The GOP is Lost on Healthcare

Pin It

Devastatingly brutal. When ideology stops humans from feeling. The other striking part of the Senator’s response is the logical dissonance. “Government is bad, but talk to my office and we’ll try to help you”.

Via: This article, “The GOP’s Health Solution” on Slate.

From a different Slate article with a fantastic headline:

“Republicans continue working to shorten and sadden the lives of the elderly in more oblique ways, too. One of President Obama’s first official acts was to reverse Bush’s executive order limiting government funding for stem-cell research, which remains the most promising avenue for new treatments of diseases that afflict the aged, including Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s. Clean-air legislation, which the Republicans defeated in 2002, has the potential to save 23,000 lives per year, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Many of those victims are elderly people, who suffer disproportionately from cardiovascular and respiratory illnesses exacerbated by air pollution. Because emissions of carbon monoxide and such are merely a contributing factor, you can’t name the individuals who have died because of this policy choice. But there are tens of thousands of people who would still be elderly today if Republicans didn’t value the rights and campaign contributions of polluters more highly than their lives.”

Since Social Security was instated, life expectancy has grown sharply. I don’t know if we can definitively see causality, but it’s an interesting argument.

From the same article:

“Faced with an unpalatable choice between cutting benefits and raising taxes to pay for the growing costs of entitlement programs, Republicans gravitated toward a third alternative—restraining growth in life expectancy. If you want lower taxes and aren’t willing to risk cutting spending, you need fewer beneficiaries.”

Read “The Republican Death Machine: Who’s really pulling the plug on Grandma?” by clicking here.

The GOP is heading towards irrelevance by not embracing reform. Something is going to give sooner or later and this conversation will have to be had. The question is if not now, when?

http://emailtoid.net/i/0664728e/2ae76c81/ emailtoid.net/i/0664728e/…

I have been reading your thoughts for a couple of months now from my home in Canada. The senators comments seem odd for certain, one of the things that I keep going over is how your government is going to pay for this. I can’t imagine how the republican war mentality is quivering at the idea they may have to cut back in order to afford health care. Imagine how that would change if one of them couldn’t get health coverage! Anyway free healthcare is amazing, if your government can get it together it will help so many people. In Canada if kids have even the most minor of sniffles parents rush them to the family doctor! It is not a perfect system but it is a pretty amazing!
http://www.meowsk.com meowsk

I know healthcare is an important issue. But I REALLY miss your photos and am getting sick of politics. Not that my opinion matters or carries any weight in your world.

http://blurbomat.com blurb

Me too. But I’m on Marlo watch while Heather works. Which means laptop, not main machine. Which means no photos and more politics.

Also, I feel very passionately about healthcare reform. Most of my neighbors disagree with me about how it should go down. This site gives me a way to share my views and have my views challenged.

Sorry if that is boring.

http://www.meowsk.com meowsk

Bummer. Note to self — don’t have kids (at least in the near future). Anytime you need another assistant… over here.

I do too. It is probably good that you are posting these things to get the facts out there. I just get sick of politics easily… there isn’t much we can do to control them and I get frustrated. Not boring — just missing the photos.

Also, sorry for the harsh tweet this morning. It’s just Heather hasn’t exactly been the most friendly person ever when I have met her. I’m sure she is much different in real life — just my initial impression. It should also be noted that my harshness is most of the time admittedly out of jealousy. I love that she was able to take all of the bullshit she learned being a web designer and apply that to her own creative outlet and on top of that turn it into an income source. Crazy amazing.

http://laurenfackler.myopenid.com/ laurenfackler.myopenid.com/

» When ideology stops humans from feeling

Turning to a huge, bureaucratic entity for our needs will only take us further away from this. You’re missing an excellent point that the senator is making: “…us as neighbors…helping people that need our help”.

The government should be our last resort. Our family, friends, neighbors, community and churches are the ones we should turn to in time of need, not the government.

http://blurbomat.com blurb

I didn’t miss that point. You are missing the dissonance of simultaneously belittling the organization one belongs to and offering help from that same organization. You can’t have it both ways.

