Graeme Frost: Swift-Boating a Seventh Grader

They have no shame. Next time it will be a toddler.

So when will Time and other traditional media outlets expose the Republicans for the disgusting people they are?

TNX THX THX, Karen.

The Frost family did talk to:
http://www.anonymousliberal.com/

"Attacking the Antidote"

Sounds like Rush "Oxycotin" Limbaugh joined in on the act too:

http://tinyurl.com/2d9jmx

Do Limbaugh and Co. have any shame?

Well this is what happens when you use children to play politics with (see above AARP) and I blame the Democrats for putting that kid in the spotlight. If you want to play politics and be in the spotlight then you have to be ready to accept the consequences.

The funny thing is that the Democrats were dumb enough to find the family that shows PRECISELY WHY SCHIP SHOULD HAVE BEEN VETOED.

"A blogger on FreeRepublic.com discovered that Frost and his sister, Gemma, attend a private school where tuition costs $20,000 a year. Their father, Halsey, is a self-employed woodworker, meaning that if his family doesn’t have health insurance, it’s because Halsey Frost -- as his own boss -- chooses not to purchase it for himself."

HIS PARENTS CHOSE NOT TO BUY INSURANCE.
WHY IN THE HELL IS IS MY RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE UP FOR THEIR POOR CHOICES????

IF YOU CAN AFFORD 20K FOR PRIVATE SCHOOL YOU SURE AS HELL CAN AFFORD HEALTH INSURANCE.

Hypocrites, thy name is liberal.

http://time-blog.com/swampland/2007/09/why_drudge_is_a_disgrace_1.html#comments

It's astonishing, and what remains astonishing is how the left is always tarred with "incivillity." Here they are denouncing a 12 year old whose family makes under $50,000 a year, but Broder and Howie Kurtz will continue to deplore "invcivility" from the left

Anon,

Try finishing the article before launching into a little tirade next time.

"But Manley say conservative bloggers didn't dig deep enough. It turns out that the Frost children attend Baltimore’s Park School on near-full scholarships; they pay roughly $500 per child per year in tuition, he said.

Like many small-business owners, Halsey Frost can't even afford to provide health insurance to himself, Manley said.

"Last year, the Frost's made $45,000 combined," Manley said. "Over the past few years they have made no more than $50,000 combined depending on Halsey's ability to find work.""

Thank you, thank you, Karen. I know you are busy with other things, but this matters to a lot of people and that you took the time to put it out there speaks volumes. Good on ya!

Fair enough. But again, why is it my responsibility to make up for the family's choices to work in a job that cannot provide for their family?

Get a better job or don't have kids if you cannot afford to take care of them.

It's all about choices...

And using kids in political ads when the kids have not even developed enough cognitively to understand what they are selling is still wrong regardless of who does it...

Here is even more info on this. Based on that I stand my by statements. It's all about choices, which I guess are ok if you are talking abortion, but not ok if you are talking about personal responsibility...

http://michellemalkin.com/2007/10/08/graeme-frost-and-the-perils-of-democrat-poster-child-abuse/

By saying "It's all about choices" you are making the assumption that any family can be upwardly mobile and find a job that gives them the ability to obtain healthcare. Many low income families cannot find a job with a high enough salary to afford health care, and fewer and fewer employers are willing to provide health care. It's not completely fair to say the family should find a better job when the opportunities don't exist.

...and i-dots like anonymous will continue to post the 'spin' from those who speak with forked tongue from the viper's pit without checking on the 'real story'.

Anon,

So a family of four (gainfully employed, I should add) making over twice what the government itself defines as poverty-level wages cannot afford health insurance, and this is somehow a sign of their irresponsibility?

Color me a dirty socialist, but it's as much our responsibility to provide that family with some modicum of healthcare as it is our responsibility to provide them with police, libraries, roads, and all the other wonderful socialist things our tax dollars provide.

The above is squarely directed at Cubicle Warrior and the rest of the faux indignant hypocrites who are only upset because they got caught once again trying to BS the American people and almost got away with it.

http://time-blog.com/swampland/2007/09/why_drudge_is_a_disgrace_1.html#comments

Again, read the link and understand why it is not my responsibility to provide them health care.

Here is an idea - if you are so persobally concerned for them, cut them a check and buy them some, but don't penalize me for making good choices and being able to afford insurance for my kids. I don't ask you to raise mine. Don't ask me to raise yours.

http://time-blog.com/swampland/2007/09/why_drudge_is_a_disgrace_1.html#comments

Thanks for bringing this up Karen and I agree with HC Carey. The media has far too often turned a blind eye to the tactics of the far right. I was fairly apolitical before George W. Bush came along, but the tactics and policies that he has followed, as well as the tactics of the right-wing that supports him, has made me rabidly political now. I get angry when the media tells me that we who are against what the President is doing are being uncivil or suffer from Bush derangement syndrome and can, therefore, be ignored while at the same time they remain completely silent about the comments made by and the tactics of the likes of Malkin, Limbaugh, Savage, Hannity, Powerline, Little Green Footballs, Free Republic, et al.

"HIS PARENTS CHOSE NOT TO BUY INSURANCE.
WHY IN THE HELL IS IS MY RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE UP FOR THEIR POOR CHOICES????"

Exactly.

Keep up the good truth.

It drives the Do As I Say libs bonkers.

Linda - try navigating off a Kos approved blog for 20 seconds and learn something...

http://michellemalkin.com/2007/10/08/graeme-frost-and-the-perils-of-democrat-poster-child-abuse/

Posted by Anonymous
October 9, 2007
Well this is what happens when you use children to play politics with (see above AARP) and I blame the Democrats for putting that kid in the spotlight. If you want to play politics and be in the spotlight then you have to be ready to accept the consequences.

The funny thing is that the Democrats were dumb enough to find the family that shows PRECISELY WHY SCHIP SHOULD HAVE BEEN VETOED.

---
Conservatives don't do nuance. Anonymous cannot digest the full details of the story. The commentary depicts why Joe Klein and Broder are so misguided when they tell Democrats to reach across the aisle and act as "Centrists".
Anonymous represents the core support base of the GOP. The core of the GOP loves corporate and uppr class welfare programs, but hates anything that addresses issues facing the majority of US citizens.
The only solution is more Democratic memembers of the House and Senate. Stories likee this will aid that prospect. Anonymous does not realize how disturbing his comments regarding the circumstances of this family are to a large percentage of American citizens. But then, that's what being a 30-percenter is all about.

