- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
February 8, 2008 at 3:52 pm #613732
KayleighMemberInteresting. I don’t think we can solve the health care crisis with private insurers who make decisions based on profit rather than health and welfare. Which is something that Edwards understood.
Maybe it will work to make the change to a single payer gradually over time, in increments. It’s a compromise, though, not a solution.
February 8, 2008 at 3:58 pm #613733
FranciParticipantOn the topic of Healthcare, check out this link.
http://www.oprah.com/xm/moz/200710/moz_20071022.jhtml
Its a reference to radio interview (Oprah and Friends radio on XM) between Dr. Oz and Regina Herzlinger. She has a very compelling argument for consumer driven healthcare. I haven’t read her book yet, but from listening to her on Dr. Oz’s show, I really liked what she had to say.
I’m curious what others might think of this idea.
February 8, 2008 at 3:58 pm #613734
FranciParticipantOn the topic of Healthcare, check out this link.
http://www.oprah.com/xm/moz/200710/moz_20071022.jhtml
Its a reference to radio interview (Oprah and Friends radio on XM) between Dr. Oz and Regina Herzlinger. She has a very compelling argument for consumer driven healthcare. I haven’t read her book yet, but from listening to her on Dr. Oz’s show, I really liked what she had to say.
I’m curious what others might think of this idea.
February 8, 2008 at 4:42 pm #613735
KayleighMemberIf people buy health insurance as individuals, there is no sharing of the risk pool. If you have a pre-existing condition, for example, you could end up paying significantly more (what would stop the insurers from doing that?)
While some health care decisions are “optional” (plastic surgery, flu shots), some are simply not a matter of choice (do I set this broken leg or let it heal crooked? Do I get dialysis or not?). So introducing health care insurance as a free-market capitalist “choice” like a tube of toothpaste is drawing a false equivalency.
And, consumer-driven insurance still does not take the profit margin or increasing costs out of the equation. Nor would it address higher out-of-pocket costs for those who are very ill but not wealthy.
My respectful opinion only. For very interesting but not exactly light reading:
February 8, 2008 at 4:50 pm #613736
JoBParticipantThere was a time in America when Insurance companies were thought of as the good guys… when they were regulated.
Real competition would create a similar situation… with the bonus that you still don’t hamper the kind of inovative care that is not available in a single payer system.
yes, that care is available at first only in teaching hospitals (clinical trials) and for those who can afford it… but that care does trickle down to the rest of society at a fairly rapid rate if it turns out to be cost effective.
In our current system, we are paying for health care, companies to manage the insurance billing and profit-taking by the insurance industry. This is expensive!
Health decisions are driven by clerks… they are trained in insurance evaluation, but not in medicine. This was not always the case.
And it is becoming almost impossible to decipher whether the health plan you chose will cover the care you need. We have almost always paid for the most expensive health care possible through employers because of my chronic illness but i still haven’t found a doctor i trust with my illness that is covered by my health plan. And, don’t get me started on pharmacy care that has a three tier formulary.. if it’s not on it, you don’t get it. None of my medications are on it… it doesn’t even cover a stop smoking medication.
Medical decisions.. your medical decisions.. need to be made by medical professionals… and Hillary’s intention is to restore that. She intends to do away with the roadblock of pre-exisiting conditions that leaves so many without the insurance coverage they paid for. And she would make certain that mental illnesses get the same care as all other illness. This would eliminate the current loophole of blaming chronic illness on the patient’s mental condition to avoid payment. The only way to do this is by regulating the insurance industry.
Can she do this? Not without our help. Unless we deliver a more democratic congress we will have the same kind of roadblocks that are currently causing our democrats to knuckle under to the republicans to get anything done.
But, yes, it is possible. And, it could all be implemented pretty rapidly since she would use an existing system.
Certainly something to think about.
February 8, 2008 at 10:58 pm #613737
BobLoblawParticipantJust back from Obama, trying to give him the benefit of the doubt. He is a great speaker and gives hope to many. He should have a pulpit to orate from. That pulpit should be in the Senate for a while longer. There was no meat in what he was saying.
That didn’t matter to the 10,000 19-24 year-old women at the rally. But I bet many of them aren’t even registered to vote. And there are, what, 20 people on the WSB who contribute regularly? Most of us are like-minded and will “settle” for either one of the two if it came right down to it. Of course, the best person for the job, based on all the evidence, is Edwards. But he has a snowball’s chance at this point.
Go to the caucuses tomorrow. Challenge the Obama folks to talk about issues and specific actions instead of “hope,” “change,” “reunite,” etc. They are just words. And while they are powerful, and delivered with grace, they are not a plan and do not address anything other than our heartstrings.
