Reader comments
Readers' forum: Let health-care bill die
62 comments | Read story
SashimiGuy | 4:57 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
Would you also send that same message to the 45,000 Americans that die every
year in our current system?
watcher | 5:38 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
Let it die ! We don't want it in any shape.
Comments continue below
Patsy | 5:38 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
... along with those who can't afford or can't qualify for insurance.
Matt | 6:37 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
Have a clue Matt. You got any better solutions for healthcare than what is being
proposed?
senate | 7:17 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
Matt, we'll make you a deal, give up your health insurance and then
we'll let the bill die, deal?
Anonymous | 7:25 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
It's nice to know that I can come to the DN editorial page for intelligent,
well-reasoned debate on the issues of the day.
Anonymous | 7:44 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
The bill won't save anyones lives and will steal and kill more people.
Insurance is not health | 7:48 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
Insurance is for protection of assets. This healthcare bill is a tax bill. If
you are poor, you have medicaid. If you stumble into the hospital sick and
uninsured, you will be taken care of. If you go to the doctor, you work out a
payment plan. If you are in a car wreck, you are covered, if you are in a work
accident you are covered. If you have a home and assets you likely have health
insurance to protect them. If you are young and healthy and need your money to
pay for education and buy autos and furniture, your assets are so small you
don't need health insurance. This bill is nothing but generational theft.
The young are sporadically unemployed, and they don't go to doctors. The
bill actually is designed to force parents to keep their children on their
policies until they are 27, or they are subject to penalties and even criminal
convictions. It's a tax bill and a government scam.
Anonymous | 7:52 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
If it dies, so should your employer subsidized health insurance.
reason | 7:55 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
Lets be reasonable and let it die. Why give even more power to the feds. The
founders didn't want all power in heaven and earth to be in the federal
govt.
How bout' we clean up the system we already have in place, cut the corruption, let competition and the free market work.
Enough of these bills being passed in the middle of the night with nobody knowing what is in them. Nobody reading them, and costing us more than we have to give. Isn't this reasonable, Obama?
How bout' we clean up the system we already have in place, cut the corruption, let competition and the free market work.
Enough of these bills being passed in the middle of the night with nobody knowing what is in them. Nobody reading them, and costing us more than we have to give. Isn't this reasonable, Obama?
Grover | 7:59 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
Does anyone see the conflict of the worry that government can't run
healthcare when the only demographic group in the country that is completely
satisfied with their coverage are those over 65. Stick with Medicare and lower
the age to birth.
ok matt | 8:10 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
Another mindless drone voicing Glenn Beck's opinion. wow.
lost in DC | 8:23 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
our posters up through 7:17 (the latest posted at this writing) are acting as if
the dems seriously flawed and exhorbitantly expensive plan will actually fix the
problems we have with paying for health care.
This bill is like a man who had too much iron in his water, so to make it taste better, he added 2 parts anti-freeze to every 3 parts water. It will make it taste sweeter, but it will kill you in the end.
Do we need health care reform? Yes. Is the current bill a good approach to health care reform? No.
This bill is like a man who had too much iron in his water, so to make it taste better, he added 2 parts anti-freeze to every 3 parts water. It will make it taste sweeter, but it will kill you in the end.
Do we need health care reform? Yes. Is the current bill a good approach to health care reform? No.
RedShirt | 8:30 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
TO "SashimiGuy | 4:57 a.m." you realize that if 45,000 people die
because of our health system every year, that really isn't a problem. Here
are some illnesses that kill more people per year than the health care
industry:
Seasonal flu: 63,000
Cancer: 556,902
Pneumonia: 61776
Swine flu (estimate for this flu season): 90,000
Complications with Diabetes: 178689
So, how about we take care of those things first since they kill more people than the health care system.
Seasonal flu: 63,000
Cancer: 556,902
Pneumonia: 61776
Swine flu (estimate for this flu season): 90,000
Complications with Diabetes: 178689
So, how about we take care of those things first since they kill more people than the health care system.
GWB | 8:38 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
The author of the letter sounds like he is on one of Sarah Palin's
"Death Panels", making the choice that will see more people die.
jackhp | 8:45 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
Note to Matt Milner: the Republican health care plan? Let. You. Die.
