Democrats defend the opposite of what they actually wanted but their corporate bought representatives fought hard for, pointing out to hysterical Republicans that it’s actually pretty similar to Romneycare and there are a lot of Republican amendments.
The Republicans, since they seem to be outright delusional about the subject. The general response I see from the left boils down to “it’s better than nothing. Barely.” That’s not much of a “defense”. As opposed to the lunatic Republican frothing about socialism, the Antichrist, death panels, the end of freedom, and threats of violence.
Your point of being healthy now can seem like a good argument. I have a friend who’s sister ate only healty foods excerised every day and died at the age of 60 from cancer. Eating healthy and living a healthy life style is a commenable thing, but it is no proof of a long life, unexpected things come up we have no control over. One can fall and get hurt badly. One never knows what the next year may bring. If one had enough money saved to cover any unexpected illiness, say if they are a trillionaire,then they wouldn’t need health insurance.
One could say they do not need flood,car or fire Insurance either, but one would sure be glad if they had it, should the unexpected arise.
Don’t take this personal, Sitnam, but I have no idea who you are and what you’ve been saying about health care. But I doubt that, behind your username, you’re a nationally known conservative pundit or a spokesman for the Republican party. So what you’ve said about healthcare is not really part of the national debate on the subject. “They” are the talk show hosts and pundits and elected officials - they’re the face of the conservative movement. And they have been acting like unprincipled idiots. And they’ve been doing it long enough that the conservative rank and file have had all the opportunity it needs to disavow them if it chose and seek a more principled group to represent it.
But you’ll be hearing a lot about it in the future. In ten years when public health care is successful and popular, the Republicans will use this fact to claim all the credit for it.
No matter how you spin it, I am being forced to buy into something I do not want. And be penalized in the process if I do not buy it. It’s NOT the same as paying for police protection, roads or what have you. It’s more akin to buying automobile insurance (and yes, I do realize its state not Fed mandated). If I choose not to drive, then I do not have to purchase it. I know you’re all HUGE O’Reilly fans here… but this Dem dodged the question 5 times:
That proposal was a reaction to Clinton’s healthcare proposal at the time and they couldn’t even get more than 20 Republicans to support it. I think it’s a stretch to call that a ‘big conservative push to ensure that healthcare is available and affordable to everybody in the country.’
They do deserve credit for offering an actual compromise instead of just trying to throw a monkey wrench into every gear they can find. I think it’s interesting (depressing) that the current bill that causes republicans to scream ‘socialist government takeover’ was described then by John Chafee, a republican, as a grab for the center.
Good luck with that! After the way they have played things so far during this bill? I seriously doubt they will be able to spin this in a positive way down the road. If THIS bill is successful then all the credit is going to fall on the Dems and Obama. All of it.
Of course, if it’s not successful, or if the Republicans can spin it so that it seems unsuccessful (two different things) then the Dems and Obama are going to get all the blame. Who is in power in the US for the next 20 years or so may very well hinge on the outcome of this thing. Say what you like about Obama, but he has big brass ones afaiac.
Aha!! That’s the part of the legislative trick you do not get.
The idea is to get your foot wedged in between the door of UHC, and with time swing it wide open. This country will be dragged kicking and screaming (maybe not) to UHC. It will happen.
Sure, you can avoid driving, but you cannot avoid health care. Well I suppose you could, but seriously, unless youare willing to forgo all healthcare then the analogy fails with auto insurance. Plus ask yourself, WHY is it mandatory for drivers? Yes you can avoid it by not driving, but health care cannot be avoided, in any realistic way. It iis mandatory so that folks do not add costs or take advantage of the system when they do get sick or injured. May I ask, what do you plan on doing if you do need the emergency room and an extended hospital stay?
The point is that if you are alive, then you need health care, or will eventually. Since that is true of everyone, universally, it makes sense to have everyone pay for it.
I hear what you’re saying, and on the surface, you’re right. Everyone’s health fails at some point. But, as you put it, “it is true of everyone”; this can be applied to many things in life and it sets a dangerous precedent does it not?
It might be OK if you did not have health insurance as long as you had to pay cash up-front for all medical services. If you ever did require services, and you did not have the cash to pay (accident, serious illness), then you would be not even allowed entry to a hospital.
Most people have deemed though, that they do not want to live in a society where one has to step over corpses to get to work (unless they work as a tax attorney, then it’s OK with them)