I have loose sex. Lots.

I drink, I smoke, I inhale to excess. Lots.

I skip UV block, vitamin C, milk, and meats. Lots.

I take the safety off whenever woodworking around the barn. Lots.

I am obese by choice. Lots.

I therefore, hereunder, and hereinafter support Comrade Hillary Clixon.

Lots.

Cubicle - I can at least say that I respect you for admitting that you are an adherent to socialism, which is what the DNC truly is the party of. Thank you for at least being honest. I can respect that even if I strongly do not agree with it.

Anon:

you are either a blithering idiot and have lost your sense of proportion or you have no basic sense of decency. You don't go after children if they make an argument. Criticise the content. But, then don't Malkinites find it easier to trash those who show them up for the tendentious rascals they are.

Anonymous, you have convinced me! From now on, I choose to have a job that pays me one million dollars a year. Damn, that was easy. Now, where do I go to pick up my paycheck?

Conway - you are the idiot for using children as political fodder and the exact liberal hypocrite of which I speak and condemn.

squid - you have to get a job first. It is harder than waiting for a welfare check but if you apply yourself you just might make it.

What ever happened to the American virtue of self reliance? You folks in here with such faux righteous indigination over someone questioning the entitlement society you so desperately seek makes me sad as an American. What happened to you people?

No wonder you want Hillary so bad and her 5000 dollars a child...

Q: How many U.S. troops have the DNC elite Swift Boated in the last 6 years?

A: ALL OF THEM.

Anonymous, you have still not responded to the facts presented by cubicle warror. He pretty successfully destroyed the "facts" that you presented. Why not address this challenge?

No wonder you cheer when hillary talks of taking things from some of us for the greater good...

squid - read the Malkin article and you will see all the response a rational person would need. You guys? Maybe not.

In the spirit of handing out things so you don't have to do it yourself squid...

http://michellemalkin.com/2007/10/08/graeme-frost-and-the-perils-of-democrat-poster-child-abuse/

The best thing that can happen in the 2008 Presidential campaign would be 1) Confused faux-DA, Naval officer etc. Fred Thompson as GOP the candidate an 2)Anonymous' statements used as the GOP ad campaign regarding health care. 3) George Allen as Thompson's liason for minority outreach

Result: Democratic Party landslide.

Oh, anonymouse, please and no thank you for a link to the Lioness of a Mother who has declared that she would go to the playground and a fight a child who threw dirt in her daughter's face, but would send paid 'stalkers' to go to the home of a family that has two children injured in an auto accident, one with a permanent brain injury.

One of the many faces of all that is hate and ugly and uses it to make $$$: michellemalkin.com
Ya' just can't get much sicker than that and stay within the law.

"...Many low income families cannot find a job with a high enough salary to afford health care, and fewer and fewer employers are willing to provide health care. It's not completely fair to say the family should find a better job when the opportunities don't exist..."

So my kids get to pay for their poor performance?

When did involuntary tithing become the liberal mantra -- or IS that separation of church and state blather just more pew research pandering?

I don't know if we can stop Hillary and the rest of you this time around, but as a nation we need to let go of the entitlement philosophy that infects the democrats and has contaminated the GOP.

I am not hopeful.

But look at the bright side. I guess I can keep on paying more and more taxes for the rest of you like I already do. It is hard to support the DNC and their ideas when you already pay more in taxes than what most people make and yet be told that I am not doing enough when I do more than the vast majority of people and I know that puts me in the minority, when you understand that you understand why I will NEVER support a Democrat.

It's all about the choices...

Anonymous, I have a job and one that pays well enough for me to have health insurance, but I have been in situations before where the job that I had did not provide health insurance and I could not afford to pay for it. If I could have gotten a job that provided health insurance or paid me enough to but it on my own I would have. The point is that many people cannot just will their way to a higher paying job or one that provides health insurance, especially when you have a family like this with serious pre-exisitng conditions. Why do you refuse to understand that this is really not about choice?

Linda - like I said - you really need to get off the daily kos and swampland once in a while and learn something. It will do you good, I promise.

"...you have no basic sense of decency..."

Sorry libs, when did Anon sign up as your legal guardian?

Do you socialist clowns EVER take responsibility for your own -- actions, neighbors, students, finances, health, empowerment, well being?

Cry me a freakin Hollyrude river, demlix!

BTW, I just shorted another 100 shares of Time-Warner.

Feel the pain.

You could have chosen to have any job you wanted if you were willing to work hard enough to get it.
You could have waited to start a family, you could have earned that degree...

Life is choices.

Wow. The comments here and on Malkin's site are enlightening to say the least. Anonymous and Question Hillary, do you kick puppies in the street, too?

Here's a question for you two - I didn't choose to invade Iraq. Why the hell is it my CHILDREN'S responsibility to pay for George Bush's poor choices?

How ironic is it that QH is the only one in here other than me who seems to get it?

Well, I have said my piece and made my position clear. Seethe away... I have a life to live.

Later!

OK Anonymous, you're Malkin quote implies and you reinforce the notion that the family pays $20,000 a year to send their kids to private school. Cubicle Warrior states that the family gets scholarships for almost all of that and only pays $500 a year in tuition. Please respond to this challenge to your "facts".

I is a lazy fat slobovian.

I sexes all the time, with anyone or anything, no qwexchuns axed.

I drinkezz, smokezezz, inhalezzes like I was Roger Clinton in Laguna Beach.

I cain't find me no work wif my six grade degree and six husbandless kids.

I use crack and meth like Barry Bonds uses the clear and the cream.

Therefore, forthwith, and hereinunder I shall support Hillary Ramrod Clixon for pwezidentente of these Union States.

"You could have chosen to have any job you wanted if you were willing to work hard enough to get it."

Get a degree (preferably an MBA) so you can afford healthcare, or your children will die.

Why don't you get it?

Anon (whichever one of your incarnations addressed me),

I wasn't actually admitting to being a socialist -- it was simply hyperbole. Do you not realize that our society now is a mix of both socialist and capitalist programs/ideas/what-have-you? Many people out there (and I readily admit that I am one) support the idea of universal healthcare, but most of us are not true socialists. Like the examples I cited above (roads, police, libraries, etc.), some things are better provided by the government. Given the rotten job private industry has done with healthcare, I figure it can't hurt to give government a shot. But hey, other than that, capitalism is great -- keeps me employed and all.

Anonymous-How ironic is it that QH is the only one in here other than me who seems to get it?

