


So I guess you want to eliminate Medicare, Medicade, VA care etc

Posted by: knjincvc | September 26, 2009 5:18 PM | Report abuse

Medicare is better than NoCare. But those who prefer the NoCare plan should be allowed to embrace it.

Posted by: Matthew_DC | September 26, 2009 5:22 PM | Report abuse

FORCE HAROLD INTO PUBLIC OPTION/SINGLE-PAYER


But let me take out some life insurance on ol' Harold.

Like MESSIAH -- I like EASY, FREE MONEY!!!

Harold, you IQ-91 -- of course, the public wants free medical care. Who the F wouldn't, you rube.

The question you can't get: WHO'S PAYING???

Good luck, repeating Logic 101. You need it.

Posted by: russpoter | September 26, 2009 5:43 PM | Report abuse

FREE BOOZE VIA OBAMA


"If 65% of Americans want the public option then as a democracy that is what America should have."

FREE BOOZE
FREE DOPE
FREE SEX
FREE CIGARS

That's next, thanks to MESSIAH.

YAY! COMMUNISM IS ALIVE!!!

Posted by: russpoter | September 26, 2009 5:44 PM | Report abuse

FREE BOOZE ON OBAMA


Scrap this crap.
Time for Single Payer.

---

Yeah -- losers need to be told, what to do, when to do it, where to do it.

They're stupid as heck.

And if they don't -- a MEAN-FACED, SHORT-HAIRED MONO-SEXUAL BUREAUCRATS will put her/his/its JACKBOOT on the LIB-LOSER'S neck to "nudge" compliance.

Obama wants to you keep posting STUPIDITY here. Do you job, or Michelle won't get you WELFARE today.

Posted by: russpoter | September 26, 2009 5:46 PM | Report abuse

So tell me, will circumcision be paid for by the government at the current rate of $1 billion a year. And getting sued for $2 million by parents who boy dies from circumcision at the Indian reservation? (see: http://tinyurl.com/ydommc2 couple seeking $2 million from federal government for personal injury & wrongful death over son"s circ death) Being that circumcision is deemed cosmetic, done for traditional and religious reasons, and where health benefits are as The College of Family Physicians of Canada concludes "Harms continue to outweigh benefits for routine neonatal circumcision. We would not tolerate routine genital surgery on baby girls (and do not tolerate it in this country); why do we tolerate it for baby boys?" (Can Fam Physician. 2007 December; 53(12): 2097–2099.) Eleven states currently do not fund Medcaid circumcision costs. Since circumcision costs $1 billion each year in the US, is not needed, any health program should be paying costs for a parental choice.

Posted by: KOTFrank | September 26, 2009 5:49 PM | Report abuse

Since CIRCUMCISION costs $1 BILLION each year in the US, is NOT needed, any health program should NOT be paying costs for a parental choice.

Posted by: KOTFrank | September 26, 2009 5:57 PM | Report abuse

Keep your filthy commie paws off my body! THIS IS AMERICA!

Posted by: thebump | September 26, 2009 6:19 PM | Report abuse

Just so everyone understands, routine infant circumcision is NOT health care. It ha no medical benefit and should never be covered by any health insurance.

Posted by: Henry75List | September 26, 2009 7:14 PM | Report abuse

Well, from a faraway view from France, why the polled people in the US are in such a contradiction and why are you in such a mess with respect to a reform you voted for (it was the first claim from Obama the candidate, wasn't it?).

This can be summarized in one sentence IMHO: your internal debates in the US are completely cumbersome and blurred by nationalistic self-centeredness! It's like the base-ball game, noone in Europe (except may be the British people who have even worst with their cricket game) can understand the rules and follow these games. And it's not cumbersome only to foreigners, I believe it is also the case for a majority of the US people who are confused! As by law you have entered the metric measurement system many decades ago but still are not using it, your views on public health-care look like debates from two or three centuries ago, and in those times debates were for highly educated people, not for the common laymen.

Why? Because of course the GOP vocal people are lying, but, also because you are drowned in your own, national, irrational and useless complexities. You have, as far as I understand, MEDICAID for the poor ones and MEDICARE for the elder ones, it would be so simple to declare: "well, like the Frenchies and many other advanced countries, we want to fill the gap and provide a uniform, nation-wide, public-based health security to everyone!!".

But you can't, because following the Frenchies while being 60 years late on them would be too painful to your proud, and also because you have reinvented the word "social security" for other means while the Frenchies have invented it at the end of WWII to name "public universal health-care insurance".