I agree that neighbors should be there to help, but we are in a situation where the free market has and is failing the public. Where do we turn then? Also, are insurance companies not huge bureaucracies?

If it’s not clear, we are at the place of last resort. The insurance industry is failing the citizens of the U.S. The government has to step in. Reagan is dead. Time to move forward.

http://laurenfackler.myopenid.com/ Lauren

We don’t belong to the government, we are the government—or at least should be however we seem to be moving further and further away from what the Constitution originally intended: “government of the people, by the people, for the people”. And, in my opinion, it is the continued mistake of making important, life-altering decisions solely based on emotion rather than logic that has led us to where we are today.

Yes, some insurance companies are huge bureaucracies. So you think that handing over healthcare to an even bigger bureaucracy is the solution?

You’ll need to define what you consider to be “the place of last resort”. I agree, we must make changes; we’re not at the place of last resort and we need to do everything in our power to maintain a “government of the people, by the people, for the people”. Government-run healthcare is unconstitutional.
nobody

There isn’t any dissonance at all. Faced with an individual, you try to help that individual. Faced with a systemic problem, you try to find the best solution for the overall system. I suppose some single-payer government health plan would have addressed this particular situation, but what other nightmare problems would it have created? Are the only bad situations the ones with faces on them, or can we use our imagination to think about those that are still abstractions and do something about them too?

The arguments against “reform” have force precisely because they anticipate the creation of other problems as moving as this: joblessness, rationing, forestalled innovation, the unappealable mistakes of an unresponsive and unaccountable bureacracy. That these are yet abstractions doesn’t mean they’ll be any less real should they be allowed to come about.

Nor, Jon, do you ever answer the question: faced with a government acting unjustly, or mistakenly, and a majority behind it, where do you turn then?

(I shouldn’t be surprised to learn that the Senator’s office could help a great deal — there are resources dedicated to helping people in distress, and often the problem reaching them is the absence of a competent case worker.)

As for the stem cell line of reasoning: opponents of such research have moral concerns as weighty as the arguments for it. The author’s suggestion that issue reduces only to its impact on seniors, or medical research, only shows his ignorance.

http://blurbomat.com blurb

There should be dissonance.

nobody

Then what are you complaining about?

Oh, wait, you’re adding meta-dissonance. Carry on.

http://blurbomat.com blurb

The lack of self-awareness from ultra-conservatives. That’s what I’m complaining about. The lack of irony. The lack of a block of legislators who are moderate.

I think it’s going to come down to an Us v Them and I think the Dems are gonna take it. The GOP has used the same tactics to push through legislation (GW Bush tax cuts) and now is crying because the other guys are thinking about using the same tactic? The very essence of what I’m talking about.
nobody

But the inconsistency really isn’t that great. And frankly, I think it’s healthy to have a response to a person in front of you that seems different from your systemic beliefs. We build systems for overall problems, and sometimes they don’t quite work for all cases, and then we make accomodations. That’s just humane.

It is not possible — I mean, logically inconceivable — to build a system that will consistently address _all_ situations. Go ask Godel. And legislating to build a system that works for a handful of particular cases risks neglecting the larger problems.

This is a much more complicated and comprehensive change than tinkering with rates in an established tax code. I think you’re oversimplifying the issues, and then judging your opponents on their differences with your simplifications.
http://blurbomat.com blurb

I agree that it’s healthy to have people who disagree with you discuss their views. But that’s not what we’ve seen from opponents of reform. Which is the reason I keep posting this crap is to underscore the need for intelligent voices from the opposition.