Squid696-How ironic is it that QH disappears at the same time that you do?

Reality?

Americans, real Americans (those that work hard, accept national defense as a national priority and not a gift from Allah, family types with an actual family, the savers, the scrimpers, the idealists, the doers not just the Dewars) IS going to reject Hillarycare II faster than you can say Where's The Office Shredder to Sandy Burglar.

We don't need failed Canadian or UK Take A Number wait 18 months for cancer treatment BS universal non-care.

We need responsible behavior, personal moderation, and independent choices free from failed Stalinist "reforms" packaged as pandering populist pinhead progress that has failed more times than the Chicager Cubs.

After tax deducts, I can cover my family of 5 from major medical malfunctions for about $750 a year.

That's less than a thousand bucks, for those of you busy at OTB or Jenny Craigers.

And I'm not rich, don't own a boat, not a frequent flier, not Paris Hilton, not Alexi Ballsless.

Not a smoker or excessive drinker or druggie either.

Do the math.

Hillary loses.

America wins.

Let freedom ring.

Posted by Anonymous
October 9, 2007
Well, I have said my piece and made my position clear. Seethe away... I have a life to live.

Later!
-----
Sorry you didn't want to keep up the discussion but 1) Responding to inaccuracies in your link to Malkin as cited above by squid696 and other regarding the family "paying 20K" is not seething, it's discussion. Your inability and the inability of many Conservatives to address inacurracies and resort to stomping off in a huff is why I don't trust Conservatives anywhere near government. Consevatives believe government doesn't work, then get elected and screw things up (see GW Bush).
Many of us actually are amused by your inability to assimilate new info.
QH, if you have held on to TMX (Time-Warner) since 01/2007, your financial wizardry is at the same level as the rest of your insights.

Typo, I meant TWX

Summary of Hillarycare II (same as Hillarycare I):

1. You're a fat slob.

2. My kids get to pay for it.

Have I missed anything?

"We need responsible behavior..."

So how do people who work at Walmart and can't afford healthcare behave responsibly, so that their healthcare isn't a problem? Eliminate themselves from the gene pool?

"After tax deducts, I can cover my family of 5 from major medical malfunctions for about $750 a year."

Too bad you can't afford to prevent those "major medical malfunctions" from happening.

Who sent us back via timewarp to Charles Dickens' England? "Please, sir, I want some healthcare."

"Healthcare???!!! Bad little paupers like you don't deserve healthcare!!!"

And the next line would be, "sit tight until you have a "major medical malfunction." And then, if we deem you not a "Moral Hazard", we might allow you some healthcare:

http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/08/29/050829fa_fact

The poor urchins are a moral hazard blight on our society. There are plenty of jobs as chimney sweeps. Then they would earn their keep.

This story started about a kid telling his truth. Typically, the neocons have totally changed the discussion by blaring BS about Hillary Care.

Let's not let them continue to change the subject.

Randy

In most parts of this country you can live in a nice house and raise kids on $50K a year. So what is the issue here? DC elite not in otuch with the rest of us, as usual.

The Democrat/treason party gets exposed for celebrating/worshipping every bogus, phony "soldier" claiming to have won a war, and every useful idiot in the Washington press corps attempted to defend the treason party. Now, the Democrat/treason party has been exposed exploiting a little child of fraudulently "poor" parents by have said child read the Democrat party's socialist talking points during the Democrat/treason party's weekly radio address. Of course the "poor" parents of said child own a business, reside in a home worth at least $500,000 and spend $40,000 per year on two children to attend grade school, and the same useful idiots of the Washington press again hysterically rush to defend the Democrat party's attempt to socialize the booming, booming, booming Bush economic boom. What's new?

"In most parts of this country you can live in a nice house and raise kids on $50K a year."

But can you afford adequate healthcare for your family? I'm sure someone's done the math somewhere.

Meanwhile, it's tremendously inefficient:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/22/opinion/22krugman.html

Anon: Malkin wants you right away to picket a school full of lefties. Go off, now, lad and sell your bilge to her.

First is the democrats have no excuse for injecting a child into an adult arguement.Secondly the Republicans to attack a child is as despicable.Republicans and democrats when you make Generals or kids part of the political discussion they are fair game for the other side.It may be distasteful but it is fair.

Regarding the paragon(s) of self-sufficiency who have weighed in here:

If there's a way that the government can get them to sign up and refuse taxpayer-funded services that they did not CHOOSE to pay for, I say let them do it.

It would create more jobs if we hired people to monitor these guys and make sure they're not doing things like using roads, being protected by police, buying food that passes health inspections, taking nasty dumps in public bathrooms, or sending their kids to public schools.

But aside from that, it's never worth it to argue with stupid people. You're letting them waste your time (unless, of course, you're having fun in the process, and that's perfectly cool).

Karen - Thank you for taking notice of this incident. Now, please, I beg you, follow up on this. And remember, the story here is the uncivil behavior of the GOP and conservatives. And, beyond incivility, the story is that the GOP and the conservaitve media establishment purposely present false information to their followers in order to shape political policy.

Let me be clear on that point: The GOP lies to American citizens.

This is not a 'both parties do it' situation and never has been. I understand your need to be objective and dispassionate but if you do not take an active role in monitoring Truth then you can not properly perform your job as a reporter. Please, help those of us that only want the truth.

THOMAS BILLIS-Sorry, but you can attack the argument without attacking the child. The right wing is attacking the child. That is who they are and what they do. They make up "facts" and then when you point out that their "facts" are wrong they move on to some other lie. See above, Anonymous spouts Malkin lies. We point out that they are lies. Their response, Hillary, Hillary, Socialized medicine!!!

"First is the democrats have no excuse for injecting a child into an adult arguement [sic]."

I don't have time to Google it up, but how many press conferences have the Republicans had with kids in the background?

I know the kid hasn't hasn't had the chance to be indoctrinated with the Free Market Solves Everything Republican party line yet, but the kid *was* helped by the program. Where do you think the term "poster child" came from? Is Easter Seals exploiting kids? My God! The injustice!

The guy quoting a Michelle Malkin article as some sort of factual basis for an argument, is hilarious. What's next? Bill O'Reilly? Glenn Beck? Ann Coulter?

I also note Anonymous got very quiet when others pointed out the innacuracies in her article (how long did it take? 10 seconds?)

- Scott

Remember the rules, fellow liberals.

It's not our responsibility to provide health care to children if parents won't buy it, or can't afford it, for them.