(wow, I kinda like the periods Roland, it gives one a false sense of importance ;) )
(wow, I kinda like the periods Roland, it gives one a false sense of importance ;) )
No change! | 9:00 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
I oppose any change to health care. I want American sick to die, or survive and
declare bankruptcy. I want English to be the only language spoken here. And I
want my analog television signal returned just like it was! I oppose change of
any kind.
@RedShirt | 9:07 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
If legislation could prevent the deaths from seasonal flu, cancer, pneumonia,
swine flu don't you think we should do it?
Legislation--enacting universal health care--can result in fewer deaths and longer lives for those who lack insurance. So why not?
Legislation--enacting universal health care--can result in fewer deaths and longer lives for those who lack insurance. So why not?
Matt Milner | 9:09 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
Interesting group of comments so far. Grover, have you ever seen how much those
over 65 pay for their "insurance?" For all intents and purposes, they
don't pay a dime. Their premiums barely cover the "shipping and
handling" costs of their end-of-year statements. Everyone else pays for
their health care costs. I would be happy with that arrangement, too. If
Medicare covers everyone, who will pay?
I'm not opposed to reform. But this thing that was cobbled together and passed without anyone having read it--I don't think that ANY of us have a clue of what the end result would be if it became law.
The government has NOTHING in and of itself - it can give only what it takes from others. I'm not opposed to taxes (really, I'm not), but surely there's a better use for our money than this bill provides.
@ok matt - I've never listened to Glenn Beck, for whatever that's worth to you.
@Sashimi - I suspect the mortality rate will be unchanged by this bill. It will stay at 100%. :)
I'm not opposed to reform. But this thing that was cobbled together and passed without anyone having read it--I don't think that ANY of us have a clue of what the end result would be if it became law.
The government has NOTHING in and of itself - it can give only what it takes from others. I'm not opposed to taxes (really, I'm not), but surely there's a better use for our money than this bill provides.
@ok matt - I've never listened to Glenn Beck, for whatever that's worth to you.
@Sashimi - I suspect the mortality rate will be unchanged by this bill. It will stay at 100%. :)
Anonymous | 9:13 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
Kill the bill! Start over and write something that will truly keep prices down
and improve patient care. Let's return the focus to where it ought to be -
healing the sick and injured - instead of being primarily about $$$$$. We
desperately need reform but not this horrendous Medusa.
Good Samaritan | 9:33 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
I'm sure that was the same thoughts as the Preist and Temple Assistant. Let
him die.
The parable told by Jesus in order to illustrate that human kindness and fellow feeling must be available to all, and that fulfilling the spirit of the Law is just as important as fulfilling the letter of the Law.
And I always thought you religous nut-cakes on the ultra-far-right believed the Founding Fathers favored Christian values.
This IS one of them.
Actions speak louder than words.
The parable told by Jesus in order to illustrate that human kindness and fellow feeling must be available to all, and that fulfilling the spirit of the Law is just as important as fulfilling the letter of the Law.
And I always thought you religous nut-cakes on the ultra-far-right believed the Founding Fathers favored Christian values.
This IS one of them.
Actions speak louder than words.
RedShirt | 9:34 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
To "jackhp | 8:45 a.m." stop the liberal propaganda. The DN ran a
story on Nov 3 titled "Reid indicates timetable for health care may
slip" where they summarize the Republican plan. I would imagine that if
the plan was simply to let you die, it would have been run on the front page.
GWB | 9:58 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
Redshirt, and which of those categories fall under the completely
preventable?
Cancer, stop everyone from smoking and you will make a dent.
Seasonal flu - not preventable, but reducible.
Pneumonia, swine flu, diabetes - same a s seasonal flu.
The deaths from lack of healthcare due to lack of insurance coverage - 100% preventable.
That is the big difference. We as a people can elimnate those deaths if we simply have the will power and the courage to care about people once they are out of the womb.
Cancer, stop everyone from smoking and you will make a dent.
Seasonal flu - not preventable, but reducible.
Pneumonia, swine flu, diabetes - same a s seasonal flu.
The deaths from lack of healthcare due to lack of insurance coverage - 100% preventable.
That is the big difference. We as a people can elimnate those deaths if we simply have the will power and the courage to care about people once they are out of the womb.
