Well if the government is efficient with it... one could argue that instead of going through a middle man (or multiple thereof) you are getting health care straight from them... therefore the tax increase should be less.

Also, allow for corps to continue to subsidize part of that tax as they do with health insurance.

ktom said:

Up here a significant portion of our economy pays for our health care. And, for a horrifying statement from the government's website itself : Instead of having a single national plan, we have a national program that is composed of 13 interlocking provincial and territorial health insurance plans, all of which share certain common features and basic standards of coverage.

Yikes. All in all, it works, but it's not perfect - health care reform is ALWAYS a political issue. Always. And probably always will. But I must say, I like the fact that if I don't have a health plan, I won't be impoverished over sudden illness or childbirth.

Our big concern right now is if we should allow some for-profit care as well. It's a bit of a quagmire.

By Odin's Raven Dan made a great point and then the rest of this thread went fully stupid.

Just because Artaban continues to troll (does he even play AGoT?) doesn't mean you should lower yourself to his Christian nationalist, homophobic, lying, illogical, and downright disgusting behavior.

EXcellent speech by Obama last night, IMO. He really hit all the points taht have gotten lost in the furor last month and sounded very strong on the public option. He called the misinformation for what it was and he extended offers to work with the GOP once again: tort reform, triggers for the public option etc. If the right side fo the aisle doesn't get on board now, the dDms just need to bull rush this through without them - they have been given enough concessions and chances at this point.

Stag Lord said:

Seemed a little belligerent to me. Had a real undertone of "I don't want to pass this along party lines, but I will if you make me." Not sure it moved anything along, but as far as a "reset the discussion" speech, it wasn't too bad. I did notice that he stopped short of saying point blank that a public option in some form is non-negotiable.

How about Joe Wilson! When in our history could a Congressman ever get away with interruption and disrespect like that during a presidential address? (And is it a good thing at that?)

It's not belligerent but politics as usual. When Bush Jr. had the majority for 6 years the only way he got things passed is with the majority of Republican support. The Republicans are uninterested in helping people. Democrats aren't much better either but they at least try sometimes.

Yes, Joe Wilson, is he a brave idiot or just an idiot? The reason he was able to shout that and get away with it is that Obama has zero backbone. He should push through his campaign promises, **** the consequences. Bush Jr. did it with the majority of America disagreeing with him and using lies. I'm sure Obama can do the same except in his case majority of America agrees with his proposed policies and he doesn't have to lie to do it.

Even if this totally lacking public option turns into law nobody is going to see increases in health care quality or lowering of health care costs.

complord said:

Speaking as a Canuck, I always find this sort of thing somewhat amusing. During our question periods, our M.P.s will all but sock each other in their kidneys. The P.M. is always a target for the opposition leader and vice versa. Sometimes they shout each other down, and it can be pretty biting at times. Especially since we've had a long succession of minority governments.

That being said, even I found it a bit out-of-line - during the delivery of any major statement, members should keep themselves in check. But it wasn't a raucus tirade either.

To be clear - I'm not mocking or praising either system - both have benefits and drawbacks.

Regarding the "lack of backbone", I think it's more an issue of not getting off-track. If he HAD responded to the comments, it could have been seen as Obama attacking Wilson for a momentary lapse.

And speaking from a country with a heavily fractured government, pushing through policies is a good way to build political resentment, both in the other parties and in harder-line voters. Even attempting to accomodate the opposition can be a powerful bridge.

Belligerent? Really? I'm with complord - i didn't think it was belligerent enough. Given teh outright lies and disinofrmation the GOP has been spreading to the uninformed this summer - I think he showed remarkable restraint and conciliation. Palin and teh death panels, Grassley and his "You're right to be afraid" comments, the constant refrain of "socialized medicine"....its pretty clear these people aren't interested in systemic reform.

Its time to leave them behind and forget the bipartisan theme - if one side doesn't wnat to be bi partisan (and Eric Cantor is STILL saying "no" to nay form of publci option) screw them. They lost the election - they can deal with the consequences now. when they had the reins they sure as hell went ahead and did what they wnated didn't they?