It IS our responsibility to do so for Iraqis, of course... for years and years to come.

No disconnect there, right?

Needless to say, this is a new low for Tumulty. We can't allow politicians to hide behind 12-year-olds. The fault lies with the Dems for their tactic of doing that in the first place.

I note also that a FReeper has done more reporting on this story than the entire MSM combined, which simply took their claims at face value.

For all those on the right who are so concerned about using children in political pictures, remember the picture of G.W Bush surrounded by "snowflake children" when he vetoed a stem cell research bill? Just one of many examples, but IOKIYAR.

I think this is a more clear description of the facts of the Frost situation.
***
"Here are the facts that the right-wing distorted in order to attack young Graeme:

1) Graeme has a scholarship to a private school. The school costs $15K a year, but the family only pays $500 a year.

2) His sister Gemma attends another private school to help her with the brain injuries that occurred due to her accident. The school costs $23,000 a year, but the state pays the entire cost.

3) They bought their “lavish house” sixteen years ago for $55,000 at a time when the neighborhood was less than safe.

4) Last year, the Frosts made $45,000 combined. Over the past few years they have made no more than $50,000 combined.

5) The state of Maryland has found them eligible to participate in the CHIP program.

Desperate to defend Bush’s decision to cut off millions of children from health care, the right wing has stooped to launching baseless and uninformed attacks against a 12 year old child and his family.

Right wing bloggers have been harassing the Frosts, calling their home numerous times to get information about their private lives. Compassionate conservatism indeed."

Many more links within the article for those who are interested in facts, not Malkin's spew.

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/08/attacking-graeme-frost/

Posted by Robin Hoodwanker:
"Summary of Hillarycare II (same as Hillarycare I):
1. You're a fat slob.
2. My kids get to pay for it.
Have I missed anything?"

Yeah. You missed a few things. What happens when the poor people who make your food, clean your offices, pick up your garbage, make your clothes, build your electronics, and do a billion other things that you "self-reliant" types won't or, most likely, can't do by yourselves, get sick and can't afford insurance? They die. And then your garbage doesn't get picked up. And your food doesn't get made. And your lawn doesn't get mowed. and your yacht doesn't get cleaned. and then the children of those poor people grow up without parents and in desperate situations. and then they kill you and take your boat. The way I see it, in modern civilized society, self-reliance is a myth. You can sit around your giant house and try to rationalize your greed by saying "I earned this, and I don't owe anyone anything", but the truth is that you owe so much to all the mostly poor people all around you who do the zillion invisible and thankless tasks that make your life comfortable. You can choose to ignore the service they provide you, and you can shirk the responsiblity you owe them as a member of 21st century civil society. Just know that it makes you a pretty miserable, heartless parasite who is contributing to a society of callousness and incivility which you will leave to your children.

"Of course the "poor" parents of said child own a business, reside in a home worth at least $500,000 and spend $40,000 per year on two children to attend grade school,"

These are the right-wing talking points.

Therefore they are lies.

The house is not worth that much, and was purchased for $55K. The children are on scholarship.

But even if their parents were making $200K a year, it wouldn't matter. The left would never, ever harass the families of snowflake children, or any other GOP photo-op kids. Instead of talking policy, the right needs to find Enemies at which to target their boundless hatred.

It's being distributed by White House pal Rush Limbaugh, and O'Reilly sit-in/child stalker Malkin.

There is no moral equivalence between the left and the right in this country.

Karen:
Even calling this -- even sarcastically -- a "debate" just continues to play into the false-equivalency hands of the right-wingers, legitimizing what they're doing to this kid and his family. "Unprovoked kneecapping" would be a better phrase....

TLB: "Needless to say, this is a new low for Tumulty."

How? She's not the one harassing a 12-year-old and his brain-damaged sister.

TLB: "We can't allow politicians to hide behind 12-year-olds."

So you go after the 12-year-old and his family...that's real classy, Whacko...

TLB: "The fault lies with the Dems for their tactic of doing that in the first place."

Snowflake children? The anti-Goldwater 'mushroom cloud' ad back in the 60's? Hardly Dem tactics, Whacko.

TLB: "I note also that a FReeper has done more reporting on this story.."

Then you should also 'note' that Freeperville got it wrong, as outlined in the ABCNews article Karen linked to.

This all gets back to economics and power. It has very little to do with taking care of people. You people who believe that HillaryCare II has anything to do with your health are truly caught up in her Fascist utopia see keeps trying to sell.

Healthcare represents 15% of this nations total economy.

This enables the government to justify increasing taxes to the levels that we see in other socialist contries to the level of over 55% taxation. It also give the government more power to set regulations and mandates that private enterprise will have to follow.

We have seen in other countries where Socialized medicine is being practiced the long waits, the sub par healthcare they recieve, and having to get government approval to have a certain procedures done. This in some cases has led to fatalities waiting on approval for procedures.

Just because everyone will have healthcare matters little if the care they recieve is so terrible. I would also challenge you to find an instance where people have left the united states to get a special procedure done from a country that practices Socialized medicine. You won't find one.

It is also a joke that she says that the entire country will cost 110 billion dollars to cover. To borrow a quote from Hillary herself her proposal for the cost requires "A WILLING SUSPENSION OF DISBELIEF." Well sure they say they will take money from the rich which is people who make over 200,000. As it is, only about 2.7% of households, or a little more than 3 million people, have yearly incomes of at least $200,000. To generate an extra $120 billion, each of them on average would have to to cough up another $40,000 a year in federal taxes. Yea that will happen. That means everyone will have to pay not just the rich.

This sounds familiar like when they said that perscription drug assistance would cost this country around 400 billion, and two weeks after it was enacted grew to 570 billion.

It is sad that some people in this country can not afford health care. I believe more in assistance where based on income of an individual they are required to pick up a percentage of the bill and the government pick up the rest. This would keep private insurance companies intact and keep the government bueracracy out of Healthcare. It has also shown to be significantly cheaper than socialized healthcare.

This is more of the avenue we should be pursuing.

Once a government program gives something for free. Then it can NEVER be taken away. It can only be expanded. Get ready for healthcare to all and it's inevitable decline for all.

This is no different than the Oxycontin Man's insult to a 13 year old Chelsea Clinton.

The bat$#!+ crazy right attacks children because they know they need to pick on target the same mental age as them.

I have to admit, it takes balls to put a child up as the spokesperson for a cause and then act offended when your opponents respond.