RedShirt | 10:02 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
To "@RedShirt | 9:07 a.m. " I never said that legislation would
prevent the deaths due to those illnesses. I just said that if the problem is
people dying, there are things that kill more people than the health care
system.
Bue if you want to go into the arguement of health insurance (that is what congress is taking over, not health care) then lets have at it. You tell me what percentage of the population is without insurance, cannot afford insurance, and does not qualify for a government plan, then lets compare that to France's system (they are usually considered the best universal health care system).
Bue if you want to go into the arguement of health insurance (that is what congress is taking over, not health care) then lets have at it. You tell me what percentage of the population is without insurance, cannot afford insurance, and does not qualify for a government plan, then lets compare that to France's system (they are usually considered the best universal health care system).
Ultra Bob | 10:09 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
If our elected representatives cannot create true health reform, and wish to
push us further down into the agony of bad health care, then let it die.
It was the lack of support for President Obama that led him to allow the medical industry itself to write it’s own reform, which will be no reform at all for the people.
We have only ourselves to blame
It was the lack of support for President Obama that led him to allow the medical industry itself to write it’s own reform, which will be no reform at all for the people.
We have only ourselves to blame
Re: SashimiGuy | 10:17 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
Yes, I'm sure that government-run healthcare will be so good that people
stop dying. Who knew that all along it was the Democrats who hold the keys to
immortality?
I suspect that after we are exposed to government-run healthcare, roughly the same number of people as before will be dying. The difference is they will be dying with more pain and less treatment options than before.
I suspect that after we are exposed to government-run healthcare, roughly the same number of people as before will be dying. The difference is they will be dying with more pain and less treatment options than before.
GWB | 10:21 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
To "reason", you say "How bout' we clean up the system we
already have in place, cut the corruption, let competition and the free market
work."
Sounds good to me, let's eliminate the anti-trust exemption.
Insurance companies can now legally collude to fix prices due to this exemption and can have monopolies in geographic areas.
To reinstate the free market and end monopolies, the Federal government should elimnate this expemtion and break up monopolies.
Sounds good to me, let's eliminate the anti-trust exemption.
Insurance companies can now legally collude to fix prices due to this exemption and can have monopolies in geographic areas.
To reinstate the free market and end monopolies, the Federal government should elimnate this expemtion and break up monopolies.
RedShirt | 10:35 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
To "Good Samaritan | 9:33 a.m." luckily, research has shown that
conservatives give more to charities, and are more likely to give to charities
that help people than Democrats.
Some research out there has shown that Democrats give more to the Symphonies than to humanitarian aid groups.
So, apparently the far right is actually doing what Jesus has said, and are giving their money to the poor.
If you have read the parables of Jesus, you will see that the servants that have to be commanded in all things are constantly rebuked. The Democrats are like those servants, and must be commanded to give to the poor before they will do so.
Some research out there has shown that Democrats give more to the Symphonies than to humanitarian aid groups.
So, apparently the far right is actually doing what Jesus has said, and are giving their money to the poor.
If you have read the parables of Jesus, you will see that the servants that have to be commanded in all things are constantly rebuked. The Democrats are like those servants, and must be commanded to give to the poor before they will do so.
jackhp | 10:38 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
RedShirt,
I think it's pretty clear from your first comment, "... if 45,000 people die because of our health system every year, that really isn't a problem") that you're on board with the Republican health care plan I outlined.
I think it's pretty clear from your first comment, "... if 45,000 people die because of our health system every year, that really isn't a problem") that you're on board with the Republican health care plan I outlined.
jackhp | 10:41 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
Matt,
Save the "party of NO" talking points and tell us what YOU would do differently.
Save the "party of NO" talking points and tell us what YOU would do differently.
RedShirt | 10:58 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
To "GWB | 9:58 a.m. " with current technology, they are not completely
preventable. So, rather than creating another big government spending program,
how about we take a fraction of that money and do some constitutionaly
sanctioned scientific research to find a cure or treatment for those things.
In the mean time, how about congress actually does something to reduce the cost of insurance rather than transferring its control to them.
In the mean time, how about congress actually does something to reduce the cost of insurance rather than transferring its control to them.
WRK | 11:01 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
If, like GWB says, that Health Insurance kills people, there should be a group
trying to ban Health Care.
Oh, wait, that's the present plan, my bad.
Oh, wait, that's the present plan, my bad.