I’m replying here because we’ve hit the reply limit…

stephen

Jon, your headline, “the GOP is lost on healthcare,” is a perfect illustration of what’s really the problem in this country. If you are a Republican, you suck, you are wrong, on everything, period. The real problem in this country is a lack of bi-partisanship. Our government is totally special interest driven. For the true powers behind the curtain pulling the levers and pushing the buttons to retain their power, Americans must be divided. A divided population can be controlled. I’m Libertarian, but have tons of staunch republican friends as well as many liberal democratic friends. Without fail, WITHOUT EXCEPTION, every person I know thinks we need health care reform. How do we find common ground while throwing rhetorical haymakers at one another? I maintain that the current proposals floating around on both sides are not the answers we need. We need systemic, not symptomatic solutions to ALL problems in this country, not just healthcare. True change is eliminating special interest driven government. Big Pharma, Big Insurance, Trial Lawyers Association, Big Media, International banking cartels, etc. They spend billions and billions of dollars a year manipulating the healthcare debate (for enormous profits) through K Street lobbyists, campaign contributions, misleading advertising, C-pacs„„„, on and on. To them your healthcare is a commodity. In a Rasmussen poll that came out yesterday, 57% of Americans would replace the entire House and Senate! That is incredible. WE NEED TO HOLD OUR REPRESENTATIVES ACCOUNTABLE! When was the last time YOU talked to your representatives? Nobody is listening. The “new” listening is practicing your partisan talking points in your head while your opponent is mumbling something over there. Finally, in the circles I run in, the biggest concern out there is the U.S. Constitution being run over roughshod. Bush I=Clinton=Bush II=Obama. I could give you 50 examples, but alas, it’s not my blog. Bruce Springstein once said, “…blind faith will get you killed…” Mr. Obama is not the Messiah, he is another bought and paid for puppet like his predecessors. I would really enjoy reading and truly listening to any SPECIFIC ideas you have for solutions instead of blind partisan lockstep insults. steve

http://blurbomat.com blurb

Stephen. Those are all your words.

The GOP is mishandling (as is the Democratic Party) the conversation on healthcare reform. The headline is merely boosting that point. I’d like you to tell me where I’ve said that Obama is a “Messiah” or that all Republicans are sucky or wrong on everything.

Here’s my suggestion: look at the world we live in. The U.S. numbers on healthcare are deplorable. If you’d done any reading of my archives instead of trolling, you’d know that I’m a proponent of single payer, but open to systems like Germany, where there is a private and public option for healthcare. You’d also know that the U.S. is the only industrialized nation that does not ensure adequate healthcare as a natural born right. The U.S. is behind the curve on thinking about this. What entity can control all of the “bigs” you mentioned above? GOVERNMENT.

Vietnam, Watergate, and Reagan have poisoned the pool about how we view the government and why the government even exists.

I have a problem with libertarians: all utopian visions of smaller centralized government without EVER SHARING A SINGLE IDEA ABOUT HOW THAT MIGHT WORK.

I’m listening to you: TELL ME YOUR SOLUTION TO RUNAWAY HEALTH COSTS AND DECLINING QUALITY OF CARE.

nobody

End the tax deduction of employer provided health care, and increase consumer exposure to health care costs.

End the tax deduction of employer provided health care, and increase consumer exposure to health care costs.

End the tax deduction of employer provided health care, and increase consumer exposure to health care costs.

We’ve only been saying this since the McCain campaign.

http://blurbomat.com blurb

You are halfway to single payer!

I agree. I think we need to de-couple insurance from employment. By doing that, you accomplish your second wish.

However, I don’t see that happening with current proposals.

http://surfmonkey89.myopenid.com/ Paul Lukinich

Couple things here.

First, the idea of bipartisanship is a canard. People disagree — that’s why we have two parties (and really should have more like 4 major ones). Look back on any important legislation and you’ll see strongarming by the majority as a means to their ends, leaving the minority bitter but largely defenseless. That is, until you get to the mid-90s, when Republicans have dominated the conversation while Democrats do nothing.

The only time we hear about bipartisanship is when Republicans are in the minority; when they are in the majority, even by the slimmest of margins, they have a “mandate”.

That said, while I agree with Jon that the GOP as it is currently constructed is lost on health care as well as a host of other issues, they’re not the problem.

If meaningful health care reform doesn’t pass the fault will lie solely with Democrats, specifically the milquetoast DLCers who continually triangulate and cater to Blue Dogs and Big Money while casting progressives aside.