You're in a mess and you have to get out of it quick, following Obama who is far ahead of most of the US people, otherwise you will become a minority ethnic tribe, out of time in this world that reinvents itself each twenty years!!

Posted by: jpbillon | September 26, 2009 7:17 PM | Report abuse

Liberalbasher wrote:

Public option over my dead body.

I don't own a gun, I will buy one if this goes into affect.

I never have understood milita's. I definatly will embrace them if this goes into affect.

public option equals civil war. I will be the first to arm myself to be a part of that war.

go for it, bring it on. Be warned, you will not need death panels if you put in a public option.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Have you gone off your medication again??

Posted by: JKJ88 | September 26, 2009 7:33 PM | Report abuse

Our sleaze bag Senator from North Dakota does not feel a goverment run health program fits into the "American Way" of doing things.
Is this the same Senator who got that special County Wide "Free Market" Socialism for the Rich deal on his Mortgage Re-FI's? With terms and conditions not available under the "American Way" of a "Free" Honest Market? You know,the terms and conditions the "Little People" get when doing Re-FI's.
Do you think he might also now be a "Special Friend" of Big Pharma?

Posted by: jeromejmarkiewicz | September 26, 2009 7:39 PM | Report abuse

"Knock the private companies out of business and, before you know it, all that is left is a money-sucking, inefficient government bureaucracy ran by life-controlling elitists."


Yes, let's knock the blood sucking, gate-keeping, profit reaping, no value-adding insurance companies out of business. Please.

I'll take the government over these criminals any day, and so would over 2/3s of Americans.

Posted by: jmp66 | September 26, 2009 8:18 PM | Report abuse

(Bloomberg) -- John Podesta compared the nation’s current budget crisis to the situation former President Bill Clinton faced in 1993 and said some form of a value-added tax is “more plausible today than it ever has been.”

“There’s going to have to be revenue in this budget,” said Podesta, Clinton’s former chief of staff and co-chairman of President Barack Obama’s transition team, said in an interview on Bloomberg Television’s “Political Capital with Al Hunt,” airing today.

A so-called consumption tax would “create a balance” with European and Japanese economies and “could potentially have a substantial effect on competitiveness,” said Podesta. Value- added taxes in Europe and Japan encourage savings by taxing consumption.

Podesta said such a tax may be regressive, but can be balanced by exempting some products and using “the money to support low-wage workers.”

Posted by: FraudObama | September 26, 2009 8:53 PM | Report abuse

Uhh?

Podesta said such a tax may be regressive, but can be balanced by exempting some products and using “the money to support low-wage workers.”

Posted by: FraudObama | September 26, 2009 8:54 PM | Report abuse

Barry is going to TAX the crap out of everybody, including his Cult Members.

Posted by: FraudObama | September 26, 2009 8:56 PM | Report abuse

It's amazing how much nonsense people are gullible enough to believe. The 'death panel' lie started with Palin and was repeated by the bozos on Fox "News." Public option is in the interests of everyone except the cut-throat insurance companies. The people who recklessly throw around the word 'socialism' have no clue what it means. Rev. Bookburn - Radio Volta

Posted by: revbookburn | September 26, 2009 8:57 PM | Report abuse

I'm glad you brought up Medicare. It was supposed to be a 1 percent tax. It is now over 17% on most folks and is still going to go broke soon. Why would healthcare be any different? It won't. According to the bill, the majority of americans would be required to pay a premium, but that won't be enough to cover the costs. There would also be an income tax increase to cover the difference. Just like medicare, the rates and taxes will go up again and again to cover costs, until there just isn't enough money, and by then, there will be no private insurance. Profit is not a dirty word. How much are you making writing this column? I wish you would spread your wealth to me....

Posted by: theonefisher1 | September 26, 2009 8:58 PM | Report abuse

I'll take the government over these criminals any day, and so would over 2/3s of Americans.

Posted by: jmp6
--

Does that include the 80% that are satisfied with their current insurance coverage? Why are libs so enamored with their Big Govt Nanny State. Incompetent maybe?

Posted by: FraudObama | September 26, 2009 8:59 PM | Report abuse

Death panel, opposition to a public plan, etc., draws a support of 26% of the public.

Meyerson seems to credit that "success" to "the right wing noise". I suggest this is not true. Remember even Bush managed to draw a support of around 26-30%? So right wing noise or not, I suspect that is is idiot ratio in any normal sociey, certainly in the US.

Don't let it get to the head of the right wing voices as otherwise it may even get worse.

