U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse

(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Jena Griswold

60%

60%

40%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Alexis King

(D) Brian Mason

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line

(D) George Stern

(D) A. Gonzalez

(R) Sheri Davis

40%

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%

30%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Joe Salazar

50%

40%

40%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
August 08, 2009 03:05 PM UTC

Weekend Open Thread

  • 94 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

Our town sucks–our scene rules!

To belong you must buy into it

So we sold you metal spike bracelets

Come on let’s see a good fight

–Dead Kennedys, from Anarchy for Sale

Tweet
Share

Comments

94 thoughts on “Weekend Open Thread”

  1. “Philadelphia’s police department is investigating why an officer used his police car’s computer to run a criminal background check on President Barack Obama.”

    Well, thank you Officer Knucklehead. NCIC is for looking up information on criminals, not the President of the United States.

    And, not to be outdone, two MENSA members in Georgia. “Two Atlanta-area police officers are accused of a similar unauthorized background check on the president July 20.”

    Because President Obama was vetted by morons, these heroes are doing a service by investigating him during their on duty time.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…

    I’ll say this ONCE. HE WAS BORN IN HAWAII. HE IS NOT MUSLIM. HE WAS ELECTED BY A LARGE MARGIN, AND DIDN’T NEED THE SUPREME COURT TO INSTALL HIM.

    And for those who insist that he was born in Kenya, is a Muslim mole out to destroy us from within, or that his healthcare plan will kill seniors, you need to increase the dosage on your medication, turn off Rush Limbaugh, and learn to think for yourself.

    1. have checked out their mayor, governor, Bush, girlfriends ex boyfriend, girlfriends parents, their childrens’ friends, etc….

      Cute story, but far less revealing then agents that reviewed Barry’s passport and foregin travel history.

            1. I don’t care if the check is on Joe the Plumber or Joe Biden.

              I don’t care what party they are, or why they’re doing the background checks. There’s an explicit privacy to the ability to run criminal background checks. I imagine the McCain campaign or the Secret Service ran a check on Joe the Plumber themselves, just to be safe. It’s a rational concern.

              Running a criminal background check on the duly elected President of the United States, regardless of party affiliation, is wrong. Especially when the background check is run when the officer is on duty and using official resources, ie. his patrol car computer.

              So, to recap, wrong is wrong and unethical is unethical. I couldn’t care less what party they belong to. My standards of ethics and morals holds for everyone.

              1. Criticizing the misuse of resources in the background check on “Joe the Plumber” lo, these 9 months later.  

                I’m still trying to figure out how you get from bored random looking-up of people to “I’ll say this ONCE. HE WAS BORN IN HAWAII. HE IS NOT MUSLIM. HE WAS ELECTED BY A LARGE MARGIN, AND DIDN’T NEED THE SUPREME COURT TO INSTALL HIM.”  

                Seem like quite the jump.

                1. Someone doing a background check on President Obama was likely looking for evidence that he wasn’t born here, or some other thing to use against him. I don’t think they were bored.

                  As for the caps, I wanted to be clear in the facts, that McCain lost by a large margin, his birth certificate clearly shows that he was born in Hawaii, that he is a Christian and not Muslim, and that he didn’t need the Supreme Court to put him in the White House as W did.

                  I try to be courteous to people here, but I never expect reciprocity from you, and you’ve never disappointed.

                  1. I know that’s what you assumed, and why I emphasized Lib’d’s point that people do all sorts of absurd searches when they’re bored and have access to the database.  

                    “Your point” was not that such a search was unethical, it was merely a vehicle for further grandstanding and making baseless assumptions against those with whom you disagree.  You admit as much in your post, despite a claim to the contrary in your first reply.  

                    Clearly courtesy and disingenuousness are not mutually exclusive concepts to you.

                    1. How can you say that’s not my point? I know what I wrote, because I wrote it. And I wrote “likely” because I don’t know the officers’ motives, but I doubt it was simple boredom, especially since 3 officers have been accused of running background checks on President Obama in Ohio and Georgia.

                      There are plenty of things patrol officers can do when they’re bored besides misuse resources. I know, I grew up around cops.

                    2. A State background check isn’t going to come up with much.  An NCIC check might, but historically speaking, only recent arrests, warrants, or convictions are going to come up with a patrol car check.

                      Not a big deal.  Stupid, but not a big deal.