Anonymous | 11:31 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
What should be done about an insurance industry that has become so corrupt that
they are basically selling the American people health care for profit? Leave it
alone and let the free market work? We already tried that, and now small
business owners can't afford to insure their employees, insurance companies
are denying coverage to pregnant women and their husbands and people are going
bankrupt trying to pay horrendously out of control medical bills for simple
procedures even with medical insurance.
Yeah, insurance companies are great. Every year you and your employers rate goes up, and your plan covers less than it did the year before (Read the fine print). People who are getting sick are finding themselves dropped from insurance plans that they have paid into for years, not to mention that the plans that the industry is creating now to lower costs leaves individuals and families woefully underinsured.
They need to be stopped. The middle class can't afford another 30 percent increase in health insurance costs when there income only increases three percent during the same period.
Yeah, insurance companies are great. Every year you and your employers rate goes up, and your plan covers less than it did the year before (Read the fine print). People who are getting sick are finding themselves dropped from insurance plans that they have paid into for years, not to mention that the plans that the industry is creating now to lower costs leaves individuals and families woefully underinsured.
They need to be stopped. The middle class can't afford another 30 percent increase in health insurance costs when there income only increases three percent during the same period.
RedShirt | 11:37 a.m. Nov. 10, 2009
TO "jackhp | 10:41 a.m. " nice to see you ignoring actual facts and
jsut attacking blindly.
The Republicans are not the "party of NO". They are the party of a 230 page health care reform bill that could reduce the cost of healthcare if it was enacted.
Once again, we can see that you just shoot from the hip and hope something will it.
The Republicans are not the "party of NO". They are the party of a 230 page health care reform bill that could reduce the cost of healthcare if it was enacted.
Once again, we can see that you just shoot from the hip and hope something will it.
jackhp | 12:00 p.m. Nov. 10, 2009
WRK,
You have some serious reading comprehension problems.
GWB said a LACK of health care due to a LACK of health insurance is directly responsible for 45000 deaths each year.
And RedShirt, we most certainly CAN prevent 100% of those deaths because if we, as a country, provide health insurance and health care to EVERYONE then they won't die due to a LACK of those things.
You have some serious reading comprehension problems.
GWB said a LACK of health care due to a LACK of health insurance is directly responsible for 45000 deaths each year.
And RedShirt, we most certainly CAN prevent 100% of those deaths because if we, as a country, provide health insurance and health care to EVERYONE then they won't die due to a LACK of those things.
jackhp | 12:09 p.m. Nov. 10, 2009
RedShirt,
The Republican plan is pretty much the status quo when it comes to "regulating" the insurance industry. 45000 people die every year because of the status quo. I'd say, "Let you die" sums it up quite nicely, thank you.
The Republican plan is pretty much the status quo when it comes to "regulating" the insurance industry. 45000 people die every year because of the status quo. I'd say, "Let you die" sums it up quite nicely, thank you.
Nice try, Red. | 12:21 p.m. Nov. 10, 2009
Red, if you read that facts.The republican health care bill would remove health
care from 3,000,000 Americans. The size and reading bills sure never mattered to
republicans when republican senator Pil Gramm, slipped the Commodities Futures
Modernization Act in to a bill twenty minutes before congress went on Christmas
break.
The party of incessant whiners is more fitting than the party of no.
The party of incessant whiners is more fitting than the party of no.
PINK BLOUSE | 12:35 p.m. Nov. 10, 2009
10:35
"...research has shown..."
"...Some research out there..."
"...aparently..."
Your standard indictment of all people who comment is that they do not stick to the facts.
Your post at 10:35 is an indictment of your own standard.
"...research has shown..."
"...Some research out there..."
"...aparently..."
Your standard indictment of all people who comment is that they do not stick to the facts.
Your post at 10:35 is an indictment of your own standard.
Encore...Encore! | 12:39 p.m. Nov. 10, 2009
RedShirt --
Please tell us all again how you concluded that the Good Samaritan was the Repbulicans!
hahahahahahahahaha
Please tell us all again how you concluded that the Good Samaritan was the Repbulicans!
hahahahahahahahaha
Matt Milner | 12:43 p.m. Nov. 10, 2009
@jackhp: I'm not trying to approach this from the viewpoint of one party or
another. Spending $1 trillion (and that's just the best estimate!)
doesn't make sense at all, especially since it doesn't attempt to
reform the system in place that is causing the problem.
