Michael Moore: Healthcare Bill “A Victory for Capitalism”

[G_j]

On todays Democracy Now! show:

Watch:
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/3/23/michael_moore_health_care_bill_a

Michael Moore: Healthcare Bill “A Victory for Capitalism”

President Barack Obama is signing the main healthcare overhaul bill this morning at a White House ceremony. We speak with Academy Award-winning filmmaker Michael Moore. “The healthcare bill that was passed ultimately will be seen as a victory for capitalism,” Moore says. “It protected the capitalist model of providing healthcare for people—in other words, we are not to help unless there is money to be made from it.”

(there should be a transcript later.)

[Echo In Light]

1. Profit over people = pure religion in God's Country

[ixion]

3. Yep, that's the game

we're just so much fodder for billionaires.

[Uncle Joe]

48. A real life version

of Soylent Green.

[old mark]

2. Moore is very short sighted and proves it frequently. nt

[jtuck004]

5. But he wears glasses that correct for it....

[G_j]

7. LOL!

thanks for the smile
:-)

[DonkeyHoTay]

12. Yes, visionary cinematic lenses...

You can always trust Michael to spin it like it isn't so that
we can perceive it as it is.  He is being his usual perceptive
self about the HCR bill just passed.  
So... let's raise our collective glasses to Michael Moore!

[newspeak]

22. MM has a site

and if there is a question about any part of what's on a film or a statement he's made, he will be glad to debate with you. So, if you think MM is "spinning", then, I'd suggest you send him a note--I'm sure he'd be glad to discuss it with you.

[liberation]

76. The irony of the projection of your post is fantastic

Yeah, we should "believe" you not our "lying" glasses. After all, Moore totally made all that stuff in Sicko, everybody knows the US Healthcare system is the bestest in the world. And all that nonsense about Bush in Fahrenheit 911? Again, lies against that upright moral family that is the Bush clan. And what about that silliness in Roger and Me? Boy he looks like a fool with GM dominating the car industry and swimming in profits... right?


LOL

[Bullet1987]

94. People will always attack Moore when it is convenient to them

God forbid he doesn't play the partisan and attacks Democrats when they should be. The attacks on Moore always ignore his damn good track record of predicting how things will play out and exposing corruption and cronyism. But he's a fat slob so what should he know...right?

[EFerrari]

14. While people were trashing Moore here last week about when

these programs kick in, not only was he RIGHT but he was organizing his district against Stupak.

Stupak's cave was directly a result of the work of the person you are trashing.

[GreenPartyVoter]

19. +1

[laughingliberal]

20. But...he's spoiling the party! nt

[Ignis]

25. Yes, but he's fat, so DUers get to disparage him all they want.

Meanwhile, he got a lot more done than the 101st Armchairs.

[quiet.american]

54. How is it that he was RIGHT?

I'm just curious as to how anyone can still make that assertion.

Moore asserted that Natoma would not be able to get help for four years. Either he didn't know about the high risk pool, or he was just being his usual cheerful self.

Moore's assertion has since been proven wrong, not the least of which, by the President himself today, who cited Natoma, and that she would now be able to get coverage and care through the high risk pool.

Rachel Maddow even mentioned during a segment that Natoma would have the opportunity to be covered by June of this year.

So how does that add up to "Moore was RIGHT."

He was WRONG.

[liberation]

77. Wait, you are using political damage control spin as "fact?"

Jesus...

[bornskeptic]

87. It's in the bill. Look it up yourself.

There is no need for "spin control." Facts are facts, and anybody who really cared what was in the bill knew that Moore was wrong when he said it.

[readmoreoften]

55. They don't care. They want to purge the Democratic Party of center-left ideas.

They are right wing apologists and not much more.

[liberation]

84. The funny thing is that they want to purge leftie ideas and policies, but still keep their votes

I love how some people in DU truly think they are entitled to the vote of liberals regardless of the contempt they feel (and show) for them.