                    3. Your point wasn’t that it’s unethical.  Your point, and you were much more explicit about it below, is that anyone who might type the President’s name into a search is an evil, racist, right-wing hatemonger.  Don’t ascribe evil to a person’s motives when sheer stupidity will suffice.  

                    4. I said that I think it’s unethical no matter who does it.

                      Point out evidence of your accusations. Use my exact words. I never mentioned party, evil, race, or anything you’re accusing me of.

                      And how do you know my point better than I do? I wrote the post.

                  2. Cops going after Obama after he complained about an unnecessary arrest of an actual rich black man on his own front porch when black men have no right to be rich?

                    It would hever happen, right Yokel?  No cop would ever abuse his power to investigate someone he didn’t agree with, right?

                    No, they’re heroes.  After all, with a little effort, with a little investigation, they might find out he was born in Kenya or something.

                    Get real.

                    1. Didn’t this happen before the Gates gaffe?  I might be wrong, but that was my impression.

                    2. Just because someone doesn’t affirmatively agree with you doesn’t mean they’re part of some evil conspiracy.

                      Dude, they’re bored.  

                    3. And I don’t care if someone disagrees with me. That’s their right.

                      If you disagree with me, and you always do, that’s fine. I don’t accuse you of any conspiracy, evil or otherwise.

                      For me to think you guilty of conspiracy, I would have to care. I don’t. Sorry to disappoint you.

  3. Support this bill if there was no public option?  I’m curious because it’s sounding like that might be part of the compromise coming out of the Senate.

    Is there a point to passing the legislation without it?

    2. bottom line for me –

      1) Universal coverage…..coverage cannot be denied because of pre-existing conditions nor canceled because of medical problems which develop after initial acceptance. Automatic inclusion for children in family, from conception forward….since prenatal care is vital.

      2) Portable – coverage can be continued if job is lost…at same premium.

      3) Affordability – there has to be a limit on what percentage of income a premium can cost.

      Would insurance companies agree to the above government mandates?  Not in a pig’s eye, IMHO  so that is why a public option is necessary…

      Related to the above is the very real need to control costs…..and that is new issue, although related.  The above provisions should decrease health costs…in the long term…by early detection and treatment, reduced cost to ERs, and prevention.  But costs would go up initially….how to pay for them and to keep medicare/mediciad from going broke  are the real problems.

      1. 1) No universal coverage is really needed, just mandate a must serve by the healthcare industry.  I’m sure uncle sam can structure a system where in the industry sends it bills and no one is denied.  If we really want to lock in access make it effectively free to use there is no need for silly and wasteful insurance.

        2) Who needs portability …. today anyone can purchase insurance with a massive amount of options.  Leave it as is or mandate providers must serve all.  

        3) Following the income and earnings social justice model there has to be a limit on what percentage of income food stuffs, broncos tickets, healthclub memberships, tvs, ipods, clothing, gas, electricity, internet access can cost.

        1. today anyone can purchase insurance with a massive amount of options

          When you become old enough to be thrown off your mommy’s insurance, report back to us how you do finding your own.

          And when you get to be my age (60), give us an update about how many options there are, will you?

        3. And I mean this sincerely. Were you being scarcastic??

          2) Who needs portability …. today anyone can purchase insurance with a massive amount of options.  Leave it as is or mandate providers must serve all.

          This makes no sense….either as your policy position or as a joke.

      2. .

        “products of conception” are human and of value if they can be used to extract or compel some sort of benefit through legislation ?

        I agree with that.

        .

    3. It’s absolutely the one thing that has to be in Health Care Reform. If the Private Health Care Industry still gets to cherry-pick the healthiest people to overcharge for coverage and exclude those who really need it, what’s the point?

      I’m hoping you’ll do your Health Care Diary soon, LB….I’ve never done one myself, but I think it’s time to get off my ass and do one.

      So, here’s a start – my proposal is to open up TriCare to EVERYONE. TriCare PRIME becomes the default insurance for all currently eligible vets, retirees and military members and families. Military Retirees who separated prior to Sept 94 pay no copays or enrollment fees.

      All of the other TriCare plans become USACare, (USACare Standard, Extra and Prime) with the matching regional fee, copay and reimbursement schedule.