We were made a whole bunch of promises during the last election, and so far none of them have been fulfilled. If they fcuk this one up…well, fool me one shame on me, fool me twice I won’t get fooled again.
http://www.blessourhearts.blogspot.com Ms. Moon

Oh yeah– NEIGHBORS should be helping. WHERE ARE ALL THE HELPING NEIGHBORS? This is insane.
stephen

Jon, ok, self flagellation first. You are right about the messiah thing. I wasn’t aiming that specifically at you. I am guilty is some way of the same barbed commentary I sent your way. Sorry. I am not perfect and have much unlearning to do in divisiveness. As to the trolling, my reading online is probably too much in terms of time allocation, (ask the wife) but it is also wide and covers the gamut of differing perspectives. It’s been that way since about 4th grade. I miss the ink of newsprint on my fingers. I apologize for not having more time to peruse your archives. I guess I just have this compelling feeling of urgency that we as a country are heading towards the abyss and I’m not hesitant to just jump with 2 feet immediately into the debate. I will read your archives. I have already read all Heather’s posts before they became archives.
First thing, we have the best health care in the world, just not the best system of distribution and payment for services. For example, the huge differences in long term survival in America in breast and prostate cancer vs. most foreign systems. We already have versions of single payer. Bankrupt versions. Medicare, Medicaide, VA. etc., Why would we want to expand those programs to the general populace without first having identified and rectified the reasons for their insolvency? Especially given the exploding national debt. I’ve been a proponent of government involvement. My massage therapist’s husband is a pharmacist. He’s in the Navy but you would never know it. He works on an Indian reservation where the cost to the tribal members is almost zero. My ex-neighbor had the exact situation but he was a dentist. Doctors coming out of medical school are buried in student loans. We have a shortage of primary care physicians. Why not pay for their education with an agreement of service stipulation like the military academies have for their graduates. The doctors get to focus on their hippocratic oath instead of malpractice insurance lawyers, the uninsured or underinsured utilizing the services sign a no sue agreement. This type of type of thing is an example of logical government involvement. I also want to see tort reform. Pooling across state lines. THIS ONE IS BIG! Naturopathic education. For example, H1N1 swine flu. What is the number 1 thing you can do to prevent influenza? Vitamin D. Have you read that a single time in the media? P.S. Wash your hands alot. Instead we are being lined up for a vaccine that over 50% of Australian health professionals are refusing because they believe it’s worse than the realatively mile influenza. Would you inject Leta or Marlo with Mercury? Guess what’s in the vaccine. Why? Big bucks, Big Pharma, Big corrupt government. I completely reject your supposition that government can control the bigs. They control the government. Instead of “of the people, by the people, for the people.” That’s the problem. Now to politics. The U.S. Constition ( there is a copy lying on my desk) is very clear. It’s not difficult to understand. It was written long before K stsreet and the Trial lawyers became powerful. Simple beauty. I refer you to the 10th amendment. “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” That for me is the basis of a Libertarian point of view. I have absolutely ZERO problem with the delegation of constitutionally granted powers to the federal government. Problem is when they seize undelegated powers. ( see obama’s czars) Libertarianism is rooted in that second part about the ” states, OR TO THE PEOPLE. ” My problem is that we’ve gotten away from “of the people, by the people, for the people.” Jon, I want what you want. The best possible for all. A search for common ground, intellectual clarity, recognition of individual shortcomings, true listening, and most importantly, eliminating special interest driven government. These are just some of the things that can start us down the path to a better society for all. steve

http://blurbomat.com blurb

I’m going to refute your assertions line by line. You seem to be willing to have a conversation and I would like you to know why I feel the way I do.

First thing, we have the best health care in the world, just not the best system of distribution and payment for services.