[Myrina]

75. +1

:patriot:

[sabrina 1]

34. Actually he is very long-sighted. Years ago when he made his

first documentary, he warned about the negative effects of run-a-way Capitalism. He was among a few who fore-saw the eventual disaster it would be for this country.

The Private Insurance Corps spend huge amounts of money trying to discredit him after he made his health care documentary 'Sicko'. Wendall Potter confirmed what people had susptected after the media attacks on MM and his movie.

Capitalists wouldn't waste their time or money on him if they did not know that he was speaking the truth, and the truth is dangerous to their business.

Whistle-blower Wendall Potter who worked for Private Insurance at that time, was asked if Michael Moore's Documentary accurately portrayed the for-profit Private Insurance System that manages our Health care. His said he absolutely was which is why they tried to silence him.

The Bush administration didn't like Fahrenheit 9/11 either and attempts were made to censor the documentary also.

MM has rarely been wrong and he isn't wrong now. This country is so regressive that it probably was almost impossible to get what every other country has, Universal Health Care as a right, and the elimination of the for-profit system. You might be right to argue that point, but to say Moore is wrong or short-sighted, is simply not true. His record proves that.

[bajamary]

61. Excellent points

Thanks Sabina!. Your post is right on the money - the capitalists money that is

MM is a visionary who is far ahead of many of us.

Thank God for Michael Moore.

[sabrina 1]

101. You're welcome, bagamary

When you read how the insurance industry targeted him, how, as Wendall Potter confirmed, scared they were that his movie Sicko would show people the lies they told about other countries who have National Health Care and view it as a right, were so wrong. They launched a campaign against his movie, and Potter who now regrets the role he played, said 'it was very successful, the managed to mute the effect of the movie'. Wendall Potter also says that MM was dead right in that movie. So they know he's right and low as they are, they try to censor him.

Nothing those corrupt Corps do surprises me. What is really sad is how so-called progressives are such willing victims. As Potter said, they targeted the Democrats warning them that if they praised the movie, they 'would be a minority party for a long time'. It is scary to think they have that much power. And this is why you see an OP like this on a progressive board. They didn't need to influence Republicans, they wanted to turn Democrats against him, and they succeeded.

[Bluenorthwest]

49. I dare you to watch Roger and Me, 1989, then look at

Detroit 2010 and say that with a straight face. I double dog dare you.

[upi402]

67. George W? Is that you posting while drunk again George?

n/t

[Mithreal]

68. -1 Weak

[kenfrequed]

71. Yeah

He was totally wrong about that War on Iraq thing, wasn't he?

And the bank bill to bail out Goldman Sachs and company. Definitely wrong about that too wasn't he?

[Mari333]

4. knr

[pleah]

6. K&R

[Raine]

8. MM is exactly on point! nt

:thumbsup:

[harun]

52. I was lucky enogh to catch the whole interview, his comments were spot on.

[ProSense]

9. "A good night...important little steps were taken to bring our country into the civilized world."

A good night it was -- important little steps were taken to bring our country into the civilized world.

Moore is all over the place on this. In the above diary, he appears to want credit for helping to get it passed.

[Luminous Animal]

10. He follows with this...

"Now, we have some real work to do if we really want to say we have universal health care.
The sharks who run the insurance companies have every intention of turning this lemon into some very profitable lemonade."

[ProSense]

11. Everyone says the same thing

This is a great start.

[Luminous Animal]

13. Your point?

[liberation]

78. ... that the DLC is paying overtime this week?

[Fumesucker]

16. A great start for the health insurance companies..

To eternal profitability..

Glad we can finally agree on something.

[freddie mertz]

23. Wow. An insight into your ideal world.

Where everyone says (and thinks) the same thing.

There is only one truth, and it is that the bill is perfect, and Obama is too.

Can someone get me a blue link for that?

[Edweird]

38. Especially far right wingnuts like Newt Gingrich. Hell, the majority of the bill was their idea

http://healthca.newamerica.net/blogposts/2008/reform_newt_gingrich_on_free_riders_and_the_individual_mandate-18127

"The reality of an individual mandate (when coupled with subsidies so that insurance is affordable and market reforms so that coverage is accessible), is that it would not only address the "free rider" problem, but also serve as a tool to enhance insurance market competition. When combined with market reforms and subsidies, the mandate would help move insurers away from a business model that relies on marketing and underwriting and towards a strategy that involves competing for customers based on performance and price. This is a good thing...and something those in favor of market competition could get behind."