      What I’m waiting for is all the Repubs out there to say that it’s a horrible gov’t program that doesn’t work – which would be interesting, since the Repub Congress of 1994 created this program….  

      1. At least there is someone out their admitting to a direction I could support.  And while we are at it I propose all serve in the military.

        Lets go Swiss or Israel style.

        1. Prior to that, family members, Retirees and their family members used Military Health Care facilities on a Space Available basis…for free. No Co-Pays, no enrollment fees, nothing. It was a benefit of enlistment and retirement. I still have my Army Recruiting Pamplet that says if I say with the military 20yrs+ and retire, I get free health care for life.

          Now, the GOP Congress of 1994 stole that from me, and hundreds of thousands of retirees as well. But, everyone who enlisted after Sept 94 knew that this wasn’t going to be a benefit, so they shouldn’t get it in my revised plan.

          1. Health care for military in MTFs isn’t “free”.

            THough I’d agree that it comes with no out of pocket expense, or very little.

            I believe that health insurance/health care for life should be a benefit of making it to retirement from the military.

            1. Prior to 1994, the cost involved to provide this was secondary to the positive effect it has on unit readiness. NO ONE is going to be good at their jobs if they think their family members are suffering while they’re deployed, be it for health issues, quality day care or having a place to live or putting food on the table.

              TriCare succeeded in fixing the availability of health care for family members and retirees, but it FAILS on the cost. I also think (as stated) that Military Retirees should have free health care for life.

        1. I guess you missed all the previous posts I’ve made on this subject, but since you decided to display the depth of your ignorance….

          TriCare has the highest satisfaction rating of any health care insurance plan. Only the Veterans Health Administration has higher ratings, but since that’s honest-to-goodness socialized health care, it can’t be in the mix.

          Here: http://www.reuters.com/article… (went with the mainstream media.)

          Yes, TriCare has it’s moments with ease of use. But it doesn’t cut off care like the Big Boys do if you fail to cross a “t” on the form.

          To Whit: Last Nov, my buddy who’s stationed at Fort Carson was skiiing at Keystone with his son. He burned in while snowboarding and fractured his neck, leaving him paralyzed. They took him to the ER at Summit Cty, then flew him to St A’s via flight for life, operated and fully restored his movement. TriCare wouldn’t let him be moved from the Surgical ICU to Craig rehab until the paperwork was just right, and with that it only delayed his movement a couple of days.

          Had this been Aetna or the other greedy-ass bastards, he probably would still be sitting in the ER up at Summit County, eventually been driven to St A’s in cab, and then kicked out the ICU hours after he was stable.  

            1. ..clearly that makes yours the only experience we based customer satisfaction on.

              (I’m wondering if your glimmering personality and communicative style had anything to do with that. I’ve seen many a Retiree and/or Family Member lose their patience with medical personnel over the fact that their asses weren’t being kissed that very moment over their  personal issue of having to fill  out paperwork.)

              Even so, we have one Yokel who claims TriCare sucks.  We’ll compare that to six years running of being rated #1 by an independent medial rating company.

              And thanks for playing….

              1. My “one experience” includes the experiences of many, many folks I’ve worked with, too.  So there’s that.  

                I’m not saying TriCare (presumably, your employer, or was that “we” in your first sentence more general?) is exceptionally bad.  



                I’m saying it’s no different from any other insurance bureaucracy.                  

                They’ll try to screw you if they think they can get away with it.  In their favor is the fact that if they don’t screw you the first or second time, they stop trying.  Against them is the fact that they do all this with all the authority of the government, with people who are also “owned” by the government.  

                1. TriCare is actually run by the private health care sector – with  those damn guvmit workers auditing them constantly to make sure they’re not screwing up too badly.

                  Unlike my current Aetna Healthcare thru my wife’s employer, I can’t call a 1-800 number and bitch to the TriCare adminstration when there’s a problem…or submit an appeal to a board that isn’t a branch of the same insurance trying to screw me….or (as a last resort) call the military/veterans affairs person at my Congressperson or Senators office and get some action that way.

                  My wife was almost killed in a bike accident in LA in 2001. We thought we had super-insurance thru her employer (UCLA) until we started filing claims. Since she needed her teeth rebuilt as a part of the accident, she spent a lot of time at a dentist office.