Disagreed. 16% of us aren’t insured. We pay more for healthcare than other industrialized nations and live shorter lives. The only area that we show parity: chronic illnesses like cancer. Read the docs linked here:

http://blurbomat.com/archives/2009/06/24/healthcare-talking-points-numbers/

We already have versions of single payer. Bankrupt versions. Medicare, Medicaide, VA. etc., Why would we want to expand those programs to the general populace without first having identified and rectified the reasons for their insolvency? Especially given the exploding national debt. I’ve been a proponent of government involvement.

They are only bankrupt because we lack the will to reform and fund them. I blame Reagan for this nonsense. He did more damage to the federal government’s reputation than either Bill or Hillary or W. And that’s saying something. George W. Bush’s (and his team’s) response to Katrina was deplorable. I digress.

Doctors coming out of medical school are buried in student loans. We have a shortage of primary care physicians. Why not pay for their education with an agreement of service stipulation like the military academies have for their graduates. The doctors get to focus on their hippocratic oath instead of malpractice insurance lawyers, the uninsured or underinsured utilizing the services sign a no sue agreement. This type of type of thing is an example of logical government involvement. I also want to see tort reform.

Many states have payback programs or offer grants to offset high tuition costs. Like most careers, if someone is becoming a doctor because they want to be rich, they shouldn’t be a doctor. I agree with you that we need to re-examine malpractice insurance and claims as well. I don’t think limiting payouts is the answer. I think having an outside board that can review malpractice cases as they arise and determine a payout where necessary is a better way to go. I think a lot of doctors practice defensive medicine and it’s expensive to do so.

Pooling across state lines. THIS ONE IS BIG! Naturopathic education. For example, H1N1 swine flu. What is the number 1 thing you can do to prevent influenza? Vitamin D. Have you read that a single time in the media? P.S. Wash your hands alot. Instead we are being lined up for a vaccine that over 50% of Australian health professionals are refusing because they believe it’s worse than the realatively mile influenza. Would you inject Leta or Marlo with Mercury? Guess what’s in the vaccine. Why? Big bucks, Big Pharma, Big corrupt government.

Oh God, you’re one of THOSE? So the government is out to get us through vaccines? Up your dose. Sorry, not buying this at all.

I completely reject your supposition that government can control the bigs. They control the government. Instead of “of the people, by the people, for the people.” That’s the problem.

I would argue that the current legislation in front of Congress makes good attempts at controlling the bigs. Obama’s back room pharma deals aside, this legislation is about regulating a runaway industry that has failed the citizenry. I would argue that the current setup is a bane on new businesses and innovation.

Now to politics. The U.S. Constition ( there is a copy lying on my desk) is very clear. It’s not difficult to understand. It was written long before K stsreet and the Trial lawyers became powerful. Simple beauty. I refer you to the 10th amendment. “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” That for me is the basis of a Libertarian point of view. I have absolutely ZERO problem with the delegation of constitutionally granted powers to the federal government. Problem is when they seize undelegated powers. ( see obama’s czars) Libertarianism is rooted in that second part about the ” states, OR TO THE PEOPLE. ” My problem is that we’ve gotten away from “of the people, by the people, for the people.” Jon, I want what you want. The best possible for all. A search for common ground, intellectual clarity, recognition of individual shortcomings, true listening, and most importantly, eliminating special interest driven government. These are just some of the things that can start us down the path to a better society for all. steve

Thanks for sharing your views. Personally, the more I look at Libertarianism, I see a kind of narcissism. It’s not about us joining together; it seems to be about MY rights and MY health and screw all y’all. That’s just what it seems to me. All this talk about the Constitution as holy writ is a bit much as well. While I generally make a moral case for insuring everybody I would argue the exact opposite; government is all about special interests. It’s about helping the least of us. And that means special interests.

stephen

Jon, a rational conversation is always a good thing. However, due to the fact that I’m going out the door in about 5 minutes on a trip to your neck of the woods, my responses will have to wait till next week. I hope the weather is going to be nice in Ogden! It was 116 here yesterday and hope Utah provides some relief.
nobody

“They are only bankrupt because we lack the will to reform and fund them.”

Funding Medicare’s future shortfalls would require an enormous chunk of our economy. That would have dramatic consequences for job creation, productivity, and growth in personal income.