It makes sense, particularly in a recession, to look at policy changes that could make a difference: remove restrictions on interstate insurance purchases, remove restrictions that dictate what must be covered by every policy, etc.
Look changing (or, heaven forbid, rescinding) the laws and regulations that drive up the cost of health care, don't just play the shell game of changing who pays for what and call it "reform."
It makes sense, particularly in a recession, to look at policy changes that could make a difference: remove restrictions on interstate insurance purchases, remove restrictions that dictate what must be covered by every policy, etc.
Look changing (or, heaven forbid, rescinding) the laws and regulations that drive up the cost of health care, don't just play the shell game of changing who pays for what and call it "reform."
Let's See | 12:44 p.m. Nov. 10, 2009
If we get ObamaCare then we get slow agonizing deaths or if we have
Non-ObamaCare then we get fast quick deaths... Hmmmm
Can somebody tell us what this means about absolute power that will be given to our Narcissist-in-Chief? Is that what you lemmings, er, liberals want?
Can somebody tell us what this means about absolute power that will be given to our Narcissist-in-Chief? Is that what you lemmings, er, liberals want?
Roland Kayser | 12:46 p.m. Nov. 10, 2009
To Red Shirt: 100% of France's population has basic health insurance that
is paid for by payroll taxes. In addition, 90% of the French purchase
supplemental coverage through private insurers. Per capita health care costs are
42% less in France than in the U.S., and the French are healthier than we are.
RedShirt | 1:18 p.m. Nov. 10, 2009
To "jackhp | 12:00 p.m. " so what you are saying is that it is better
to for more people to die while sitting on a wait list. Just like in Canada,
and many other countries that have socialized medicine.
RedShirt | 1:40 p.m. Nov. 10, 2009
To "PINK BLOUSE | 12:35 p.m." and "Encore...Encore! | 12:39
p.m." read the following articles:
"Are Conservatives Happier than Liberals?" in the Washington Independant
Utah is typically considered a conservative state and "Happiest place? Survey says … Utah!" in the DN says it it the happiest.
Live Science's article "Happiness Is ... Being Old, Male and Republican" says conservatives are happier.
Again "The number: 37% – GOP leads" in the DN shows conservatives are happier than liberals
CNN's Jack Cafferty ran an article "Why are conservatives happier than liberals?"
Now read the article "Bleeding Heart Tightwads" in the NY Times, showing that liberals are the least likely to give money to charity.
Is that enough verifiable evidence, or do you need more?
To "Roland Kayser | 12:46 p.m." actually only 88% of France is covered by their national system. Read the article "France Fights Universal Care's High Cost" in the Wall Street Journal. 12% get private coverage. They may have a lower cost per person, but at least half their people pay more than we do.
"Are Conservatives Happier than Liberals?" in the Washington Independant
Utah is typically considered a conservative state and "Happiest place? Survey says … Utah!" in the DN says it it the happiest.
Live Science's article "Happiness Is ... Being Old, Male and Republican" says conservatives are happier.
Again "The number: 37% – GOP leads" in the DN shows conservatives are happier than liberals
CNN's Jack Cafferty ran an article "Why are conservatives happier than liberals?"
Now read the article "Bleeding Heart Tightwads" in the NY Times, showing that liberals are the least likely to give money to charity.
Is that enough verifiable evidence, or do you need more?
To "Roland Kayser | 12:46 p.m." actually only 88% of France is covered by their national system. Read the article "France Fights Universal Care's High Cost" in the Wall Street Journal. 12% get private coverage. They may have a lower cost per person, but at least half their people pay more than we do.
GWB | 1:40 p.m. Nov. 10, 2009
Redshirt, you said "how about we take a fraction of that money and do some
constitutionaly sanctioned scientific research to find a cure or treatment for
those things."
Where in the Constitution does it allow for medical research? Unfortunately, (using the strict constructionalist, literal interpretation of the Constitution) I can't find where it gives power to the government to confiscate my assets to pay for medical research.
Please enlighten me.
Otherwise, your talking points fall flat on literal interpretation of the Constitution.