                  BCBS rejected every claim for this care, even thought it was part of our catastrophic accident policy. Thru a series of bullshit manuevering on BCBS part, it took an average of 6-9 months before they would pay those claims…EVERY TIME I SUBMITTED A CLAIM. Each time they rejected it, I had to send a copy of my policy with the appropriate section highlighted, the police report, the ER report, and a statement on why I thought BCBS should honor the policy.

                  Let’s compared the one ER claim I had with Tricare the year before, when my wife had food poisoning. I had one phone call with TriCare to explain why I went to the ER next to my house in the San Bernardino Mountains instead of in the City, and it was done. No Mas. Paid in Full.

                   

                    1. My personal experience is exactly that – If you’d like to include some specifics on yours, let’s hear it.

                      Important word in that – specifics. Why did TriCare deny your claim? Did you use an in-network provider? Out-of-network? Did you follow the rules in using it?

                      Or were you in Grumpy Old Bastard Mode, convinced that your immediate needs trumped the necessity to follow the rules in using TriCare?

                      Inquiring  minds want to know!

              2. I’m sure you know this, but he’s just trying to anger people so they react. That way, he can attack you for being a reactionary.

                Yokel doesn’t care for facts unless they support his theory. Actually, to his way of thinking, he doesn’t have theories. He has his faith, which gives him the knowledge that he’s always right, and his circle of friends to reinforce his belief system that the government is evil, and liberals are scum.

                Reasonable discussion is impossible when one participant shows no respect for the other’s beliefs and opinions, even if they both disagree.

    4. If there’s no public option, there’s no incentive for insurers to cut premium costs, and we’re in the same boat we’ve been in for 50 years.

      But since most of big players on this issue in the Senate have been bought and paid for by the health care lobby, it wouldn’t surprise me at all.

    5. They can put in a bunch of rules to try and get the insurance companies to offer fairly priced coverage to everyone, and to stop them from refusing to cover stuff. But the insurance companies will game that system.

      What they need is competition. And the only way to create a competitive market is to have an entity that will agressivelt compete for each client and can do so on a level playing field.

      Without a public option we have a lot of sturm and drang – all to no real effect. And I think people like Pelosi & Waxman are very aware of that. (I also think the two Colorado members who truly get this are Bennet & DeGette.)

  4. there has been this much concern and skepticism from Americans prior to the lead-up to the Iraq War.

    Nobody seemed to care how much it would cost, when it would end, how many lives would be lost, and what the consequences of unilateral action would have on the rest of the world and our reputation.

    When it comes time to drop bombs there can be no questions asked–just vote yes and do your patriotic duty. When it comes time to get people out of the uninsured limbo they live in then it’s OK to question everything–“we don’t want to get this wrong”.

    Perhaps if the concern, skepticism and downright anger from the left had been legitimized by the media, we might not have chosen to invade Iraq.

    There’s still a lot of time left for this debate to play itself out, and I don’t share the opinion that the Dems have already lost like LB said above, but I definitely don’t think we’re winning. But like I said, the recess ain’t over yet.

    1. .

      That invasion was fait accompli the day he was appointed by the Supreme Court.  

      In like fashion, any new law on health care delivery & financing will be whatever big pharma says it will be.  National Dems are in the pocket as deep as Repubs.

      The only possible good that might come of this “debate” is if voters finally vote for their best interests and throw every incumbent out of office.  Gute chance, eh ?

      .

      1. more like unable to make it happen. I think that Bush wanted to invade Iraq just as much as Obama wants to reform health care. But, we both know the thing that both of them want more than anything–the same thing that all politician want–and that’s to be re-elected.

        If the American people weren’t behind the invasion, it wouldn’t have happened. If the American people get behind health care reform, it will happen. Bush didn’t want to be a one-term president, and carrying out an invasion that has as much public skepticism and concern as there is over health care right now would have probably guaranteed a lame duck presidency for him.

        I’m purely talking about this from a political perspective, and not from whether or not it would be the right and good thing to invade Iraq or reform health care. Just talking about the political reality.

        1. .

          the US President can start a war on his own, without consulting Congress.  There was no stopping that war.  none.

          I just disagree with the statement,

          “If the American people weren’t behind the invasion, it wouldn’t have happened.”

          Health Care Reform is a different story.  This has to be legislated, just as it took legislation in the late 1960’s or early 1970’s to create the current system where people pay insurance companies to buy a ticket that gives them a chance to file claims which might or might not be paid.  