You do realize that you are spouting propaganda TO THE RIGHT OF NEWT GINGRICH, don't you?

[RaleighNCDUer]

88. The problem with that being, of course, that cartels do not compete

against themselves.

There will be NO practical competition driving down costs. Only a mandate for unlimited profits driving costs UP.

[progressoid]

51. Everyone?

:wtf: :crazy:

[DrDan]

15. correct once again . . . .

[1776Forever]

17. MM speaks truth but in a way that is a plus for those that need Health Care.

I have always said we live in a Capitalistic society and if we want to get the best out of it we have to build on that framework. I think it was the only way to get Health Care Reform started! It is not the end and with more Progressives Representatives and Senators in the future it will be only the start to what is needed to do the "right thing".

[G_j]

18. except that the countries w/ the most accessible quality care

don't rely on a for-profit model, as far as I know, correct me if I'm missing something.


And yes, the best course now is to get real PROGRESSIVES into office.

[RaleighNCDUer]

89. And you certainly can't claim that Germany is NOT a capitalist country.

Or almost any OTHER nation that has real universal health care.

[laughingliberal]

21. Yes, another victory for capitalism

and no one is going to do anything about our system until the parasite of unregulated capitalism has killed the host. It's not far off.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

24. So if an insurance co. denies a pre-existing condition, it's only $100/day fine?

[Xithras]

29. Yes, if your condition costs over $36,500 to treat annually, they'll just take the fine.

I expect that many companies will simply take the fine when potential customers are found to have particularly expensive pre-existing conditions.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

31. "they'll just take the fine" and as Michael Moore said, hope you die before then.

[kenny blankenship]

37. It's the Pinto Principle,

and it's not just an abstract theory of business school, as the case of the Ford car proves, but a business practice.

[NYC_SKP]

40. No, their liability in a lawsuit would scare them more than the fine.

and repeated offenses means a class action lawsuit.

and there wasn't tort reform.

...

[jtuck004]

45. If that were to be the case, where are the class action lawsuits

today? By setting an upper limit on expenses it could be argued that the feds have given them
a great defense.

It could even be interpreted as saying the federal government has just established the upper limit on
the worth of a person.

[readmoreoften]

56. +1

Probably the average amount of profit the average worker producers for capitalists every work day.

[ScreamingMeemie]

62. It's funny you should say that because Jonathan Swift has been

running through my head the last few days. A very modest proposal indeed.

[jtuck004]

95. Thank you for that

I had never read that but repaired that deficiency immediately,
and saved it for re-reading later. It amazes, and somewhat dismays me
about what we haven't learned from the past.

Thanks again

[ScreamingMeemie]

96. You are welcome.

[RaleighNCDUer]

90. And the shorter time the patient survives, the less the fine will be. nt

[inna]

30. Yep.

It’s not going to be as easy as it sounds. “Oh, you’ve got a pre-existing condition. No problem.” Well, not exactly “no problem.” You know, the so-called controls that this bill puts on them are Mickey Mouse. For instance, if they deny you health insurance—let’s say Aetna won’t give you health insurance because you have a pre-existing condition, and you say to them, “Hey, wait a minute. That’s against the law.” And they’re going to go, “Whoa, yeah. Sue me.” Because you know what the fine is, the fine for them for denying somebody because they have a pre-existing condition? One hundred dollars a day. So if you’re Aetna, and you’ve got a patient who maybe needs, you know, a $100,000 operation, what would you do? Would you pay out the $100,000 operation because the law says you have to? Or do you break the law but just get a $100-a-day fine? Because, let’s see, after a year that would be $36,500 versus a $100,000 operation. Gee, I wonder which one Aetna’s going to go for. And of course, they could just hope against hope that within a year the person without the operation might be dead, so they won’t have to be worrying about shelling out any more money to a doctor or to a hospital.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

32. This quote from Michael should have a thread of its own for those

whooping about how happy they are that people with pre-existing conditions "will be able to buy health insurance".