Posted by: steviana | September 26, 2009 9:25 PM | Report abuse

There already is a public option, its called medicare, medicaide, the VA. Do u see any republican saying scrap that? No, its political suicide.

In Australia we have the public optio. We r not socialists. Its a bogus claim. Your naional discourse on this mater i a joke and u should be ashamed.

You have no issues blowing up people but saving them is socialism and I'll get my and yada yada...How the hell is helping sick people tearing the fabric of a country apart?

The left protests war, the right protests saving peoples lives. Its disgusting

Posted by: Chops2 | September 26, 2009 9:31 PM | Report abuse

And liberal basher:
U r a gutless coward, put your gun down and fight like a man u pussy

Posted by: Chops2 | September 26, 2009 9:33 PM | Report abuse

Face it, most people cannot evaluate the medical/hosptl care they receive, and they do not know whether the charges made on their bill are fair or not. They may suspect they are overcharged, but they never know whether or not that I.V. is the right one, or that pill is exactly the right meds. One man stood at a meeting saying "get the government out of my medicare" (medicare is government run). Baucas's bill is being reworked and will be substantially changed. I pray for public option.

Posted by: drzimmern1 | September 26, 2009 9:34 PM | Report abuse

Liberal basher yelps:

Public option over my dead body.
I don't own a gun, I will buy one if this goes into affect.
I never have understood milita's. I definatly will embrace them if this goes into affect.
public option equals civil war. I will be the first to arm myself to be a part of that war.
go for it, bring it on. Be warned, you will not need death panels if you put in a public option.


Does anyone doubt the caliber of the mob the right-wing-nuts appeal to? Illiterate gun-totin' morons.

Posted by: notation | September 26, 2009 9:58 PM | Report abuse

How about some REAL healthscare reform, like letting union employees who have ONE insurance provider(mandatory) do some comparison shopping? It's a fair bet that the people that run the insurance companies providing this 'health insurance' probably eat pretty well, and have 4-star coverage themselves. The rest of us can go rot, or throw ourselves on the mercy of The Government, right? Right. But, it turns out, you read more about The Government, and those folks have some pretty classy coverage and all that. I guess the moral of the story here is, if you're not upwardly mobile/upper middle class, kind of part of the old great unwashed, there, it sucks to be you, and you can pay your own way at the clinic, there, or whatever. Which, come to think of it, really isn't such a bad idea. Clinics are cheaper, provide their services for CASH(there's some alternative healthcare for you, pay your own way), and they also tend to accept various insurance plans, but at a much, much lower cost than the 4-star competition, and me, I'm looking for a fair-minded, honest physician-person if I'm in need of some kind of medical attention. I don't want the guy who's multitasking, spends half the day on his workstation computer trading futures in medical supplies or buying shares in whatever pharmaceutical company looks good on the stock ticker today, I want the guy/gal that went into medicine because they've pretty much got it in them that they want to help people, moreso than any concern for profits.

Healthcare is a business. Someone made the stethoscopes, someone made the blood pressure machine, someone made the gowns, the smocks, the gloves, the lights, so forth and so on. Nothing is 'free'. And, when you say 'medical', you may as well say 'Cadillac', because the price just went up, up, and away!

In short, the wonderful world of medicine is very, very lucrative. And, the government already subsidizes the world of medicine pretty heavily, through education, through direct payments(study Medicare/Medicare Advantage fraud cases, last couple of years, Big Buxx), and as long as the government keeps shoveling out the healthcare payola, people will keep lining up and maneuvering to take the best possible advantage of the situation, and the taxpayers. Then, if there's any talk of spending cuts, out come the sob stories, the violins, the kabuki theater, and then they trot Grampers out in front of the TV camera to REALLY pull at the old heart-strings, meanwhile they're shopping for real estate in the Bahamas or something. I'm not saying they're all dishonest, I'm saying that the folks that run the whole show are pretty sharp, and don't miss meals very often, and have political ambitions of their own that they'd sure like to foist off on the public, and get everyone paying into that whole scene, there. It's For The Sick People, of course...and I don't buy a word of it.

Posted by: walkerbert | September 26, 2009 10:11 PM | Report abuse

"The conundrum is why some Democrats -- all save those from the most right-wing districts -- oppose it."

It's no conundrum. The fact that Meyerson thinks it is is not only part of the problem, it shows how useless people like Meyerson are in shedding light on the problem.

Democratic politicians oppose it for a reason only the willfully blind like Meyerson would miss: they take money from the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries, just like Republican politicians do.