          Personally, I think it might be better to simply undo the damage of the earlier legislation and let the States handle this issue.  Some States will choose socialism, some won’t.  But either way, the State-run system will be run by people responsive to voters.  The US Congress is a lot of things, but “responsive to voters” isn’t one of them.  

          My Congressman’s job is to get reelected.  He does that by courting donors.  He couldn’t care less what voters think, as long as he can fool them with slick TV ads and persuade them to vote against their principles simply because of the (R) after his name on the ballot.

          There might be 5 Members of Congress who give a second thought to what voters think.  For all his other faults, Boulder is represented by one of them.  Most of us are not.

          And that caucus of 5 is up against 430 representatives of the Corporation.

          .

          1. Are you and Libertad sitting in a bar someplace with your own personal meet and greet and making this stuff up? I had insurance on my own back then, I don’t remember any legislation.  where the fuck did you get the following?

            this has to be legislated, just as it took legislation in the late 1960’s or early 1970’s to create the current system where people pay insurance companies to buy a ticket that gives them a chance to file claims which might or might not be paid.  

            1. .

              take a minute and compare where I’m posting from to where “Libertad” is posting from.  That’s one of my 17 sockpuppets.  How else could I do so well in an election on this site ?

              Oh, and “health insurance” was revolutionized by legislative action in that timeframe.  I don’t know the law, but I attended a lecture once by a guy who had been on the Congressional staff who wrote the law.  He ran right out and started an HMO and cleaned up.  For years after that he would sell customized music cassettes, and later CD’s, on late night TV from Monument, Colorado.  

              Sorry if you don’t know about that, and no, I’m not going to look it up for you.  

              .

              1. You are funny.  You used to be verbose, somber, with a sense of integrity to what you were posting.  but now you are just funny….creatively funny…LOL…

                You have been in the military and now military retirement with its accompanying medical benies…I don’t begrudge you but,,,you don’t know bat shit about the health care problems of people who are not on the government tit….

                YEESH..

                Now let me get this straight, our military was manning the fortress walls of democracy staffed by men who took their intelligence information from somene who wound up selling customized CDS on late night TV from Monument CO……ROTHFLOL……………..and we won.

                1. .

                  but I think it benefits proponents of an overhaul to listen to why some folks are opposed.  Maybe our arguments and concerns don’t make a lot of sense to you, but they reflect our concerns.  

                  We can’t all invest the time it takes to know the system and its drawbacks as well as you do.  I figure you might know it better than most folks who will end up voting on the bill.  

                  But just because I’m not well-informed, that doesn’t mean I care to let folks who are better-informed –

                  and who have a fairly radical agenda –

                  make the decision for me.  

                  .

          2. instead of going along with the neocon BS, that might have been a formidable road block.  Remember, at the time the majority of the people did not support going to war in Iraq.  It would have put some spine into the political cowards in the legislature who also knew it was BS but were afraid to be seen as weak and unpatriotic. And yes I’m talking about Democrats.  

            Yes, Bush/Cheney made the decision before 9/11 ever happened and were just looking for an excuse but they could have been opposed.  We handed them their extraordinary level of power on a silver platter.  They couldn’t have done what they did without plenty of complicity.

            1. .

              I believe that you are right about that.  That’s not a possibility I’d really considered.  

              Thanks for making your corrections in such a pleasant manner.  I’m moderately passive-aggressive.  Notice how folks like Dwyer also find mistakes in my posts, but instead of dispassionately pointing out the errors of my ways, they launch into personal attacks.  

              With my limitations and habits, I’m much better off just letting their attacks go unanswered.  

              But I relish your gentle reprovals.

              .

              1. Cheney RIF’d the military after Gulf War I.  Did you by any chance get caught in that?  The time frame seems about right

                Eisenhower did a RIF back in the late 50s and my dad was initially scheduled to be RIFed….won an appeal, but I remember that as the darkest days in my family….worse than Korea.  I hope you didn’t have to go through that.

                I don’t find factual mistakes in your posts, I find bizarre statements which I don’t understand and say so…..or I ask you for a source…..ducking the issue and pulling “I am so fragile crap” is simply not fair.  A lot of us have family that are going to be hurt like hell by what the conservatives are doing…so I don’t see this as a  place for :tea party” manners….excuse the reference.