[LibDemAlways]

74. Earlier on this thread someone used the phrase

"opportunity to be covered" in mentioning the high-risk pool. Wow, aren't sick people fortunate? The government in its infinite generosity has now provided them not with any sort of guaranteed care but only the "opportunity" to spend who knows how much to buy coverage they still may not be able to afford. And people on this board who have the nerve to call themselves Democrats seem to think this is wonderful. Same sort of mindless cheerleading the R's did under Bush.

[amborin]

26. K&R plus 10000

[grantcart]

27. Actually I think that the capitalist model for health care is undermined by this bill

The capitalist model would have the government provide single payer access in the same way that the government provides airports for airlines to compete.

Insurance companies impede individual for profit health care providers, Doctors, clinics etc, from providing competitive market driven care.

Canada's single payer system is much more market driven at the Drs' level and therefore is closer to the capitalist model in a modern mixed system economy.

[EFerrari]

28. Right. A better word for the insurance industry is leeches, not capitalists.

This bill does benefit the leeches. But in the general, vernacular sense where profits are private and loss is socialized, yes, this is a capitalist model.

[readmoreoften]

58. So any capitalist paradigm you don't prefer isn't "real capitalism".

Sorry, this is real capitalism.

[liberation]

79. Just like Bush et al were not "real conservatives" when the hubris of the GOP was too obvious

to even pretend to hide it.


Didn't you hear? It is the new and improved "personal responsibility" from conservatives. When their clusterfuck is all but too apparent, simply redefine the term as something else... and pretend like they never had anything to do with it. Rinse and repeat!

[ibegurpard]

63. wow, that was some serious newspeak

kudos for your chutzpah

[liberation]

80. The doublethink is also a sight to behold...

See, forcing citizens to buy the product from a barely regulated private health insurance industry (which is a natural monopoly basically) somehow, through the magic of N-Dimensional chess, "undermines" the capitalistic nature of our health care system because of the millions of forced customers and increased revenues and profits. yeah, that makes complete "sense"...

[RaleighNCDUer]

92. Which is why Adam Smith advocated captialism, not corporatism.

This is a corporatist bill.

[earth mom]

33. Why doesn't Moore just come out & say that there is no doubt that the US is a fascist country now?nt

[G_j]

35. close enough, I suppose

but I'm not sure he has actually used that word. Certainly he is as aware as anyone of the corporate ownership of America.

[treestar]

36. nothing at all would be more of a victory for capitalism

This is a stupid statement. Capitalists would prefer no regulation at all; let the market take care of it. Maybe this bill does not go far enough, but it is certainly not good news to capitalists.

[G_j]

39. The stock market doesn't appear to agree w/ you

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20100322-708982.html?mod=WSJ_latestheadlines

ARCH 22, 2010, 11:47 A.M. ET
US Stocks Rise Steadily; Drug Makers Lead Health-Care Climb

By Kristina Peterson and Donna Kardos Yesalavich
Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--U.S. stocks rose steadily on Monday as the end of the health-care debate relieved investors, and drug makers and hospital operators led a climb in health-care stocks.

<snip>

The Dow's pharmaceutical components strengthened, as drug makers are expected to profit from the expansion of health-care coverage. Merck rose 2.1%, while Pfizer climbed 1.7%.

<snip>

The gains in health-care stocks came after the House of Representatives on Sunday voted along party lines to approve a historic health-care overhaul bill promising to bring health insurance to 32 million Americans and dramatically refashioning the industry's regulation.

Companies ranging from hospital operators and pharmacy-benefit managers to drug and medical-device makers are expected to profit from the bill, which will enroll more people in insurance programs. Meanwhile, most new fees and cost-cutting measures aren't seen as a major factor until 2014.

