I reckon that since Wesley Clark made that statement, he would be better suited to tell you exactly what he meant.
I think in essence any legitimate gripe they have with health care reform approaching universal is their gripe with serious need for Welfare and Immigration reform. To them, the only people who don’t have insurance are the lazy without jobs or the illegal immigrants that won’t get insurance because it’ll point them out to INS.
-I agree that Welfare reform could do a better job compelling some without jobs to look harder at finding them.
-I agree that Immigration reform should do a better job of making businesses that hire illegals prohibitively responsible.
-I don’t agree that that’s what UHC is really about.
:rolleyes: Please; libertarians are about as “centrist” as Communists.
my bold
to quote the great Dara O Briain:
“Herbal medicine. Oooh, herbal medicine has been around for thousands of years.
Indeed it has, and then we tested it all, and the stuff that worked became - medicine”
This really cuts straight to the heart of the matter.
Had Obama’s first major initiative been some completely different, totally unrelated matter, there’s not a doubt in my mind the Republicans and the grassroots/talk radio types would have reacted in precisely the same manner.
Are you guys just completely losing perspective? Conservatives have fought government health care for decades. Cite
Speaking as a Government worker who could probably make more in the private sector, but has decided to stay where he is because he prefers an environment where promoting the good of society is more important than how much money you can get from society, I respectfully disagree.
A neighbor & longtime friend is a Native Texan with land on the Border. He’s got a great shotgun collection. He’s prone to politically incorrect rants, although he’s usually teasing.
The other day he was extemely serious when he said that the Republicans want Obama to fail because he is a black man. No matter what the President tries to accomplish, they will be agin’ it.
I am not a Republican. But I think there are better programs.
For one thing, I hate the whole idea of calling it “health insurance.” What we want is an effective health-care delivery system that’s affordable to people who need it. The whole “single-payer” thing just indicates the problem–why isn’t the payer the person who receives the service?
I like making my own health-care decisions. Part of my decision includes whether I can afford it or not. “Insurance” should just be protection again the worst life can deal you. For instance, you would want insurance to have a baby. If you had a normal and uneventful pregnancy and delivery, you would pay for it; if you had complications, three months bed rest in the hospital, a C-section and several units of blood, then your insurance would cover that added cost.
But I can deal with a tax to provide care for people who can’t afford it. What I really hate is that I can’t walk into an emergency room with a splinter for under $750, because the ER has to make money on people who pay because they have to treat people who don’t pay, and a lot of them. This becomes a vicious cycle–I will NOT go to the ER with a splinter, because I can’t afford it. I will go only if I have something truly life-threatening.
But if there were a reasonable charge for the little stuff, more people would go there for the little stuff, and they could add lower charges to help pay for the indigent.
Oh, also: The Republicans are pissed because it’s not their bill. They are pissed because they don’t have a majority in Congress. They are pissed because there’s a Democrat in the White House. I think a lot of them, actually, are pissed because there’s a black family in the White House, but of course they wouldn’t say that.
This is the part I don’t get. Obama/democrats have had their run for barely over a year now. Things shift back & forth in american politics, and there are already prognostications showing a swing back toward the right come November. As a more or less neutral observer, this makes them appear very childish, and that is putting it mildly.
You guys are far too cynical. It’s not as if the magical Health Care fairy will come down and grant UHC if you just believe hard enough. That stuff costs money, even if you did believe the government would do it right (in which even I have a healthy dose of skepticism) it’s not hard to fathom an American simply believing health care is not necessarily every Americans birth right.
You can disagree, but ranting that UHC opposition is nothing more than expected selfish obstructionism is the ignorance of talk radio gas bags.
You sound pretty certain.
I wish to commend all of my fellow Dopers who have firmly ignored this set-up straight line.
This is consistent with what I have heard from my wingnut acquaintances.
Its kind of sad because these folks have basically become Republicans first and Americans second.
They’re pissed that an African-American man and a Woman (2 of a kind that they consider not as intelligent as European Conservative man) would have the gall to lead the United States of America out of the quagmire that has been the Health Care debate, and actually bring it to somewhat of a workable base to start to reform it.
Remember, it wasn’t too long ago that we were saying “Ye Sur, massa.”
Wow, this crap is tiresome.
It depends on the Pubbie: Some are states’-rights federalists who want to devolve the USA into something like the EU; some want poor people to have to go to churches & private institutions (funded by voluntary donations) to get aid; & some imagine (I would say delusionally, given my reading of history & human nature) that the poor will suddenly get fire in their bellies & become more productive when there is no welfare state. Relatively few want to have their streets cluttered by the decaying penniless. Most really don’t understand where all these homeless people came from.
This all holds more or less.
I believe (note the caveat) that a lot of the current HRC bill comes from a similar proposal from the Republicans in 1993 (it would be ironic, if true). Sorry, can’t look this up as I’m at the air port and my phone sucks for doing research.
More recently, the Republicans (not that Republican=conservative, but I figured that’s what you meant) tried to focus first on Social Security reform, instead of HCR. 6 to 1, half dozen to the other, but they did try. Now, you might not think that their plan was good, and certainly they were unable to get it passed, unlike this one, but I think it’s incorrect to say that they haven’t tried at all to reform some of the systemic faults in our system.
That said, they haven’t exactly covered themselves in glory this time around on HCR.
-XT
This keeps getting repeated, but what exactly was “deceptive” about the process? A bill was passed in the House, changed and passed in the Senate (with 60 votes) and then the changed bill was passed by the House. That’s exactly how things are supposed to work, I thought?