    3. Seriously- it’s the Big American flaw- not hubris, not gluttony (though there is plenty of both) nor any other vice nor sin.

      It’s that the large majority of the American electorate sees the world as us and them. Us needs to be cared for and protected and allowed to do whateverinhell we want.

      Them needs to be repelled and defeated and employed @$2/day and to supply the resources we don’t have in our boundaries etc.

      Invading Iraq was  not on the mind of most R voters in 2000. They were fed up with Clinton and by extension Gore and they liked the idea of a guy they might want to have a beer with.  The rest of W’s shortcomings were… overlooked or charming. And we’d still be safe no matter W’s weaknesses because, after all, big Dick was there to make sure and he “won” Desert Storm in prime time for everyone to watch (except Art & TC)

      And in 2002 & 3 in the run up, there was plenty of opposition – but in the end, better to fight it over there than in NY or DC or anywhere else within our borders. Which of course is true- except that Iraq wasn’t in any way capable or willing to project anything into our space. And there was no meaningful, certainly no threatening, Iraq – Al Queda connection.

      So- nothing like the opposition we see now. The protesters  in 2001 & 2002 were not afraid  – they were confident in their righteousness and impatient and intolerant of the neocons. If we could have brought back B Goldwater in 04 (the later in life BG) – he would have kicked W’s ass in a primary and swept to a large victory.

      Ron Paul was too insane. No serious economic or financial mind really wants to put us back on the gold standard.

      But the oppo we see now seems frightened.  They’ll say it’s anger- I say potato/potahto.

      They want to hang on to their mythical view of what they wish America once was … in the 50’s, in the 20’s, in the revolutionary era, etc.

      But it never was- and never was going to be.

      We want to hang onto our mythical vision of what we think America once could be and maybe still can be in the  21st c. and beyond.

      fear vs. hope.

      Naturally that oversimplifies- but I can’t post the whole chapter here now.

  5. The health care debate in this country is starting to go into overdrive, and we still have a lot of recess left. Fists have been flying from both sides and the Republican strategy of a mixture of disrupting town halls and fear-laced talking points has at the very least stymied any headway the Democrats had been making since they took over their supermajority in January.

    A lot of people on the left have said that Americans support what the Democrats are doing. A lot of people on the right, including Laughing Boy in this open thread, have said that the majority of Americans oppose this bill, and because of that this debate is over and Republicans have already won.

    Gallup gives us a mixed bag of analysis from their polling, and they come to a third conclusion:

    Taken together, these findings underscore the conclusion that Americans’ views on the push for healthcare reform are in a state of flux, perhaps mirroring the back and forth debate in Congress on this contentious issue. Two keys for the average American appear to be cost and urgency. The data suggest a continuing need to convince Americans of the return on investment of any proposed major investment in healthcare reform. Americans also appear dubious about the benefits of what they perceive to be less-than-fully-informed representatives in Washington rushing into a new healthcare reform law when the need for such legislation is not the highest on the public’s agenda.

    What this tells me is that, to some extent, Republicans like LB are correct to some extent; in that, most people don’t think there’s a real urgency for reform, and that real reform won’t benefit them. Where Democrats are right is that these assumptions on the part of the majority of Americans are incorrect. Most people are far more concerned about the economy, and the fact that many of them aren’t seeing any direct benefit from the stimulus are certainly contributing to that attitude.

    What Democrats should take from this is that they are not doing a good enough job explaining the bill, how it will benefit everyone and not just the uninsured, but most importantly how it will benefit the economy.

    If health care reform is scuttled, it won’t be because of teabaggers shouting at their representatives at town halls. It will be because of a poorly managed and confused message on the part of Democrats.

    1. .

      I say I’m typical.  See for yourself.

      As far as I can tell, the major thrust of the reform initiative is to get coverage for the 46 million who don’t have any, either  because they can’t afford it or because they choose not to pay for it.  

      And the way Obama is going to do that is by curtailing care for the rest of us, while our costs continue to rise, and to give that chunk of value thus carved out to those who “need” it more than the rest of us who are going to have to pay for it.  

      Is it a shame, a scandal, that there are working poor who cannot get good health care, except by theft of services at emergency rooms ?  

      Absolutely.

      Is the solution to distribute even more “free” lunches ?

      I don’t think so.

      .