Hospital operator Tenet Healthcare rose 7.5%, McKesson, a health-care information technology company, gained 2.1% and Express Scripts, a pharmacy benefit manager, rose 1.7%. Pharmaceutical companies also climbed, with Eli Lilly up 1.5% and Bristol-Myers Squibb up 1.6%.

Investors said the legislation didn't diverge wildly from the market's expectations and could benefit a range of companies, particularly those tied to government programs such as Medicaid-managed care companies.

..more..

[sabrina 1]

41. 'Particularly those tied to government programs such as

Medicaid-managed care companies'.

That is where they big windfall is, a gift from the Democrats to Big Insurance. They get to get their greedy hands on public funds, and once they do, it's going to be almost impossible to change that.

As far as moving away from a for-profit Health Care system, this is going to do the exact opposite.

Of course they have make sure the people get something out of it, but it's clear the main purpose of this bill was to bail out the Private Insurance Ind. with public funds.

Throughout 2009, Private Ins. was losing millions of customers and yet their profits were high. This is why, as they get their hands on more and more of our tax dollars, the more they will profit.

Iow, instead of the Government doing one of the things it does pretty well, managing funds for SS and Medicare, and Medicaid, this bill helps to transfer the management of these funds to Private Insurance.

[G_j]

46. moving in the opposite direction

& certainly not socialism! :rofl:

I'm afraid it makes single payer more remote as a possibility than it was before.

[treestar]

98. There's a sort of win/win there though

If more people can get medical treatment because of having the means to pay for it, that's going to mean the Pharma Cos. make money. Some of the drugs they make do work. And more people getting drugs means more sales. But then people who never had that chance before would have it.

[readmoreoften]

60. Forcing every American to be a consumer of their product is ABSOLUTELY a victory.

Is it "the ultimate victory", maybe not. The ultimate victory would be taking 100% of our salaries for insurance profit in forced work camps. But just because this isn't the most horrific scenario possible doesn't mean it isn't "a victory."

[liberation]

81. No, no.... see those corporations *hate* the increase in revenue and profits...

Those CEOs are incredibly pissed at all those millions of forced captive customers, let me tell you.


The real victims here are them insurance co. CEOs. Do you know how hard is going to be having to figure out what to do with all that money? That is the real tragedy see...

[treestar]

99. But then "their product" would be paying for health care, so I'm

not sure it is such a disaster - some people will get medical treatment they could not afford before. So MDs and other health care professionals might make more - I'm sure I'd rather have the treatment that forgo it just because insurance companies, pharma and doctors would benefit.

But they still are being heavily regulated in return. Insurance companies would rather take $$ from those they choose - the relatively healthy with no pre-existing conditions - and be unregulated. They'd profit a lot more.

[RaleighNCDUer]

93. The market IS regulated - by the health insurance corporations.

This is NOT a capitalist free market model - it is a corporatist model which has now been established as the basis for 1/6th of our economy.

I would rather the market be regulated by the government than by for-profit corporations.

[treestar]

100. It is being regulated by the government

It is the government that enforces the laws and makes regulations.

[RaleighNCDUer]

102. Bzzzt.

We are supposed to have a government 'of the people, by the people, for the people'. This is government of, by and for the corporation - when the corporations write the laws, it is the corporation that rules, not the people. It is the corporations that makes the regulations, and the government is their enforcers.

[Owl]

42. I like MM but he tends to blow with the wind.

[Mithreal]

69. -1 You're right, he has never been in front on any issue.

[Nikki Stone1]

43. Yes.

.

[nightrain]

44. knr. Indeed! And we seem to be in the death throes of imperialistic capitalism.

[fedupinBushcountry]

47. He was for it

before he was against it.

[Mithreal]

70. -1 Repeating a favorite phrase of rightwingers, nice.

[liberation]

82. ... or maybe the previous poster was referring to Obama's different stand on health care reform

during his 03 senatorial campaign, where he was for single-payer, and his 08 presidential campaign... where he was against it.

Don't be so mean... ;-)

[Mithreal]

91. I know.

I am mean sometimes.

One of my pet peeves, I guess you can call them that, is repeating certain phrases.