Love,
Bob
February 8, 2008 at 11:11 pm #613738
beachdrivegirlParticipantBob,
As a young voter, the biggest reason why I think I will go to the Caucus tomorrow and support Obama is not on what I think he can do better or more efficiently than Clinton, but because there are so many individuals that despise Clinton out there I fear that if Clinton is on the ballet come November, we will have another depressing election and another four years with a Republican in office.
February 8, 2008 at 11:30 pm #613739
BobLoblawParticipantClinton will certainly have a harder time in debates with some things. Her health care plan would be targeted because it is the most opposite of the Republicans. Her ties to Bill (58% of voters in Iowa or someplace — I forget where and think polls are a bit weak to go by — say they liked her because Bill was her husband) would be brought into play. Her record on approving $$ for the war over and over again would be questioned — although not by Republicans, obviously :-)
Overall, however, I think the Republicans will eat Obama alive. They are one well-oiled, polished political machine. “Our” best chance is to throw somebody into the battle who has some experience and meat behind the rhetoric.
Just my opinion, btw. I was soooo happy to see people who were not old, white, male (or a combo of all) around Key Arena I nearly cried. You are the future of this country. And seeing that somebody has kicked young people and the African-American community into gear is fantastic.
February 8, 2008 at 11:35 pm #613740
kParticipantBob,
You rock! I like your post. I hope it gives some people food for thought. I agree that he is a great speaker, but no depth in there. We need more than “change” and “hope” at this point. We need substance and serious experience. Even while speaking on people challenging his lack of said experience, he never gave us an adequate example that would sway my vote.
I will be out to caucus tomorrow for Hillary. I hope to meet a few of the WSB folks while I am there. This will be my first time participating in a caucus, but feel I have no choice. We need help! Now!
February 8, 2008 at 11:40 pm #613741
JoBParticipantthis was just sent to me.
i scanned the printout of the broadcast (you can watch or listen) and learned a few things.
You can bet i will go through it more carefully before tomorrow:)
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/2/8/examining_clinton_obamas_stances_on_the
February 8, 2008 at 11:40 pm #613742
JoBParticipantps.. bob.. i agree.. you rock!
February 8, 2008 at 11:41 pm #613743
WSBKeymasterJust one contribution and then we step back out: Having been on somebody else’s payroll going back to age 16 … with a nice health-insurance policy, mostly employer-paid, for most of that time … I didn’t really appreciate how bleak the picture was for those not so lucky, until we went into business for ourselves with WSB. Just finally found something that will at least (knock wood) be there for coverage if one of us gets seriously ill or injured … but otherwise, its deductible is so high that it’s not good for anything else. To get an individual policy without a high deductible, there seems to be no way to avoid paying an incredibly high price — four digits per month for a family of three — which is what I would have had to pay to continue my old work policy thru COBRA. Really never walked a mile in these moccasins before, but now I can feel every stone on the path. And yet at that, I know I’m still one of the “lucky ones” … at least we can afford that high-deductible policy … its cost would be out of reach for many families just getting by.
February 8, 2008 at 11:45 pm #613744
TishParticipantI don’t understand why you think that Obama will be pummelled and not Hillary. As Noonan said on his blog earlier today:
“Mrs. Clinton is stoking the idea that Mr. Obama is too soft to withstand the dread Republican attack machine. (I nod in tribute to all Democrats who have succeeded in removing the phrase “Republican and Democratic attack machines” from the political lexicon. Both parties have them.) But Mr. Obama will not be easy for Republicans to attack. He will be hard to get at, hard to address. There are many reasons, but a primary one is that the fact of his race will freeze them. No one, no candidate, no party, no heavy-breathing consultant, will want to cross any line–lines that have never been drawn, that are sure to be shifting and not always visible–in approaching the first major-party African-American nominee for president of the United States.
He is the brilliant young black man as American dream. No consultant, no matter how opportunistic and hungry, will think it easy–or professionally desirable–to take him down in a low manner. If anything, they’ve learned from the Clintons in South Carolina what that gets you. (I add that yes, there are always freelance mental cases, who exist on both sides and are empowered by modern technology. They’ll make their YouTubes. But the mad are ever with us, and this year their work will likely stay subterranean.)
With Mr. Obama the campaign will be about issues. “He’ll raise your taxes.” He will, and I suspect Americans may vote for him anyway. But the race won’t go low.
Mrs. Clinton would be easier for Republicans. With her cavalcade of scandals, they’d be delighted to go at her. They’d get medals for it. Consultants would get rich on it.
The Democrats have it exactly wrong. Hillary is the easier candidate, Mr. Obama the tougher. Hillary brings negative; it’s fair to hit her back with negative. Mr. Obama brings hope, and speaks of a better way. He’s not Bambi, he’s bulletproof.