      1. If right-wingers don’t have some solution to contribute to the health care crisis, their opinions aren’t worth listening to.

        Praying for universal health care while telling the uninsured “Fuck you, I got mine” is worse than useless.

          1. Unless you want to institute a nationwide referendum just for this one policy, you’re going to have to rely on representative democracy.

            We already know your vote. It’s ‘no.’ Great, thanks for playing, now kindly get out of the way while the adults accomplish something.

      2. Thank you for the thoughtful response.

        A couple things:

        1. How does this plan curtail care for other people? The government is not taking over health care–as much as some people, myself included, think a single-payer system would be the best–and nobody has to give up their private insurance.

        2. Thank you for at least addressing the fact that it’s a travesty that 40 million Americans lack proper access to health care. That is why I am so passionate about this issue, and I appreciate the fact that you can disagree with me on policy while agreeing that there is a problem that needs to be fixed. Many Americans feel that there is no problem, as that Gallup article showed.

        My question for you is, what is your solution? The Democrats have offered a plan that should provide a system under which every single American has affordable access to health care. I haven’t seen a conservative version that addresses that basic need.

        1. And assuming you have a plan-  why are we only hearing about it now- not all during all those W years with R congressional majorities?

          Of the millions of uninsured- some should be uninsured.

          – those that can afford coverage, but choose instead to pay out of pocket for everything (not counting those that abuse the system by seeking care and never paying)

          –  those that are not citizens (though if we arrested and convicted them- they would be covered)

          Everyone else should be covered in one giant pool of uninsured- with rates set so as to allow some free market rationing and profitability for the providers.  Yes- the healthy 20-yr old would likely be subsidizing the old and otherwise infirm- but they inherited the interstate highways and the peace,  freedom and prosperity that flowed form WWII and other military actions, and the rest of the country. Love it or leave it.

          I don’t pay more for my water than my neighbor. Nor does he pay more than I.  LIkewise elctric, gas, internet, phone, and a dozen other things we take for granted are regulated until a free market solution can make any sense (long distance).  Medical insurance should be the same way.

      3. If you’re OK with being the only western industrialized nation to allow millions to go without basic healthcare.  

        Thing is, in our system almost anybody can find themselves without the access they thought they had to healthcare.  The insured need reform just as much as the uninsured because stuff happens. In the system we have now when stuff happens to you, good luck.  

        That stuff is the major cause of personal bankruptcy.  People with insurance go bankrupt everyday because of health disasters. You don’t have to be poor or irresponsible to get screwed by a system run by those who consider obscene levels of profit a basic right and you and your family completely expendable.

        1. .

          I got kicked out for talking back to my superior.  

          The way I see it, I wasn’t really “talking back.”

          But when every Captain on your battalion staff knows your job better than you do, because you spent your entire career as a General’s Aide, and now that you’re a battalion commander, and one of your staff principals (I was the S-4) humiliates you in front of all the officers in the battalion by correcting you on fundamental aspects of active defense in AirLand Battle doctrine,

          well, that’s out-and-out insubordination, isn’t it ?  

          The Lt Col had interrupted an ARTBASS sand table exercise to revise a defense of the Fulda Gap, putting the most powerful weapons in the battalion, Echo Company’s 5 ITV’s, in an untenable exposed position.  He didn’t appear to have any acquaintance with the Soviet Order of Battle.  

          I had the temerity to point out the limitations of the M901 Hammerhead Improved TOW Vehicle.  He didn’t know what the heck I was talking about, but every other man in the room did.  

          Technical competence is not the be-all and end-all in combat arms.  As in any bureaucracy, folks get promoted for pleasing their boss, not for doing a good job.  That clown retired as the 3-star Commander of the Army component of a major combatant command.  

          I believe he was the inspiration for the Jodie call about Pharaoh losing an entire battalion.  

          Me, I got a separation pay and a DD-214.  

          I get my health insurance through my wife’s employment.  Until she figures out what a loser I am and dumps me, I’m covered.  

          .

            1. .

              This was in the timeframe I’m referring to.

              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H…

              I don’t know if this was the key legislation that revolutionized health insurance, but the Wiki entry suggests to me that it might be.  

              Why is Ali Hasan a figure in Colorado politics ? Because, when the legislation I’m referring to happened, his Dad started an HMO and made a bundle of money.  