Obviously it is not the kid's fault. He is a victim of parents who care more about their politics then their child and politicians who care more about their political future than the children they use as a human shields.

You all have balls though. How dare they argue with the children. They are the future.

-Ben

"Well this is what happens when you use children to play politics with"

Right.

"WASHINGTON, Feb. 25 - The battle over Social Security has been joined by an unusual lobbyist, a 9-year-old from Texas who has agreed to travel supporting President Bush's proposal.

The boy, Noah McCullough, made a splash with his encyclopedic command of presidential history, earning five appearances on the "Tonight" show and some unusual experiences in the presidential campaign last year. He beat Howard Dean in a trivia contest at the Democratic National Convention and wrote for his local newspaper about his trip to see the inauguration.

"He's very patriotic and very Republican," said Noah's mother, Donna McCullough, a former teacher and self-described Democrat. "It's the way he was born."

Wow! Corey, what an intelligible argument you made there. Here’s a suggestion, how about using your masterful skills at debate somewhere else, like a 6th grade debate team.

Here's a question for you wingnuts out there. Suppose one of these kids, god forbid, was in an irreversible coma like Terry Shiavo? Suppose after a few years the parents and doctors decided to remove life support. The wingnut intelligencia would then be arguing that the state should accept the burden of keeping this brain dead child on life support. Your position amounts to this, you are willing to use government resources to keep a brain dead person on life support but you draw the line at helping children who are recovering from a horrific injury if they happen to live in a house you, in your infinite wisdom, have decided is too good for them.

Posted by chatmandu
October 9, 2007
Once a government program gives something for free. Then it can NEVER be taken away. It can only be expanded. Get ready for healthcare to all and it's inevitable decline for all.
-------
The question arises, would there be more renal deaths if, for example, government programs did not include dialysis and renal transplantation.
A funeral is cheaper than dialysis or a transplant. Is that the society that we want as our future? Has health care declined or improved for reanal disease patients in general?
There are hematologic malignancies that are curable. Should there be government programs availble to cover these cases? Has health care for children with hematologic malignancies improved because of government sponsored research and insurance programs, or declined?
I suspect that most citizens would come to the conclusion that something must be done for both the uninsured besides from GW's statement that "They can just go to the emergency room."
Many people in the wage-stagnant middle class also realize that for a number of serious diseases, they are under-insured. I really don't see the Libertarian/Conservative position on this issue as currying favor with most voters.

First, here's one of the right's patron saints Freidrich Hayek, in his famous treatise against socialism, "the Road to Serfdom":

*****There is no reason why in a society which has reached the general level of wealth which ours has attained the first kind of security should not be guaranteed to all without endangering general freedom…there can be no doubt that some minimum of food, shelter, and clothing, sufficient to preserve health and the capacity to work, can be assured to everybody…Nor is there any reason why the state should not assist the individuals in providing for those common hazards of life against which, because of their uncertainty, few individuals can make adequate provision. Where, as in the case of sickness and accident, neither the desire to avoid such calamities nor the efforts to overcome their consequences are as a rule weakened by the provision of the assistance – where, in short, we deal with genuinely insurable risks – THE CASE FOR THE STATE'S HELPING TO ORGANIZE A COMPREHENSIVE SYSTEM OF SOCIAL INSURANCE IS VERY STRONG...****

http://tinyurl.com/2gj82z

So if universal healthcare is socialist, then why is the uber socialist nemesis Friedrich Hayek advocating it?

As for wait times, this article ran recently in Business Week magazine:

"The Doc's In, but It'll Be a While

Despite spending lots more per capita on health care, the U.S. is often as bad or worse than other industrialized nations in wait times"

http://tinyurl.com/29o8q5

Yeah Karen!

Now will you talk about this on Washington Week in Review?

Oh wait-- Gwen would never let you bring that up. Condie wouldn't come over for dinner anymore.

You know what the most amazing thing about this Schiavo attack on a 12-year-old is? That the media thinks the left are uncivil extremists obstructing compromise.

SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP ANON, JUDGEMENT, AND THE REST OF YOU WHO HATE THE POOR CHILDREN. YOU ARE ABOUT TO BE SWEPT AWAY BY THE TIME OF LIBERAL SOCIALISM THAT WE WILL BRING AND IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT YOU CAN MOVE. WE DON'T WANT CHILDREN HATERS LIKE YOU ALL HERE ANYWAY!

HEALTHCARE IS A FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHT AND IT IS THE RESPONISBILITY OF THE GOVERNMENT TO PROVIDE IT AND IT IS THE REPSONISBILITY OF THE RICH AND THE CORPORATIONS TO DO THEIR SHARE AND PROVIDE FOR THE SOCIETY THAT MADE THEM RICH.

STOP THE GREED
EMBRACE NATIONALIZED HEALTHCARE AND SCHIP

STOP BEING NEOCON PIGS AND EMBRACE HILLARY
FIND YOUR HUMANITY NEOCONS IF YOU HAVE ANY LEFT

YOU PEOPLE ARE SHAMEFUL

I SEE HILLARY ON THE TV
SHE THE SAME PERSON THAT I USED TO SEE
I LOVE HILL AND SHE LOVES ME
I WRITE WHEN I'M OFF MY MEDICATION, SEE?

THE ONLY MEDICATION I WILL COME OFF OF IS THE ANTIDEPRESSANTS NECESSARY WHEN I SEE HOW BUSHITLER DESTROYS AMERICA AND THE CHILDREN EVERYDAY.

THE EUPHORIA AND THE JOY OF ANOTHER PRESIDENT CLINTON WILL CLEANSE THE SADNESS WE HAVE FELT AS THE NEW LIBERAL DAY EMERGES AFTER WE TAKE OVER.

NO ONE CAN STOP HILLARY.
NO ONE CAN STOP THE NETROOTS.

LIKE MARKOS SAID, WE ARE THE MAINSTREAM!!

I AM ACTUALLY AN EMPLOYEE OF THE COMPANY THAT IS BIDDING FOR THE NEW SWAMPLAND REGISTRATION SYSTEM

Posted by Robin Hoodwanker:
"Summary of Hillarycare II (same as Hillarycare I):
1. You're a fat slob.
2. My kids get to pay for it.
Have I missed anything?"

Yeah, you missed the fact that the states with highest rates of obesity are all in the deep south. The very red states of Georgia, Mississippi and Alabama. Those states also take more from the federal government than they pay in, so in reality, it's the blue states, NY and California that subsidize the obesity of the red states. No need to thank us.