The biggest problem for the Republicans will be that no matter what they say that is not issue oriented–“He’s too young, he’s never run anything, he’s not fully baked”–the mainstream media will tag them as dealing in racial overtones, or undertones. You can bet on this. Go to the bank on it.
The Democrats continue not to recognize what they have in this guy. Believe me, Republican professionals know. They can tell. “
Enough said.
February 8, 2008 at 11:58 pm #613745
BobLoblawParticipantI doubt it. All of it above. Except the part where no one will use race. But why would they? They won’t be afraid of being called out for questioning him. Yes he’s African-American — but whoopideedoo. For a majority of voters, that is absolutely no issue. What will matter to the 51 percenters are the tried and true words “change,” “hope,” “together,” etc. heck — it makes me want to salute the flag right now. Still, I think Reagan actually trademarked those to bamboozle the American public.
I’ve read both their big papers (written by staff) and see more polish and meat behind Hillary’s. That’s why she gets my vote. But Obama has more of the feel good puffery that America buys.
But, hey, how about that Erik Bedard? Now there’s somebody we should all be excited about.
I digress …
February 9, 2008 at 12:01 am #613746
JoBParticipantoh tish, would that it were so.
yes, the republicans are going to go after hillary. they have been going after hillary for 12 years and have created more scandals than most people see in a lifetime already.
But they have run out of ammunition as far as the scandals go… there isn’t anything new to drag out of the closet.
And.. other than her husband lieing about sex, they haven’t been able to prove any of their allegations in spite of spending a ton of taxpayer money to do so.
The swift boat defense won’t be so effective without new scandals to feed it.
They haven’t landed on Obama yet.. but you can bet every dollar you have that if he is our candidate they have plenty to use. Heck, i could come up with a fair amount… just after reading his book.
They won’t even have to go the black route.
As for Teflon… McCain has made a political career out of his Teflon… tortured Vietnam vet.
and if they want to add more Teflon to him, all they have to do is give him Condolesa or some other black woman as a running mate..
There is no Teflon Democratic candidate. If there was, this would be a much easier decision.
As it is, we are all going with our guts here and hoping for the best.
In the meantime, i am thankful to have a win win situation with our candidates. They are both inspiring people who talk about what they want to do to help the American middle class… and with our help, they should be able to do a lot of it.
February 9, 2008 at 12:10 am #613747
KayleighMemberDang, I feel like I’m on the edge of getting sick (there’s yucky flu stuff going around the office.) I want to feel well enough to caucus tomorrow. It’s important and I want to stand up for what I believe in so much.
Home to bed with some hot tea and toast for me.
February 9, 2008 at 12:16 am #613748
BobLoblawParticipantJoB, I have to correct you: Bill never had “sex” with that woman.
February 9, 2008 at 12:26 am #613749
JoBParticipantBob.. mea culpa… you are right.
His only real lie was one of misdirection.
He had sexual interaction with her.. but not “sex”.
It was misdirection under oath… and that’s what Georgia’s bar went after him for.
Anyway.. lots of taxpayer money spent and in the end that was the best they could do.
Much ado about a whole lot of nothing.. but all anyone seems to remember is the scandal.
February 9, 2008 at 12:33 am #613750
TishParticipantWhat I think you’re forgetting, however, is that:
1) We, as a nation, are tired of legacy candidates. Not that many people are that enthused about the fact that we have gone from Bush Sr. to Clinton to Bush Jr and possibly, back to Clinton again. That’s over 20+ years of Clinton and Bush! In this sense, people honestly DO want change.
2) The campaigns haven’t gone negative yet. Once they do, people are going to be reminded of ALL of Clinton’s scandals (travelgate, watergate, etc.) and she is going to take a major hit. After enduring all the scandals associated with Clinton and Bush, people are yearning for a candidate who is relatively scandal free.
3) Barack’s wins in the Midwest and in red states (where independents carried him to victory) clearly shows that while Hillary can carries true blue democratic states (like CA and NY) she doesn’t have the ability to pull in independents or Republicans to the degree that Obama can. This fact is not going to go away…even if she does win the nomination.
4) Last but not least, I wouldn’t discount Peggy Noonan’s predictions. After all, Bill Clinton recently hurt Hillary’s campaign (and was credited with helping her lose South Carolina) for making comments that others perceived as racist (they weren’t in my opinion). People ARE weary to attack Obama because they will be accused on being a racist. It’s the Clarence Thomas senate confirmation hearings (where Dems were afraid to attack his record for fear of being perceived as racist) all over again. It’s a simple fact.
I agree with you that we’ll have a win win either way. I still think, however, that Obama is our best choice.