The fact that it doesn't shame Meyerson to admit he's stumped by this "mystery" tells you how useless "news" media like the Post are.

Posted by: geezjan | September 27, 2009 12:05 AM | Report abuse

People generally seem to have a basic problem comprehending insurance issues. Here is a good example of one where we have hands-off government and look what we get from insurance companies...

One of the most important factors in disaster preparedness/recovery--be informed:

Laissez-faire Not Fair
----
When the dust settles, who will carry the mantle for disaster survivors?
This should help understanding:
What do you expect in case of an insured loss? Are You Disaster Ready? (hurricane, tornado, earthquake, flood, fire, etc.). US President Obama affirms government's laissez-faire policy with his telling response: http://www.disasterprepared.net/whitehouse.html

Posted by: antonebraga | September 27, 2009 6:02 AM | Report abuse

Consider the Connection:
Public Option = Consumer Choice
No one should die because they can not afford health insurance, and no one should
go broke if they get sick.
The choice should be ours.
Our health is in the balance!!!
Search 4 me:
CTC123GREEN
Some concerned organizations:
www.consumersunion.org
www.aft.org/fight4america
www.HealtCareCantWait.com
www.organizingforamerica.com
www.WeWantThePublicOption.com
www.ourfuture.org/action

Posted by: jerry_mayeux | September 27, 2009 2:56 PM | Report abuse

FREE BOOZE VIA OBAMA

"If 65% of Americans want the public option then as a democracy that is what America should have."

FREE BOOZE

FREE DOPE

FREE SEX

FREE CIGARS

That's next, thanks to MESSIAH.

Posted by: russpoter | September 25, 2009 7:20 PM

===================

I take it must be paying for sex.

Posted by: James10 | September 27, 2009 6:47 PM | Report abuse

I have joined Alice in Wonderland.

Reread what you wrote. Now, don't you agree that your premise is that many people seem to want something, therefore it should become so? This makes the point, it is socialist. The oligarchy panders to the crowd and gives them cake, taken from those who have some.

OK, now read slowly and try to think. A few years ago, in may parts of the U.S., there was a popular opinion that blacks should eat somewhere else and go to schools somewhere out of sight. Now, think, don't you think it is bad to run a country on popular opinion? Take your time.

Read Federalist Paper #10 and see if you can figure out how a representative republic can protect everyone's agreed-to rights and no crush minorities rights.

Now, think about all this. You may come to understand the value of following the Constitution's structure and power granted by the people, which do not include government run anything, other than the post office and army.

Posted by: getgene | September 27, 2009 10:48 PM | Report abuse

I see that there are lots of fear mongering right wingers out there. They are either so rich that they are making money hand over fist from the health care industry or they are ignorantly supporting these people out of some kind of twisted patriotism. Why don't you ask these billionaires and multi-millionaires if they will help their brethren out there if they get sick, who are out on the lines at the tea parties that the rich put on, with the help of their well paid for politician friends. The answer is that they could care less if they have insurance or get sick or die, because they have their 20 million dollar mansions in California and Switzerland (mainly) where they can figure out ways to cause problems out here with the people that work.
Why do over 60% of the American people want a public option but the owners keep crying socialism. It is because of people like this that revolutions happen, but they don't care about that either. Let them eat cake is their motto. If you can't afford medicine, or an expensive procedure then they will let you die. These people are not human as far as civilized society should be. This is a great injustice towards anybody who is sick and cannot afford it.
The religious people used to run and own the hospitals until the rich bought them out but who continued to use the religious names of the hospitals. I think that it is the devil that has bought them out and these people are an abomination to this world and to humanity!

Posted by: builder7 | September 28, 2009 1:21 AM | Report abuse

If you think the insurance companies are going to voluntarily lower our costs and their profits and their million dollar wages while having a monopoly over the process – well I’ve got a bridge to sell you …and I think Wall Street should be completely unregulated I trust strangers with my money, and pollution is good and airbags should be removed from all our cars.

Our market systems depend and thrive on competition; unregulated markets are a vicious roller coaster ride of boom, bubble and bust. The winner takes all mentality doesn’t take into account the whole system that’s what governments are for. The pure free market system is a myth. It doesn’t exist and as an economic model is anarchy.

At the end of the day vote your pocket book. Don't take up millionaire strangers causes as if they were your own. They have plenty of paid voices lobbying for them. Keep your eye on what is best for you and your family and the Country will be fine.

Paul Burke
Author-Journey Home

Posted by: JourneyHomeBurke | September 28, 2009 1:24 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company