Republicans use children to illustrate their policies, too. Think of the snowflake babies. There's absolutely nothing wrong with it.

The difference is that no one hounded the snow flake baby children.

What's strange to me is not that Malkin and Limbaugh are stalking the family and trying to ruin their lives, but that so many of the Drudge heads who migrated here are doing the same.

I thought the Drudge heads were just stupid, not evil. Guess I was wrong.

I DID NOT POST THE ABOVE POST!
TIME WE NEED MODERATORS AND REGISTRATION HERE PRONTO!

MARKOS WOULD HAVE ALREADY TAKEN CARE OF QH AND HIS SOCKPUPPETS. WHY CAN'T YOU?

EVERYTHING IS GOING EXACTLY ACCORDING TO PLAN

Anonymous says:

"You could have chosen to have any job you wanted if you were willing to work hard enough to get it.
You could have waited to start a family, you could have earned that degree...

Life is choices."

I assume you're against government assistance for the able bodied. Give that advice to farmers in Iowa who get subsidies or to ranchers in Wyoming who feed their cattle on federal land or to mine owners in Utah who don't pay taxes on their profits because of some obscure federal law dating back to the early 19th century. Wingnuts don't mind feeding at the government trough, they just don't like anyone else to do it.

Now aren't these caterwauling flying monkeys of the right the same people who were absolutely outraged that MoveOn dared to attack General Petreaus?

Let me see:

A 4-Star General who writes Op-Eds and testifies on policy to Congress vs a 12-year old brain injured child?

Oh, I understand. Obviously, the 12-year old is the one it's all right to attack. We can't allow the General's feelings to be hurt while a 12-year old brain injured child is being allowed to get SOCIALIZED MEDICINE!

They don't call 'em Values Voters for nothing!

Anon--you don't want to have to pay for the healthcare of others? Fine. Well, I don't want to pay for the war, abstinence education, corporate welfare, faith-based offices, etc. As Nick mentioned, it's those of us in the liberal states paying for everything anyway, so I don't think you have to worry your beautiful mind.

YES TO WHAT SLEESTAK SAID. ALL THE EDUCATED PEOPLE LIVE ON THE COASTS AND IN THE CITIES AND WE PAY FOR YOU HICK REDNECKS AND YOUR SILLY LITTLE NASCAR. YOU SHOULD BE THANKFUL FOR US NEOCON FOOLS!

I am for not for profit centers such as the Children's hospitals of Atlanta. These centers offer cutting edge procedures and are funded through corporate donations, fund drives, and benefits held. I myself have volunteered at a few events, and donated to the hospital when I can.

People give and childrens' issues are takin care of and not only that it is one of the best pediatric hospitals in the country. See you don't need government. Just people with a little time and money. I don't mind doing it I am just not a fan of government forcing people to do it.

We already have great children's centers all they need is funding. I will drop a link if some of you are interested in donating. Lets see if you liberals can walk it as well as you talk it.

http://www.choa.org/default.aspx?id=1975

SHUT UP NEOCON!
THOSE NOT FOR PROFITS ARE STILL SLAVES TO THE INSURANCE SYSTEM AND GOOD LUCK GETTING IN THERE IF YOU ARE NOT RICH!

NATIONALIZED FREE HEALTHCARE IS A FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHT AND IT IS HIGH TIME THAT GOVERNMENT PROVIDED IT.

WE LIBERALS DONATE FAR MORE MONEY TO CHARITABLE CAUSES THAN YOU REPUBLICANS EVEN HAVE.

"See you don't need government. Just people with a little time and money. "

Wow! Judgement, what an intelligible argument you made there. Here’s a suggestion, how about using your masterful skills at debate somewhere else, like a 6th grade debate team.

I second what Question Limbaugh has to say. Do you have one rational argument in you Judgement?

Ah, yes many have volunteered, donated, etc. especially for acute care, but still many go without even the basics or long term care.

http://www.shrinershq.org/
http://www.wish.org/
Hospice
UIHC

Can't we just reach a compromise on this issue and let Michelle Malkin scrutinize all of this family's financial and medical records while she drops a hot steaming one on their expensive-looking kitchen floor?

JJ, guys like you are ''in what we call the reality-based community,'' which is defined as people who ''believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.''

http://www.cs.umass.edu/~immerman/play/opinion05/WithoutADoubt.html

Judgement is, clearly, ''in what we call the faith-based community.'' Don't bother her/him with your ''reality.''

Thank you lupercus - I try to help people like Judgement and QH see why they are so wrong in hopes that they will join the rational people.

It's like teaching a pig to sing, JJ...

Judgement,

CHOA is owned by Grady Health Systems and is also a teaching hosptial. They probably do great work there but they are not free of government support.
Teaching hospitals are supported by federal, state and local governments in the form of property tax abatements, land give aways, and more. Their corporate owners also derive a benefit from owning a non-profit hospital. Then, there are the tax breaks the foundations, who are the primarily source of funding, get in exchange for their donations. Don't misunderstand me, there is nothing wrong with any of this and the end result is probably a fine hospital that does a lot of good for your community but it's inaccurate to say" see, you don't need government.." Without the support of government, directly and indirectly, your shiny little hospital would not exist.

http://www.anonymousliberal.com/

answers another 'self-educated':

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Steyn

don't miss his comments about VA Tech.

Didn't know I needed to support a statement about donations JJ. What would you like me to define that for you.

do·na·tion (dō-nā'shən) Pronunciation Key
n. 1) The act of giving to a fund or cause.
2) A gift or grant.

I didn't realize you and QL required that much explanation for a simple statement such as we can all handle healthcare through donations such as the hosptial I listed. You guys should be poster children for public schooling in this country.

I don't believe that the government holds all the solutions for this country and I believe they have continuously demonstrated a nack for being unfathomably inept at the handling of social security, budgets, and basic government functions. Yet these are the people you want to turn our healthcare over to?

You guys do live in another world.

Judgement, if you want to lay out a plan as to how a system of private donations can support healthcare for the poor, education, the highway system, national defense and the host of other things government now accomplishes, by all means go ahead.

Otherwise, maybe bring the condescension down a notch. You laid out a patently absurd statement and got called on it. Time to put up or STFU. Thanks.

There is no Constitutional precedent for a federal healthcare program. I think Hamilton, Madison and others outlined the roles of of the various levels of government fairly well in this country. Now I could compromise with a socialistic viewpoint if it were implemented on a true State level. That would mean all funding is raised and distributed on a State level. That would allow you to have univeral healthcare and not tear up the Constitution.