              Well, the Monument guy I’m referring to also started an HMO, based on his insider knowledge gained by helping to write the law.  He quit his job as a Congressional staffer and started an HMO.  He spoke to a graduate class I took at UCCS in TQM in the 1990’s.  

              Here’s the business model, right after this law:

              people pay premiums, and the HMO pays for necessary care for conditions that arise after enrollment.  By excluding all pre-existings, and by basing premiums on costs to care for ALL conditions, even the ones not covered, folks who started HMO’s made millions.  They were in effect charging for caring for pre-existings, but not covering them.  An HMO would have had to be dumb as a rock to not make millions in those early days.  

              Today the health insurance business model is to not even pay for stuff that IS covered.  

              Still a very profitable model, but today’s “members” understand very clearly that they are being cheated.  That wasn’t so clear 30 years ago.  

              .

              1. Nixon was at the forefront of it as well. At the time, for-profit health care was unheard of. Nixon had a lot of friends in the industry, and the HMO law was tailor-made for them.

              2. I will check out wikipedia.  Not all insurance plans are HMOs.

                The health insurance business started out as non-profit and then went to profit…..I fought with BC/BS and won with the help of the Insurance Commissioner…but it was all about distributing risk by creating high risk pools, and charging subscribers in those pools sky high premiums.

                I don’t know what the deal is now, but prior to Reagan economics, health insurance premiums were fully tax deductible….

          2. ….I have a similar tale of woe, and why I got out with 16yrs as a SSG(P) in AFRTS.

            However, as former WarPlanner and 11B, I’m probably one of the few people on this site who understood your rant, and got the depth of the ignorance of sad LTC.

            Maybe you should translate that passage as “I worked for a Light Colonel who couldn’t find his ass with both hands and a funnel, and when I called out his tactical incompetence to prevent the next Gallipoli, he wrecked my carrier.”

              1. .

                I wrecked my career, nobody else.

                I had an old Ranger buddy in the unit when I got there, and he warned me what kind of officer the Commander was, and that he had sacrificed many junior officers before me to cover up his failings.  

                I ignored his advice.  

                It was a training situation in a converted movie theater at Fort Carson.  Although his very smart S-3 had devised an excellent defense, the Commander apparently wanted to show his officers that, even though he had no infantry background, he was as smart as the rest of us, maybe smarter.  After all, it was just the Infantry.  How hard could it be ?

                Everyone else knew better than to correct the guy.  Not me.  

                I was simply trying to make sure that we were all agreed that the hammerhead took 90 seconds to retract, and if the vehicle moved before it was fully retracted, the missile guidance system would break and the platform would be transformed from a TOW missile launcher into a TOW missile carrier.  

                I thought the guy would nod in agreement and say something like, “well, of course.”  Instead, he cleared the room and accused me of undermining his authority.  

                Fail.  Game over.

                When we meet, the first PBR is on me.  Unless they have Schlitz.  

                .

                1. ….ye gods, I’m hoping at least one REFORGER or USAREUR rotation happened in your 14 years.

                  That’s the best the Officer Corps drinks? PBR?

                  (I’ll withhold judgement on the new Schlitz until I can try it.)

            2. (Can’t remember who but it feels like Churchill) “Wars are won by the side that makes fewer stupid mistakes.” In WWII they dumped Rochefort part way through for some B.S. reason and he was the one breaking the Japanese naval codes.

              I’m sorry it happened to you. Crap like this kills people in wartime and having bozos like this General in a command position when wars start hurst this country – a lot.

          3. Even if your wife doesn’t dump you she could lose her job or her employer could radically change her plan or go out of business, or one of you could have a health crisis so serious your share is a debilitating expense.  Unless she has a government a government job.  In that case be very nice to her and see that she takes good care of herself.  

    2. 1) The giant problem for the majority of people with healthcare is the increasing cost. They see no effort in this proposal addressing this. And they worry that the items being proposed will increase costs. This leads to a lot of unease even on the left. (Yes portability and pre-existing conditions are also concerns, but very secondary to growing costs.)

      2) We have a lot of legislators working very hard to craft a plan. But their main message to date has been some high level discussion of a couple of major points (public options and funding sources). It’s more basic than they haven’t done a good job selling it – they haven’t done a good job describing it.

      If Obama & Congress can address the above two items (and 1 is killer), then I think you’ll see support shoot up.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

83 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!