Always seems to me, they deaden thinking but if meant in a humorous way, making fun of the phrase, dangit sometimes I don't pick up on that. Sometimes I even miss that there are multiple interpretations for what people post. I can't even communicate clearly sometimes, let alone always understand what I read.

I have seen so many Michael Moore trashing threads. When I saw this op, it just reminded me of all the DU'ers piling on and taking cheap shots. I know, no excuse.

[Jack Sprat]

50. Moore is right, but it's a start as I see it.

As soon as this takes effect, we should actively pursue single payer, government run healthcare and cut out the Private insurer middlemen who profit the most.

I have been reading the wingnuts crying over wild nonsense because they only watch Faux News and never use their brains. This one idiot was saying that nurses and doctors would be laid off now that government had taken over healthcare. :rofl: I wish! The truth is that doctors, nurses, and hospitals are going to be busier than ever and moreso.

Back to serious stuff. Yep, we could save money for everyone by having one government-run provider and taking the healthcare profiteers out of the ledger.

[G_j]

53. he does go on

to say,

"I mean, I don’t mean to sound cynical, because I understand the importance of this vote. Certainly, had the vote gone down to defeat and the Republicans had won, I would say that it would probably have been near impossible for President Obama to get anything through for the rest of this Congress. So that would not have been a good idea for that kind of paralysis to set in."

Kucinich seemed to be having similar thoughts when he talked about failure of the bill weakening the presidency.

Moore seems to think good parts of the bill could have been passed separately, such as preconditions.

The fact is, we have to do the best with what we have. I trust we will continue the battle, as will Moore.

We need to put progressives in office.

[graywarrior]

57. I wish he'd make up his mind.

[New Dawn]

59. Kick for truth.

[flyarm]

64. Statement of NOW President Terry O'Neill

Statement of NOW President Terry O'Neill


http://www.now.org/press/03-10/03-21b.html

Health Care Reform Victory Comes with Tragic Setback for Women's Rights

Statement of NOW President Terry O'Neill

March 21, 2010

As a longtime proponent of health care reform, I truly wish that the National Organization for Women could join in celebrating the historic passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. It pains me to have to stand against what many see as a major achievement. But feminist, progressive principles are in direct conflict with many of the compromises built into and tacked onto this legislation.

The health care reform bill passed by Congress today offers a number of good solutions to our nation's critical health care problems, but it also fails in many important respects. After a full year of controversy and compromise, the result is a highly flawed, diminished piece of legislation that continues reliance on a failing, profit-driven private insurance system and rewards those who have been abusive of their customers. With more than 45,000 unnecessary deaths annually and hundreds of thousands of bankruptcies each year due to medical bills, this bill is only a timid first step toward meaningful reform.

Fact: The bill contains a sweeping anti-abortion provision. Contrary to the talking points circulated by congressional leaders, the bill passed today ultimately achieves the same outcome as the infamous Stupak-Pitts Amendment, namely the likely elimination of all private as well as public insurance coverage for abortion. It imposes a bizarre requirement on insurance plan enrollees who buy coverage through the health insurance exchanges to write two monthly checks (one for an abortion care rider and one for all other health care). Even employers will have to write two separate checks for each of their employees requesting the abortion rider.

This burdensome, elaborate system must be eliminated. It is there because the Catholic bishops and extremist abortion rights opponents know that it will result in greatly restricting access to abortion care, currently one of the most common medical procedures for women.

Fact: President Obama made an eleventh-hour agreement to issue an executive order lending the weight of his office to the anti-abortion measures included in the bill. This move was designed to appease a handful of anti-choice Democrats who have held up health care reform in an effort to restrict women's access to abortion. This executive order helps to cement the misconception that the Hyde Amendment is settled law rather than what it really is -- an illegitimate tack-on to an annual must-pass appropriations bill. It also sends the outrageous message that it is acceptable to negotiate health care reform on the backs of women.

Fact: The bill permits age-rating, the practice of imposing higher premiums on older people. This practice has a disproportionate impact on women, whose incomes and savings are lower due to a lifetime of systematic wage discrimination.