Anon, QH: "It is not what enters into the mouth that defiles the man, but what proceeds out of the mouth, this defiles the man."

I've seen the phrase "It's all about choices." run through this thread, but what about the children's choices? They have none. "It is not good to take the children's bread and throw it to the dogs."

It is for the greater good of our society (as CW points out, this includes police, libraries, roads, etc.) for us to take care of the poor, elderly, incapable and *our children!*

"Permit the children to come to Me, and do not hinder them..."

"There is no Constitutional precedent for a federal healthcare program."

I don't know about "constitutional", but there's medicare and social security. Those have passed constitutional muster.

(By the way, at least 2 of the comments in here aren't me, maybe more.)

kbangin, what is the definition of a universal right. Assuming you are referring to healthcare for children as a Universal Right. Further what is the role of the State in regards to Universal Rights?

I don't see anyone talking here about "universal rights." They are talking about a health care program with some sanity, like the rest of the industrialized world has.

"think Hamilton, Madison and others outlined the roles of of the various levels of government fairly well in this country."

How did those guys feel about harrassing 12 year-old kids who dared to disagree with them?

Can anyone imagine being in a foxhole with anonymouth and his reactionary brethren? Their solipsistic attitude is almost startling in its raw inhumanity.

NY Nick,

I said in one of my posts above am not against government assistance. I am against government healthcare. Most of their funding does come through private and coporate donations though.
I don't know what the percentage of government assistance is but, I am going home and don't feel like looking it up now.

I do see your point however, I don't think government is the salvation of our healtcare issues. There is definitely a better solution than to turn our healthcare system over to the government. Because like I stated before we see what a wonderful job they have done with our failed social programs we have now.

I don't know where lupercous's comment about faith based argument comes. I am not religous and have never included religion in any of my posts.

In 2003 my husband was employed and we got our health insureance thru his job. I had been working, but left my job to stay home with our two small children.

In October of 2003 my husband was diagnosed with cancer and had surgery resulting in $80,000 worth of insurance payments. The next insurance cycle his company laid him off after ten years of service. Are the two related? I don't know. But I do know his presence on their insurance rolls caused their rates to rise. Without him their rates would come back down.

So at that point neither of us is employed. We can pay for continued coverage via Cobra, but that is $800 per month for our family. We do that and blow through all of our 401k money in about six months. We are both desparately looking for work.

With no money and no income we qualify for Minnesota Care. Thank God. It covers us until I find a job three months later. But because of all the insurance changes some bills that should have been paid fell through the cracks. We are left with $10,000 in outstanding debt.

We just paid that off. I get our health insurance through my employer. They are a small company and can only afford to pay 50% toward our insurance, so we pay out over $650 per month as our half. My husband has a fulltime job, but no benefits.

His cancer has returned and he will again need surgery. Too bad we made the choice for him to get cancer, huh? Just like the Frost family made the choice to get into a car accident, and the choice to try and advance themselves without a full-time "regular" job.

If my small company should go out of business my choices for health insurance will be...what?

Choices. You people on the right make me sick.

"...failed social programs..."

Yeah, social security is a complete failure:

****There is a growing consensus in Britain that privatization must be partly reversed. The Confederation of British Industry - the equivalent of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce - has called for an increase in guaranteed benefits to retirees, even if taxes have to be raised to pay for that increase. And the chief executive of Britain's National Association of Pension Funds speaks with admiration about a foreign system that "delivers efficiencies of scale that most companies would die for."

The foreign country that, in the view of well-informed Britons, does it right is the United States. The system that delivers efficiencies to die for is Social Security.****

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/14/opinion/14krugman.html

Luperous,

"Judgement, if you want to lay out a plan as to how a system of private donations can support healthcare for the poor, education, the highway system, national defense and the host of other things government now accomplishes, by all means go ahead."

We already are taxed for those government services: education, the highway system, national defense. Try to stay with us here.

Otherwise, maybe bring the condescension down a notch. You laid out a patently absurd statement and got called on it. Time to put up or STFU. Thanks."

I am not saying pay for the entire healthcare system through donations I was saying look for alternatives. If that was unclear as I look back up there it probably was I am sorry. I was using them as an example of how most of their operating budget is handled through donations and coporate sponcers. Oh and maybe you should follow your own advice there about bringing down the condecension.

JoyousMN: After expressing my sincere hope that everything works out for you and your family as well as possible, I'll apply to your story the logic of our supremely autonomous friends on this thread:

"You guys should have CHOSEN not to have these awful things happen to you. And because they did, somehow it's your fault."

Somewhere in there, I smell the legacy distorted Christianity: if you suffer misfortunes, it must have been because of something sinful (or "irresponsible") that YOU did.

In the end, of course, it's just begrudging churlishness flattering itself with the name of self-reliance.

And it's not even Emersonian self-reliance. Emerson would have argued that the heightened personal power that self-reliance gives you ought to lead to altruism.

In well-adjusted people, it does. But yes, these people are sick. when they're not commenting on this thread, they're staring out the window screaming at kids who accidentally walk on their lawns. Or stalking their homes...

JoyousMN,

I am so sorry for your troubles, sister. And I am so, so sorry that these rightwing morons are adding to your heartbreak and grief. Please know that the hearts and best wishes of the decent folks among us are with you and your family.

-James

Thanks Enceladus.

One point I forgot to make. We HAD to keep our coverage NO MATTER WHAT because if we let it lapse then my husband's pre-existing condition would make it almost impossible to get coverage if we had to buy an individual policy. If we had continous coverage then they could not turn us down.

I spoke out during the 2004 elections too. I told our story and it was put out by the Kerry campaign in a brochure here in MN. (Yes, I'm a Democrat too. Sounds like the Frosts are as well. There is likely a reason for that.) In response, I received some of the most amazing letters from "Christian" Republicans. One letter basically said, "Too bad your husband has cancer, but abortion is really awful."

I really feel for the Frost's. We only had a small taste of the crazies. They will get the full treatment.

So healthcare is not a universal right than JJ?

And I never said what was said about the young boy was polite or kind, TomT. I'll thank you not to put words in my mouth.