Where in the Constitution does it allow for medical research? Unfortunately, (using the strict constructionalist, literal interpretation of the Constitution) I can't find where it gives power to the government to confiscate my assets to pay for medical research.
Please enlighten me.
Otherwise, your talking points fall flat on literal interpretation of the Constitution.
jackhp | 2:05 p.m. Nov. 10, 2009
RedShirt, 1:18 p.m.
Yep, that's what I'm saying. *rolls eyes* (it's truly amazing how you get dumber with each post).
Yep, that's what I'm saying. *rolls eyes* (it's truly amazing how you get dumber with each post).
@RedShirt | 2:55 p.m. Nov. 10, 2009
you: that it is better to for more people to die while sitting on a wait list.
Just like in Canada, and many other countries that have socialized medicine.
me: how do these other countries have longer life expectancies and higher ratings for health care when people are dying waiting for treatment?
me: how do these other countries have longer life expectancies and higher ratings for health care when people are dying waiting for treatment?
RedShirt | 2:57 p.m. Nov. 10, 2009
To "GWB | 1:40 p.m." if you actually read the constitution, you would
find Article 1, Section 8 that says that Congress is "To promote the
Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors
and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and
Discoveries."
I don't know about you, but medical science probably qualifies under that.
I don't know about you, but medical science probably qualifies under that.
Wake up | 3:18 p.m. Nov. 10, 2009
The healthcare bill won't save any lives. It will just shift the deaths
(and costs of healthcare) to the middle class - as always. The rich will still
get what they want and use their influence to benefit themselves. The poor will
get more of what they want without paying for it.
The middle class, on the other hand, will pay the poor and will not be able to afford what they get now. They will have to wait longer to get help, which means that more of them will die.
That fact is not about liberal or conservative views. It is just a reality that only conservatives are willing to recognize. Thanks Liberals.
The middle class, on the other hand, will pay the poor and will not be able to afford what they get now. They will have to wait longer to get help, which means that more of them will die.
That fact is not about liberal or conservative views. It is just a reality that only conservatives are willing to recognize. Thanks Liberals.
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
- Y.'s Pitta on Mackey Award list 8:11 p.m.
- Chop shops busted 8:05 p.m.
- Roy's 29 points lead Trail Blazers 8:03 p.m.
- Blake's late goal lifts Leafs over Isles 8:01 p.m.
- Hawks' run crushes Bulls 7:53 p.m.
- Mason's 32 saves lead Blue Jackets 7:42 p.m.
- Mutated version of H1N1 found 7:42 p.m.
- Miller, Sabres blank Capitals 7:40 p.m.
- Johnson, Moore lead No. 5 Purdue 7:35 p.m.
- Y.'s Emery bruised, but rarely beaten 7:33 p.m.
- Hot Rod behind mic for Lakers
- Cougars use depth to beat ASU
- Max Hall wants to look ahead
- Non-BCS schools not given fair shot
- Panel passes BCS playoff bill
- Doctor calls Mitchell 'naive,' 'inept'
- Palin signs books, chats with fans
- Small plane crashes near Lehi
- Snow brings big chill
- Jazz go up against 'the best'
- Y. profs: Beck not all-knowing
291 - Letters: Global warming a lie228
- TCU to play Boise in Fiesta Bowl206
- BYU football: Bronco weighs in on Hall178
- Cougars going back to Vegas150
- Utah/BYU rivalry can be more civil145
- Andersen apologizes for Jordan hoax137
- George lost in rivalry hatefest121
- Max Hall wants to look ahead116
- Ed Smart 'appalled' at testimony100
Love him or hate him, Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch knows how to get attention.
For the latest news in the health care debate and how it affects you...
Latest comments
Booo...our government want to force change, not educate for change. This is...
Perspective Man, I was referring to a belief in the Book of Mormon. One...
I was privileged enough to have lived in both Utah and Los Angeles over the...
is it against the law or not?
Lets give max a break on the hate utah thing. He got caught up in the...
Go Murray.. Kobe time
It's apparent that some of our bloggers haven't learned to read above a 2nd...
Great story! We're rooting for J.R. all the way! Watched him race in recent...
To the critics: The trading over marriage may seem tribal or primitive, but...
Healthcare needs Action to change it.... Not Fear and Terror Scare...
Advertisements
Did anyone change their mind because I put a period after each word?