Reader comments
Moderate Dems pivotal in Saturday health-care vote

ha | 10:34 a.m. Nov. 20, 2009

Lemmings headed for cliff

The Rock | 10:36 a.m. Nov. 20, 2009

The American people do not want this. The Declaration of Independence states that all legitimate governments govern with the consent of the governed. Our current government is not a legitimate government.
The preamble to the constitution states that one of the goals of forming this government was "to preserve the blessings of liberty to our selves and our posterity." This health care bill gives the government life and death control over every American.
How is a person with a sick child going to feel free to disagree with a government that can deny coverage to the sick child? (Don't tell me it would not happen.)
The laws of the nation are to be uniform through out the country. Congressman have exempted themselves from the system they want to put us under.

It can't get much worse.

Arthur M. | 11:34 a.m. Nov. 20, 2009

Survival of the fittest is the way of the Real World! You socialistss should be happy your not charged for breathing my air!

Comments continue below

mark | 11:45 a.m. Nov. 20, 2009

Republicans are giving Democrats the next 2 elections (at MINIMUM) when they pass healthcare without a Republican lifting a finger.

Ana | 1:06 p.m. Nov. 20, 2009

Actually, I think it is the Democrats who are handing over elections when they ram something like this down our throats.

mark | 1:20 p.m. Nov. 20, 2009

Ana

We'll know who's right in 4 years...I like MY odds.

Cosmo | 1:58 p.m. Nov. 20, 2009

This Nation will be plunged into civil war by the DemonRats! Thank you Harry.

Craig | 2:02 p.m. Nov. 20, 2009

I think we will know who's right next November. I predict Republican gains in both the House and the Senate, regardless of whether the healthcare bill passes or not, but more so if it does.

xscribe | 2:23 p.m. Nov. 20, 2009

@The Rock: The percentage is about 50/50, so that means 50 percent of America does want this. You just happen to side with the half that doesn't. This also doesn't eliminate private insurance nor dictate government-run insurance, so you're dead wrong - pun intended - about the life-and-death control you talk about. Stop the scare tactics, please.

Factanista | 2:28 p.m. Nov. 20, 2009

A quick Google search on the public opinion to a public option shows an overwhelming majority favor it.

Obama was elected with promises of health care reform. Now that it's coming some of you think that it will somehow harm his chances next election?

lol k

Products of the American education system at its finest.

Succeed | 2:52 p.m. Nov. 20, 2009

If this pass I will favor succession from the Union. Socialism is communism. We all know what kind of quality of life we can expect from that form of government.

Anonymous | 3:45 p.m. Nov. 20, 2009

Yeehaw!

I for one am looking forward to yet another well run government service that comes in under budget and delivers better service at lower rates than the private sector. I mean we only have to look back at history to know this will be a resounding success.

What's there to lose? I mean it is not like our country is running out of money or anything crazy like that.

Linguist | 3:50 p.m. Nov. 20, 2009

I wish that the proposed Health Care Reform bills were radical--we actually need some radical change in the way insurance companies currently ration our health care and get between patients and their doctors.

Alas, the bills are really more bandaids than major surgery.

In fact, Republican President Richard M. Nixon proposed a "Comprehensive Health Insurance Plan" in 1974 that was far more "radical" and far more "socialist" than anything currently being proposed--and, well, President Nixon was no "liberal."

And EVERY employer would have been required to offer all full-time employees President Nixon's Comprehensive Health Insurance Plan--with no "opt outs." EVERY employer.

Please stop presenting the current proposed bills as something radical. They aren't. Debate them on their merits. There's no need to paint them as something they simply are not.

Anonymous | 4:23 p.m. Nov. 20, 2009

We won't know for sure what this will do for several years. It isn't scheduled to go into effect until after Obama has won his second term. That should be enough to suggest it isn't a good bill, if the President isn't even to use it to get re-elected, in fact it is the opposite. I hope every senator has read the 2000 pages before they vote over the weekend. Then we would have something to be grateful for. Senators that actually know what they are votine for.