Oh and JJ, I never said Social Security or any other program was Constitutional. I wasn't aware we were assuming everything passed up to this point in history by our Congress was acceptable. I think many things implemented were done so to expand Federal Power at the expense of State and Local power. My namesake discussed the importance of those separations to protect the rights of minorities at some length. Please pick up and read the Federalist Papers and the Constitution at some point. I have nothing against a liberal or even socialist standpoint. I am a liberal by the original meaning of the word in Political Science. I am only opposed to the programs being funded or controlled Federally. There is nothing wrong with a US State launching a health program.

So don't lump me in with Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians (though I usual like them) with idiot rhetoric. I believe in the theories this country was founded on.

The cognitive dissonance is amazing:

Darwin's theory of evolution and natural selection is "wrong" and "evil."

But SOCIAL Darwinism, that's just the way things "naturally" are and ought to be! The poor and unfortunate are just inferior human beings, and we need to weed them out by not helping them in the struggle for existence!

Judgement,

I'm not sure what the solution is to our the problems in our health care system but I do know that government will be a part of it somehow. It's unavoidable. Some people have become conditioned to believe that the private solution is always the best, the most efficient, the most fair. Not always. As the saying goes, follow the money. The organizations fighting the hardest to stave off any government solution for our health care system are the insurance lobby and the pharmecutical lobby. Insurance companies and pharmecutical companies would not be meeting their fiduciary duty to their shareholders if they put the good of the overall health care system about their own profits. That's the rub here. Health care isn't some luxury we should pay for ourselves or due without. It's not a commodity. Doctors understand this. Doctors are taught to fix the patient in front of them, regardless of their orgin or ability to pay. The rest of the industry has no such obligation. Insurance companies and pharmecutical companies will adjust to whatever system we put into place. They all operate in Europe and Canada with their univeral coverage systems so don't believe everything you hear from them when they cry poverty or say they'll not be able to produce the next great drug. They will adjust.

My husband and I have been married for 22 years. We have both worked hard all our lives. I've been working since I was 16. Let me say how glad I was that we could qualify for some assistance without having to give up everything we had worked for. That to me is the point of helping middle-class families too. Castastrophies can happen to any one. Don't we live in a country where we can help people without forcing them to give up everything they have worked for?

Those on the right seem outraged that the Frost family was making ends meet. They lose sight of the fact that reason they were able to do so was because they were getting help with their health insurance. So is your point that the Frost's should have had to be DESTITUTE to get help? I say again, any one of us is only one castastrophy away from needing help and CHOICE often has nothing to do with it.

Publius-- Well, you're welcome to try to repeal social security if you want. I'm sure that would be a very popular initiative.

And there are many things you can take out of the Federalist Papers, and the founding fathers for that matter.

I am a greedy neocon who kicks poor people in the gutter and takes money from the childrens' healthcare so I can send people to die for me and my Halliburton stocks in Iraq.

As far as I am concerned since I am getting my social security checks the system works. As for the people who are producing now and putting money into the system but may not get any out of it, too bad for them. I have mine.

WELL I AM TOO YOUNG FOR SOCIAL SECURITY CHECKS BUT I THINK THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE PUT MONEY IN DESERVE TO BE TAKEN CARE OF AND I THINK WE MUST RAISE TAXES ESPECIALLY ON THOSE MAKING OVER 100,000 DOLLARS ANNUALLY TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL AMERICANS CONTINUE TO BE CARED FOR. I WOULD LIKE TO THINK SOME OF MY MONEY GOES TO YOU AS OPPSOSED TO BUSH ILLEGAL WAR.

JoyousMN,

I am sorry for your husbands illness and hope that he will beat his cancer into remission. I recently went through a similar issue with my step father who had Non Hodgkins Lymphoma. Along with that he also developed congestive heart failure. We thought he had days. He ended up though making a full recovery and is walking 3-5 miles a day and this happened to him in June. I hope the best for your family.

Obviously that was not me earlier.

Joyous, your story is not unique but does not make it any 'less'. We should need only one story like yours to not only make us weep, but spur us to real reform.

I am recalling some history here without Googling.

The railroad barons, building different sized tracks to the detriment of the public good while amassing great personal fortunes were finally 'controlled' by the federal government with a mandate for one standard track size enabling the western movement, etc.

Many 'activists' worked for public health bringing such things as government control and standards for such things as 'healthy' public supplies of water. Government also subsidized and regulated such things as electricity and telephones making them available to all.

Gen. Eisenhower returned from WW II, realizing that many things should be done to promote the general welfare and common defense. Interstate highways and the building of hospitals were part of his plan. I attended grade school during this time in two states [a rural school and a city school] where each school building had a full time RN and screening physicals were given for free each year. Also, got polio vaccine twice for free.

My dad and my brother both worked successfully in fairly comparable managerial jobs in the Insurance industry. Their 'pay' differentials were gross as Insurance profits grew with the supply-siders. My dad was service oriented. My brother was profit motivated.

I have knowledge of health care in three states. There is NO equity, particularly when it comes to access, standard of care and patient rights. As health care has moved further into the for-profit corporate driven realm, cost have sky rocketed and positive outcomes have decreased when compared to other 'industrialized' nations.

While I am not a big Clinton fan, at least OSHA was a functioning agency that worked for safety during his terms. Why would I mention this? Because in one state sprinklers systems were made mandatory in ALL facilities providing health care. In another state standing facilities were 'grandfathered' and made exempt from this requirement. Anybody who doesn't believe that we don't need agencies like the FDA and CDC as true watch dogs, must believe in the tooth fairy.

One state requires that 'incident reports' related to quality control are part of the record. Another state allows these reports to be classified as 'top secret' and not available for review.

It seems to me that we need to look at ALL systems, take the best and create one that serves all citizens with equity. That is not going to happen with the fragmentation, the multi-systems based on profit.

Best wishes for Judgement's and JoyousMN's loved ones' recovery.

Judge, I don't want the taxpayer to have to foot the bill for every possible medical expense, and I imagine (hope) that you don't want to turn everything over to the market.

Once we get beyond cardboard stereotypes, it seems obvious that all we are talking about are the details - how much government involvement? what should be privatised, and how?

Ideology and preconceptions shouldn't enter into it.

JJ,

I am glad you are reaping the benifits of our Social Security. However, there is plenty of evidence that shows that it will not be there for those of us who have been paying into it. That is a real poor additude that I got mine screw you mentality you have there.

Here is but a few reasons socialized medicine is not a good idea. Just a few examples that should really make you think. It also shows you why in socialized medicine there is no incentive to have better care with Socialized medicine. Like I said before and as the readers digest article points out just because you have free health care doesn't mean anything if it sucks.