The second (or third, fourth…) health care war is on full speed ahead with incredible noise, disruption and knee jerk reaction. Would a fair and equitable health care plan for all Americans that want a plan sound like common sense? Noooo, say the loud minority that insists that they “want to have their country back,” that Obama’s plan “is driving America toward socialism” and that they do not want “bureaucrats between me and my doctor.”
Newsflash: so-called bureaucrats are already and have been for a long time, between patients and health care professionals. They determine time spent with patients, medication allowed for treatment and, in worse case, deny treatment for the so-called “preexisting condition.” Folks that claim that they love their insurance companies often did not have to use them.
The claim of socialism is so disingenuous. Folks fail to consider that some American institutions such as Social Security, Medicare, the post office, the armed forces, etc. are all “government run” and the majority of Americans can’t imagine life without them. The loudest of loud mouths when questioned if they are on Medicare respond affirmatively without even considering the absurdity of their positions.
Now then, how shall reasonable voters (who by a large majority elected Barack Obama) proceed? Using similar tactics of name-calling is not acceptable to most. Ultimately it’s the tactic of the desperate and the hopeless. Democrats (especially Obama and members of Congress), Independents and progressives in general must devise a clear and concise message that explains the health care proposal to rational voters.
Republicans that insist on saying ‘no’ have not advanced any alternatives aside from claiming that what we have is “the best in the world” thereby continuing the myth that anything American is always “number one.” Well, it seems that in the delivery of health services to the greatest number of our citizens we are not number one at all; we lag way back despite paying through the nose with our premiums.
We need some common sense leadership and that quality comes from different sides. But bold decision-making must come now and no one can afford to sit on the sidelines. Democrats have the ultimate hammer, that of their majority in both houses of Congress. I keep hearing that they don’t want to follow that route, but one thing I remember from the Bush years: he drove his policies however destructive they have proven to have been, by applying pressure from all sides to his Republican majority. They passed their administration policies (often, with the regretful nod of many Democrats) and ignored any opposition that may have been voiced. They authorized a march to war under false pretense at a cost of over one trillion dollars. Not a peep from the current noise crowd that such an undertaking was “too costly and we could not afford,” arguments that they so freely now use to denounce the health care initiative.
Democrats may have to go it alone on this one. Courageous presidents have done it before: TR in establishing the National Park systems was demonized for ‘giving away land that could be explored’, FDR was ridiculed for Social Security and so many social programs Americans now take for granted, LBJ for signing the Civil Rights Act, etc. Most Americans now agree that most of those decisions were good for the country. The US needs a national health care program. It is incomprehensible to have close to 50 million of our citizens without the ability to see a health care professional.
Let’s stop the noise and begin to use common sense.
-Charlie Wysling, Bend
This article appears in Aug 27 – Sep 2, 2009.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
Charlie Wysling says:
Folks fail to consider that some American institutions such as Social Security, Medicare, the post office, the armed forces, etc. are all “government run” and the majority of Americans can't imagine life without them.”
And they are all going over budget each year, cost more then first forecasted, and basically are going broke. According to the CBO within a short period of time SS, and Medicare, will consume 70% of the GDP.
The loudest of loud mouths when questioned if they are on Medicare respond affirmatively without even considering the absurdity of their positions.
“Using similar tactics of name-calling is not acceptable to most. Ultimately it's the tactic of the desperate and the hopeless.”
This is funny coming from the same people who called Republicans back in the 90’s “baby killers”, or declared that the GOP wanted the elderly to die when they sought SS reform, or welfare reform. Now they only call them “homophobes”, “xenophobes”, “NAZI’s”, “fascists”, or whatever they wish, and attack them when they try to speak out on university campuses.
“Republicans that insist on saying 'no' have not advanced any alternatives aside from claiming that what we have is “the best in the world” thereby continuing the myth that anything American is always “number one.””
Well, accept for the three, count them THREE, alternative bills they introduced in May, and June, that were not allowed to come forward for a vote. Then too, there is the tort reform they have wanted for years, and Democrats have blocked.
“Democrats may have to go it alone on this one.”
I hope they do. Then when it runs way over budget, and fails, they can accept the blame. However, they will probably say “we had no choice since the Republicans failed to participate in the process” thus lying, and ignoring the truth as usual.
“LBJ for signing the Civil Rights Act,”
This too is funny since it was the Democrats that opposed it, and the Republicans that made passage possible.
“Let's stop the noise and begin to use common sense.”
When will you begin?
Dear Krazy Ken,
What is your suggestion for a system to replace Medicare?
PP
Krazy Ken said: “Let's stop the noise and begin to use common sense.”
When will you begin”
Right after YOU DO Kennewick Man, right after you do…. Haw, haw, haw!
Pooper says:
Dear Krazy Ken,
What is your suggestion for a system to replace Medicare?
PP”
Well, guess one could eliminate the taxation that is to pay for it, and allow the people to save for some other insurance.
Look, I have never said I have all the answers. It is your side of the aisle that wants others to believe they do. What I do know is that to repeat the mistakes that the European countries have made is not the answer.
Why not at least look at some of the alternatives Republicans have put forward, or even tort reform, or the Healthy Americans Act introduced by Wyden which Baucus has said will not go forward? Would not that be better then lying, and saying the Republicans have no answers, or suggestions?
If you are really seeking an honest dialogue then you should give the other side a chance.
Steerpike says:
Right after YOU DO Kennewick Man, right after you do…. Haw, haw, haw!”