I suppose you can call that a lack of will, but doesn’t it make more sense to rather use resources more efficiently and focus on people who can’t provide for themselves?

Seriously, Medicare is safe from future bankruptcy only because the government’s license to print money. Its current financing and cost structure is completely unsustainable.

http://blurbomat.com blurb

The current legislation seeks to fix MANY problems with Medicare. One that I know of: forcing every doctor who looks at a single patient to communicate with each other. So if 5 different doctors look at the same patient, they all will know what meds, what procedures and what advise/methods have been used. This alone is enormous. Trust me. We have an extended family member whose life would be much improved (and cost less!) through this single reform.

I don’t disagree that we need to look at Medicare. But the deeper philosophical issue remains: fix or dump? I say fix. Because it is fixable.

nobody

Hmm, I overlooked the “reform” element of your sentence.

I think the reforms will take more than “will”. For one thing, our elected officials clearly don’t know enough economics to run a lemonade stand. But I guess we agree that Medicare is a slow motion train wreck.

http://beckycochrane.livejournal.com Becky

I’m grateful to you for these posts and the links. You help me explore the issues. And I’m grateful to those of your readers who disagree with you on solutions without insulting or demeaning you or the people who agree with you.

I’m not sure why that’s so hard for people these days, but when I read someone who disagrees with me (or you) with civility, and who doesn’t throw out talking points without having done any research of their own, it’s so refreshing. It gives me hope that somehow we can find common ground and fix things.
http://surfmonkey89.myopenid.com/ Paul Lukinich

Testing. Blah, Bleh, Blech.

Testing. Doogity; floobity.

Testing. Exclamation! Question? Period.

Yup, the comment field allows you to use paragraphs and punctuation.
okaykettle

I struggle with whether to comment. You seem to want an honest discussion but your basic premise seems to be “it’s all the evil GOP’s fault”. The current reform is faltering across party lines and it’s poorly understood, explained and advocated by its strongest proponents.

If your posts were reasoned and eloquent arguments for the specific reform being debated in Congress and across the country, you might be making strides toward convincing those of us who want reform but think this reform is a hot mess. If you spent time addressing the moderate concerns instead of the most polemic or slogany of arguments, you might again make people stop to think.

Consider that the Democrats even as they handily control the House and the Senate are considering reconcillation to push this reform through. If I wanted this reform to go through, as you do, I would work on convincing moderates/independents/libertarians that the current reform is the right answer for the country rather than wasting my time with asshats on either side of the aisle (of which there are many).

For every sad story you can find and every BS tactic the GOP has pulled, I can find an equally sad story that argues the other side but I think the tit for tat is what has stagnated true political progress in this country. You allow in your party what you do not allow in the GOP and I’m guessing you have no complaints and see no fault in the current plan (remarkable given its 1000+ page size). I’d bring up examples but then I’d be fanning the tit for tat flame war. Let me come over to your side and say I agree much of the behavior of the GOP is reprehensible. It’s not why healthcare reform is failing — if anything, BS tactics are helping it pass — but I agree the behavior is terrible. But let’s move on (dot org), shall we?

Why is this specific reform good? Why shouldn’t people be concerned about the considerable expanse of federal powers? What if those 40+ million don’t all sign up for the public option (i.e. who pays the difference)? What controls are in place to ensure that the people, and not the government, are in control of their healthcare? What are the consequences if you’re wrong about how deficit neutral and awesome this plan is? What if we all end up with worse care than we have now — how easy would it be to reverse or reform the reform?

I’m sorry that woman and her family are struggling. I hope she was able to find help. I agree that Sen. Colburn was contradictory in his statements but it doesn’t prove that the proposed reform is the right plan. And that’s the task at hand — not tattling on the GOP. Don’t be Cindy Brady.

http://blurbomat.com blurb

Have you read my archives? I make a stronger case there. Click on the tag: “Healthcare”.