The Wilson thing leaves me speechless - except for the shocked profanity I blurted while watching it live. We're not Britain, we're not Canada, teh President isn't just the head of a aprty but the head of state. The freaking office deserves a level of respect that ahd preetty much been a given for the past couple of hundred years. But in an era of Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity and the other "entertainers" who have been poisoning our discourse for over a decade now - I probably shouldn't be surprised it has come to this.

I love that Rahm Emmanuel went ot GOP leadership and said soemhting like: "No President has ever had that siad to them in that fashion. I suggest he apologize IMMEDIATELY." And Wilson did - kinda. It just reinforces for me somehting that I only realized this week: the right hates Obama. They hate him wiht a vitriol and a passion I ahve never seen before - not even for Clinton. I don't think its racail, I think its becuase Obama is really trying to implement serious change and reform - but tehir hatred scares me, I have to admit.

Stag Lord said:

Maybe "belligerent" is the wrong word. I'm thinking more along the lines that his message seemed to be "we'll do this without you if you make us," but he was not particularly direct in making his point (if that was it). In addition to setting the record straight on the misinformation and factual misrepresentations, he was taking little jabs at the right as well. I called that "belligerent" because I don't particularly care for that tactic and it frustrates me a bit. Either stick to the goal of representing the facts as you see them without the veiled references, or rip off the veil and be directly confrontational.

Note that I'm not disagreeing with content, I'm just saying the some of the indirect "you remember when X said that?" stuff called more attention to form and style and distracted from the content for me.

It doesn't seem like he was ready to blwo the whole thing out of the water and call the GOP out on the mat (plus its not very Presidential to do so). He was subtly getting the point across - kind of playing the Game of HMOs, if you will. Not directly threatening to leave his enemies in teh cold, but implying it for sure.

But yeah - it was pretty much allusion and allegation, giving the GOP room to separate themselves from the wing nuts (if they choose) while leeting them know this is goign down wiht or without them.

"A message to Christians who oppose public health care, from another Christian: Read more bible. Watch less Fox news".

Link: http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/9kps9/a_message_to_christians_who_oppose_public_health/

Has anyone measured how the Christian community is splitting on this issue? I think it would be interesting.

LiquidIce said:

Hahaha, QFT.

Oh - and by the way: YES WE CAN!!

Not perfect - but itsd a start. and it is a big deal because its is a stinging defeate to the GOP plan of obstructing every step of the way and not working with the party in power in an effort to derail a Presidency. Elections have consquences, gentlemen.

Its about time the typically gutless Democrats actually acted like a governing party.

Its a good thing McCain wasn't elected...he is looking like a real schumck after all this "we will fight it every step of the way" easily said by someone who had his own health care paid for the the government for years....freaking hypocrites.

My favorite anti-health care comment so far? A random guy posting on a USAToday online article "Health Care is a States Rights issue. The Federal Government should not be imposing health care on us!" The good news? He can afford to have his head surgically removed form his ass...

LOL - i know

and I love the idea taht a couple of states are passing or have passed laws saying its illegal for teh Feds to make you buy health insurance. Uh - we had the nullification agrument.

150 years ago. It didn't work out so well for the state's right guys.

That was kind of amazing. Way to steal defeat from the jaws of victory, and then victory from the jaws of defeat.

I laughed when the teabaggers started moving the goal posts - from claiming the bill would bring armageddon, to deciding.. well maybe its not armageddon quite yet because if everyone votes GOP in November they can repeal it. (Apparently Obama isn't just a communist socialist nazi muslim antichrist but also a schitzophrenic who would agree to repeal his own bill).

The supposed rout of Democrats in November will no doubt fizzle off anyway.

This whole thing was like that Monty Python sketch with the sensible party against the silly party. I'm seriously happy for you guys - welcome to the 21st century.

Thanks liquid - and I'm with you. I think the GOP is going to pretty stunned when things don't turn out in November the way they think they are going to. I really hope they keep up these high expectations and talk about taking abck the House. And please, please run on a repeal message - and let the Dems frame the argument about putting teh insurance companies back in charge.

I'm with donald frum - like him, i am a republican who thnks the aprty has gone far too far to the right, and I end up siding with teh desm a lot more than I would like. I do ahve reeservations about this bill - but it is better than any solutions the GOP put forth.