Funny you should bring up the “Kennewick Man” which was another fraud leftwingers tried to use to prove evolution, or was it that the Native American was the first to settle in North America.
In any event, once again you prove you have no intelligent response to my posts, so, what can I say.
Look, I have never said I have all the answers. It is your side of the aisle that wants others to believe they do. KRAZY KEN, EVERYBODY, THE MINDREADER What I do know is that to repeat the mistakes that the European countries have made is not the answer OH, YEAH, THOSE “MISTAKES” THAT EARNED THEM SUCH HIGH RANKINGS IN THE WHO HEALTHCARE RANKINGS… OOOOOOH, YEAH, THOSE MISTAKES! HAW, HAW, HAW.
“Funny you should bring up the “Kennewick Man” which was another fraud leftwingers tried to use to prove evolution, or was it that the Native American was the first to settle in North America”
Sure Kennewick Man, sure!
“In any event, once again you prove you have no intelligent response to my posts, so, what can I say”
We all started that way, Krazy Ken, but you beat it out of us!!!!
I want that Brit who is so proud of his health care system to comment on this:
Model Health care in England
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1209034/The-babies-born-hospital-corridors-Bed-shortage-forces-4-000-mothers-birth-lifts-offices-hospital-toilets.html
The babies born in hospital corridors: Bed shortage forces 4,000 mothers to give birth in lifts, offices and hospital toilets
Thousands of women are having to give birth outside maternity wards because of a lack of midwives and hospital beds.
The lives of mothers and babies are being put at risk as births in locations ranging from lifts to toilets – even a caravan – went up 15 per cent last year to almost 4,000.
Health chiefs admit a lack of maternity beds is partly to blame for the crisis, with hundreds of women in labour being turned away from hospitals because they are full.
Latest figures show that over the past two years there were at least:
63 births in ambulances and 608 in transit to hospitals;
117 births in A&E departments, four in minor injury units and two in medical assessment areas;
115 births on other hospital wards and 36 in other unspecified areas including corridors;
399 in parts of maternity units other than labour beds, including postnatal and antenatal wards and reception areas.
Additionally, overstretched maternity units shut their doors to any more women in labour on 553 occasions last year.
Babies were born in offices, lifts, toilets and a caravan, according to the Freedom of Information data for 2007 and 2008 from 117 out of 147 trusts which provide maternity services.
One woman gave birth in a lift while being transferred to a labour ward from A&E while another gave birth in a corridor, said East Cheshire NHS Trust.
Others said women had to give birth on the wards – rather than in their own maternity room – because the delivery suites were full.
Tory health spokesman Andrew Lansley, who obtained the figures, said Labour had cut maternity beds by 2,340, or 22 per cent, since 1997. At the same time birth rates have been rising sharply – up 20 per cent in some areas.
Mr Lansley said: ‘New mothers should not be being put through the trauma of having to give birth in such inappropriate places.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1209034/The-babies-born-hospital-corrido rs-Bed-shortage-forces-4-000-mothers-birth-lifts-offices-hospital-toilets.html#ixzz0PLFg1AUZ
Whining Steerpike says:
We all started that way, Krazy Ken, but you beat it out of us!!!!”
I would suggest you go back and look at the first response to my first letter, then admit you are either ignorant of the facts, or lying.
Then again, you seem to be incapable of going back and looking at responses.
“Funny you should bring up the “Kennewick Man” which was another fraud leftwingers tried to use to prove evolution, or was it that the Native American was the first to settle in North America”
A charge I never heard before. Any sources–you must have some–to back this up? The only controversy I was aware of was tribal–who gets to claim him as ancestor and bury him.
Fed Up Granny says:
“Funny you should bring up the “Kennewick Man” which was another fraud leftwingers tried to use to prove evolution, or was it that the Native American was the first to settle in North America”
A charge I never heard before. Any sources–you must have some–to back this up? The only controversy I was aware of was tribal–who gets to claim him as ancestor and bury him.”
Just go to google, and type in “kennewick man controversy”
Here is a sample:
The Controversy
Public interest, debate, and controversy began when an independent archaeologist, working on contract to the Kennewick coroner, decided the bones were ancient but might not be Native American. He described them as “Caucasoid” and sent a piece of bone to a laboratory to be dated. The final date indicated an age of 9,000 years, making Kennewick Man one of the oldest and most complete skeletons found in the Americas. Subsequent tests of other bone samples showed the skeleton to be somewhere between 5650 and 9510 years old. But if it is true that these human remains are thousands of years old, and are not Native American, then who was Kennewick Man? This question raised a number of other questions that have put Kennewick Man “on trial” in the public eye.
http://www.washington.edu/burkemuseum/kman/
Kooky Ken said: “The Controversy
Public interest, debate, and controversy began when an independent archaeologist, working on contract to the Kennewick coroner, decided the bones were ancient but might not be Native American. He described them as “Caucasoid” and sent a piece of bone to a laboratory to be dated. The final date indicated an age of 9,000 years, making Kennewick Man one of the oldest and most complete skeletons found in the Americas. Subsequent tests of other bone samples showed the skeleton to be somewhere between 5650 and 9510 years old. But if it is true that these human remains are thousands of years old, and are not Native American, then who was Kennewick Man? This question raised a number of other questions that have put Kennewick Man “on trial” in the public eye”
1, Don’t see no Lib’ril Conspir’cy here Kenny Boy
2. How on Earth DO you define “Liberal” anyway?