Landrieu bought and paid for? | 4:32 p.m. Nov. 20, 2009

Isn't it ironic that Harry Sleaze would include $100 million in his socialized medicine package for Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu's (D)state if she votes for this? It isn't ironic that she has been working to get this for a while. Hmmm...I wonder what Ms. Landrieu is going to do? That's a rhetorical question.

As for Blanche Lincoln (D) of Arkansas, she will be defeated in her upcoming election if she votes for this. Currently, she holds a 41%-39% lead over her opponent. However, if she supports this health care debacle and travesty, her opponent takes a 12 point lead.

See ya' Blanche and Mary! You won't be missed, but the people taking your spots will certainly be a welcomed site. Vote for this and each of you will be given pink slips and it will be deserved.

I can't wait for the cleansing that will take place in 2010 and 2012 that will sweep away the leftist radicals,Corruptocrats, all bark-no bite blue dogs, and any lost/misguide Republicans. A return to conservatism and common sense is on its way.

Harry Sleaze will be defeated by Tarkanian as well.

Poll Numbers | 4:33 p.m. Nov. 20, 2009

For the record, the following is from the latest Rasmussen poll on November 16th:

– Forty-seven percent (47%) now favor the health care plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats.

– Forth-nine percent (49%) now oppose the proposed legislative health care plan.

– Only 25% of all voters Strongly Support the plan while nearly twice as many (39%) are Strongly Opposed.

As has been the case for months, Democrats favor the plan while Republicans and voters not affiliated with either major party are opposed. The latest numbers show support from 79% of those in the president’s party. The plan is opposed by 78% of Republicans. Sixty-one percent (61%) of unaffiliated voters now oppose the plan, up significantly from 48% two weeks ago. Unaffiliated voters (mainly Independents) are now the largest political block of all voters.

My Opinion: The 49% of voters opposing the proposed Obama/Congressional bill do want a health care plan – just not this plan. They're worried about the overall cost and whether it can be paid (deficit-neutral) over the long haul beyond 10 years. If unaffiliated voters have their say, the Democrats may be in big trouble next November if this plan passes.

Lindy | 4:48 p.m. Nov. 20, 2009

It seems that something that affects all of the American people should be a matter of vote.

Isn't this a Democratic country? Should'nt the people be able to decide whether or not they want this health bill? Instead, politicians who have their own health program are forcing it upon us.

When a bunch of politicians are in such a rush to pass something through with almost no debate, it makes me suspicious as to how good it is for the American people. Generally, politicians care very little for the welfare of the people that they represent, but care a lot about what's good for them.

Linguist | 5:02 p.m. Nov. 20, 2009

Lindy wrote, "...Generally, politicians care very little for the welfare of the people that they represent..."

With respect, I haven't found that to be the case at all. In fact, the several politicians I know personally entered politics because they cared what happened to their society, and wanted it to be a better place. Of course, "better" depends on who were are in life, but I think it's unfair to claim they are out to get us.

As for direct decisions on issues by the voters, no, that's not the way our government is set up. We elect representatives who, as the name illustrates, represent us in the government. And there are real constraints on what they can and cannot do, both through checks and balances (and elections) and because there are constitutional constraints on them.

It's actually a pretty remarkable system.

And in my opinion, it's at the very heart of what makes this such a remarkable and wonderful country.

Re: Lindy | 4:48 p.m. | 5:05 p.m. Nov. 20, 2009

You asked, "Isn't the a Democratic country?"