February 9, 2008 at 12:40 am #613751
dennyMemberI’ll keep this brief, but try to have enough “meat” for Bob so that he doesn’t dismiss me as he does Obama.
Hilary will not win a November election against McCain. She is the one issue that will unite the conservatives around McCain, and she has negatives that have historically scored at plus 40%. For over ten years. That will push enough independents towards McCain as well.
I have a great deal of respect for John McCain and his service to America, but I am interested in having a major change in the White House.
I was at the rally today, too. I saw a stump speech that was no better or worse than Hilary’s, but perhaps more eloquently delivered. No stump speech is heavy on details. Neither are the American People. You want details, keep reading their websites.
More importantly, I saw tens of thousands of people show up, faces representative of our whole community. Some of them aren’t even democrats. I want all of those people to show up in November and put Obama in the White House.
See you Saturday at the caucuses.
February 9, 2008 at 1:10 am #613752
HuindekmiParticipantPoll numbers are backing up what the Obama supporters are saying.
RealClearPolitics.com can show you the aggregates of poll data from 7 sources (Rassmussen, Time, CNN, Cook/RT Strategies, ABC/Wash Post, FOX News and NPR) as well as a weighted average.
In the latest polls, McCain is leading in all but one poll (CNN).
The latest polls show Obama leading in all but one poll (NPR) and then only by 1 point.
February 9, 2008 at 1:40 am #613753
JoBParticipantRe: political polls…if the polls were an accurate prediction of what would happen in this race, we wouldn’t be having this conversation now. The polls said that Hillary wouldn’t survive Super Tuesday.. remember?
Re: Obama’s turnout… Hillary wasn’t expected to have much of a turnout and she also had to close her doors due to capacity. And she wasn’t just attended by middle class middle aged females either.
Re: “Hillary will not win an election against McCain.. she is one issue that will unite all conservatives for McCain” …. conservatives may not like McCain, but they will not desert in droves for Obama either. yet, conservative women may well cross over for a woman. However, It is the undecided vote that is important here.. and we know that vote is strongly anti-war. A democratic vote is going t be a vote for middle class pocketbooks and an end to the war.
Re: Hillary is a legacy candidate… how can any woman be a legacy candidate? True, it took one with strong political connections to even get a serous bid for nomination… but calling her a legacy candidate is overlooking some pretty persuasive prejudice here. …
Re: Hillary’s scandals… ok.. sigh.. i am so tired of hearing about Hillary’s scandals. What part of they couldn’t prove any of it did you not get? these are not Hillary’s scandals.. these are republican scandals perpetrated against her. You maybe tired of the accusations, but accusations is all they were. If Obama gets the nomination, we will be incredibly tired of Obama scandals by the time this election is over. He is cute.. he is black.. he is one heck of a preacher.. and he is not bulletproof. they don’t have to go after him as a black, all they have to do is dig into his past.. and his political associations in Chicago. and they will.
i am really looking forward to the discussions tomorrow. With any luck there will be someone incredibly articulate at my caucus and i can sit quietly in a corner… but if not, i want to thank everyone for doing such a good job of warming me up and honing my arguments:)
February 9, 2008 at 2:18 am #613754
JulieMember“A democratic vote is going t be a vote for middle class pocketbooks and an end to the war.”
Neither of these is as important as climate change. This war, misguided, tragic, and disastrous as it is, will kill thousands of people–more thousands if it ends later, fewer thousands if it ends sooner.
Climate change, on the other hand, will kill millions of people through displacement, starvation, and thirst–it will happen more gradually, and be harder to see, and it won’t, for the most part, be people in this country. It will also wipe out many non-human species. I think we have a responsibility to those millions of people and those species. So my democratic vote is a vote for immediate and drastic action addressing climate change, above all.
The war will be difficult for anyone to end. I do want the next president to work to end it as soon as possible–but I think the environment must be a higher priority.
February 9, 2008 at 5:55 pm #613755
JoBParticipantjulie,
you are right .. the environment is critical.. but people vote their pocketbooks… or what they think they would like their pocketbooks to be .. as in the last two elections:)
thank god for that because while they are watching out for their pocketbooks.. we can watch out for the environment.
February 9, 2008 at 6:06 pm #613756
HuindekmiParticipantUnfortunately, the President has a lot more control over war policy than climate policy. With the war, the President can directly affect the troop levels, deployment, etc.
With climate change, the President can veto or approve legislation passed by Congress. Our current President has actively blocked a lot of congressional action on climate change, so much that bills get stagnated knowing that they don’t have enough support to overcome a veto. The President also has direct control over who is running the EPA, Interior Dept, etc. But any real climate change solutions must come from Congress. So we need not only a Dem President, but we need to maintain the Dem majority in both the House and Senate!
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.