Your sorrow is well-intentioned, but these kinds of stories are why this current reform is the answer. Everybody needs to be covered. Insurance companies shouldn’t discriminate.

If you’ve done any research about the current bills, you’ll note that the only “expanse of federal powers” is that the insurance industry gets some long overdue regulation and people get an added choice in insurance plans. One of those choices would be a public option.

We all pay the difference now. We all have stagnate wages as companies shift more and more resources to providing healthcare for employees.

Dont be a troll. Read my archives.

Cortner

The video you posted reveals more to me about the bias of the commentator than it does about Sen. Coburn. First he says that Coburn is against reform which is untrue. He has his own health reform bill. He’s just against the bill that is currently being presented. She says her insurance will not cover her husband to eat and drink. We aren’t given any specifics about that. No insurance including medicare is going to send a speech therapist to someone’s home to feed them at every meal. We don’t know if speech therapy recommended a feeding tube and the family declined. Coburn was a family physician before becoming a Senator. He has more chance of offering her real help than most in Congress. The commentator makes a snide remark “Aren’t you the government?” Yet he fails to mention Coburn is a physician and has his own healthcare bill. Someone undergoing a tragedy doesn’t provide any more rational debate than someone who’s angry. I think it reasonable for Coburn to offer to talk with her outside of the town hall meeting. First to respect her privacy and second to actually get some details of what the problem actually is. These little town hall snippets that show up on the networks have more of a polarizing effect than really adding to reasonable debate. Jon, your comment “Disturbingly brutal” is how I would characterize the commentator’s attempt to play off the woman’s tragedy for a political motive. I too feel for the woman but my lack of knowledge about her circumstances is not going to cloud my rational judgement. All we really know is that she is insured and feels incapable of coping with her husband’s eating difficulty after a brain injury. If you can find out more specifics about her problem, I’d be interested.

http://blurbomat.com blurb

If that’s the case, why isn’t Coburn talking about his plan?

Coburn appears to be more interested in ideology than any reform.

I would argue that your “defense” of Coburn is less about healthcare reform than some kind of personal thing against what I’m trying to do, which is keep a dialogue going about healthcare reform. If you disagree, fine. But most people who see that video and hear that story, want to help.

You’ve also underscored the problem: insurance companies won’t help where they should.

Cortner

From Coburn’s website
http://coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=HealthCareReform.Home

“But most people who see that video and hear that story, want to help.” Trouble is most people won’t. Tom Coburn has the personal background as a family physician that he likely probably can. Since the video was a snippet, I don’t know if he talked about his healthcare plan not that it would matter since he is part of the minority party. I don’t know enough about her situation to know if insurance failed her. For all I know she could have Medicare or Medicaid. Most people with Medicare are happy with it but it has limits as to what it covers. I appreciate the dialogue here. That’s why I participate. I’m not attacking the fact that you have a forum. I’m simply trying to point out that “news” organizations use these snippets from the town halls to grandstand for their bias. If you switch back and forth between Fox and MSNBC, it’s easy to see what I mean. Each has their agenda and in the end they try to polarize and manipulate us than they inform us. I thought I was contributing something. Surely you wouldn’t have us all be cheerleaders.
Cortner

After watching the video again, I noticed she does say her husband has a feeding tube. If he had a traumatic brain injury, he may likely never eat or drink again. He may be permanently dependent on the feeding tube. That’s a reality for many people with stroke and brain injuries. It’s a tragic situation either way. We just don’t know enough to know if what she wants fixed can be fixed.

http://blurbomat.com blurb

I think it’s admirable that you are talking about helping the woman in the video. You might have missed my main point in posting this:

It appears the GOP does not want reform and is doing their best to display that desire in every public appearance. It appears that the GOP is opting out of negotiations on reform. Republicans in office want their cake “government is bad/evil” and eat it, too, “I’ll use my elected official power to help you.” Those two intellectual fronts don’t fit together. It was stupid when Reagan said it and it’s more so now.

BLURBOMAT

Jon Armstrong shares photos, music, politics, hair & pants.

The GOP is Lost on Healthcare