The answer is a matter of definition. A true democracy is where all citizens vote on every issue, as you have suggested. In actuality, this is a Republic, where the citizens choose someone to vote (represent) for them as a group of citizens. Hence, under the U.S. Constitution, we are a Republic wherein we have Representative in the Congress and Senators in the Senate to vote and represent a specific group of citizens who elected them for that purpose.

mark | 5:07 p.m. Nov. 20, 2009

@Lindy

America is a Republic with elected Reprentatives who vote for their constitute's interests. The fact your representives are a Minority Party, doesn't mean they don't vote your interests. it just means your side loses.
If every decision our Representatives make needed a public vote...NOTHING would get accomplished.

@Mark | 5:19 p.m. Nov. 20, 2009

Enjoy it while it last Mark....come 2010 Democrats will be the minority once again!

Insanity | 5:45 p.m. Nov. 20, 2009

Our national debt is $12 trillion. The White House estimates that this figure will more than double to 24.5 trillion by 2020.

Both major parties show no signs of discontinuing the practice of spending money we don't have.

Obama is setting records in this area. Historically, government programs cost FAR MORE that they are estimated to cost.

We already have social programs that will be unfunded soon.

Now Democrats/liberals tell us we need add this health care plan because... (insert whatever outrageous reason has been offered here).

They want us to believe it will actually cost what they say it will cost??? What has government ever done that proves that such an outcome will happen?

THIS IS INSANE!!!

People who support such a plan are disconnected from reality!

Liberals: This plan is immoral. We are enslaving future generations with staggering debt. How in the world do you ever justify this? How in the world do you ever expect to pay for all the social programs we are saddled with? Do you think you can tax your way out of this??

Before you start throwing other "well, what about..." please, answer the financial question!

Lindy | 6:10 p.m. Nov. 20, 2009

You are right, the system is set up in a way that supports the democratic process, I was just frustrated with the feeling that things seem out of control. I know that having the masses make these sorts of decisions might be a disaster, sometimes the public is not very well informed when they vote.

And it is unfair for me to believe the stereotype that all politicians have no regard for the people that they represent, I'm sure that there are politicians somewhere that entered politics for the good of their communities. You might have to forgive me for my negative feelings about politicians though, I live in Chicago, need I say more?

xscribe | 8:33 p.m. Nov. 20, 2009

@Insanity: Here's an answer to your financial question by asking you a question: When did the American people first start having to pay debt, and when did it become "staggering"?

You can now stop using words like "immoral."

$$$$$$$ | 9:00 p.m. Nov. 20, 2009

Does anyone who supports this really think this is only going to cost what the Democrats say? In 1966, when Medicare was proposed and adopted, it was estimated that it would cost $12 Billion by 1990. The actual cost by 1990 was $230 Billion. Do we really need to touch the hotplate to know that it's hot?

Insanity | 10:54 p.m. Nov. 20, 2009

@xscribe: You are dodging the issue. If you think the current course we are on is alright, say so and support why you believe it. I am disgusted by it.

Not since WW2 have we seen debt levels, as a % of GDP, this high. At least at that time we knew that war was the cause of it. One of the primary causes now: social spending (currently comprising 44% of the federal budget). Yes, there are other causes but they are traceable to government meddling also.

If $12 or $24 trillion of debt is not staggering to you then what is??? Does this not bother you?

Is it immoral to have debt? No. Is it immoral to saddle future generations with it? Absolutely. It is especially immoral when you observe that our current batch of politicians have no intention of changing their behavior.

How do you justify that???

Anonymous | 2:27 a.m. Nov. 21, 2009

Change Healthcare Now!

How is it Ok to spend a Trillion to go to Iraq for war based on 2000 deaths

and then why is it not ok to spend a Trillion to go to the American people for Healthcare based on millions of deaths.....

Jean | 10:30 a.m. Nov. 21, 2009

Consider this my apology to the world. I voted for Obama and the Democrats because I was tired of George Bush. I had no idea how much worse off we would be. I am sorry.

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.

1 photo

Manuel Balce Ceneta, Associated Press

Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin of Ill., right, accompanied by Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., gestures during a health-care reform news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington Friday.