Fact: The bill also permits gender-rating, the practice of charging women higher premiums simply because they are women. Some are under the mistaken impression that gender-rating has been prohibited, but that is only true in the individual and small-group markets. Larger group plans (more than 100 employees) sold through the exchanges will be permitted to discriminate against women -- having an especially harmful impact in workplaces where women predominate.

We know why those gender- and age-rating provisions are in the bill: because insurers insisted on them, as they will generate billions of dollars in profits for the companies. Such discriminatory rating must be completely eliminated.

Fact: The bill imposes harsh restrictions on the ability of immigrants to access health care, imposing a 5-year waiting period on permanent, legal residents before they are eligible for assistance such as Medicaid, and prohibiting undocumented workers even to use their own money to purchase health insurance through an exchange. These provisions are counterproductive in terms of controlling health care costs; they are there because of ugly anti-immigrant sentiment, and must be eliminated.

Fact: The bill covers only 32 million of the 47 million uninsured in this country, does not contain a meaningful public option and provides no pathway to a single payer system like Medicare for all. Democratic negotiators crumpled before powerful business interests and right-wing extremists, and until they get a spine there will be no true competition to help rein in costs.

The bottom line is that everyone -- citizen and non-citizen, undocumented immigrant and visitor -- has a fundamental human right to health care. This right has been denied in the U.S. for far too long, while the rest of the industrialized world moved ahead to assure universal and affordable care for their people.

We call upon President Obama and elected officials in both houses to commit to a process of steady improvement of our health care system that will result in true reform with universal coverage, realistically affordable rates and no discrimination. We still have a lot of work to do before we can genuinely celebrate.

###

For Immediate Release

[grahamhgreen]

65. Roger (and me) that!

[upi402]

66. Sick people, meat or pet

He's right. It's setting precedent that we will regret. Too bad we're starving so badly that we need even this.

[ecstatic]

72. I wonder how much money his films have generated and what

he is doing with the money. Seems kind of odd for him to be against capitalism when his career depends on it.

[liberation]

83. Nice red herring...

Is it so hard to make money the old fashion way, by earning it, and be able to fathom the fact that the health care of the American people should not be a profit proposition for a handful of private insurance companies whose only contribution to the system is adding overhead for the privilege of denying people's coverage?

Or is the narrative, some of you are trying to push, so weak... as to be so threatened by common sense and human decency?

[grahamhgreen]

86. No. He produces a product and sells it. Predatory capitalism poduces nothing and steals money by

by shuffling it around and creating scams like CDS's, CDO's.

[blindpig]

73. That's it in a nutshell.

Your health is a commodity.

k&r

[Saxon]

85. Cattle Auction.

Ranchers need to sell some or all of there stock for various reasons. Not enough grass. Not enough water. Feed price is to high.
Need money to make a payment to the Bank. Prices for cattle have gone up. Prices for cattle have gone down.
You get the picture.

When the time comes to sale the rancher takes the cattle he wants to sell to an auction and they are sold to the highest bidder.

Now the outcome for the cattle varies. Cows with caves, called pairs, usually go to other ranchers. Old cows go slaughter.
Near grown steers may go to feed lots or slaughter. Downers go slaughter. Year old steers and heifers usually go to other ranchers.

That's what happened to the American people. We were sold to the highest bidder.

Your outcome will vary, but be assured the insurance corps will make the same cold dollar based calculations regarding your future as the buyers at the cattle auction.

[avaistheone1]

97. Michael Moore is right once again.

This bill leaves millions behind and will millions into poverty and bankruptcy.

Yet the bill richly empowers and enriches the health insurance companies.

[paulk]

103. he's right - it's the American model

our "exceptionalism" at work, I suppose.

The Democrats and Obama administration have bought into it completely - everything must be available for a buck to be made. When it comes to economic matters, what we can expect from the new Democratic party is basically what we could have expected from any Nixon era Republican. Business and the making of a dollar come before any benefit to the people as a whole. It's the trickle down theory, and it's a sad day to realize that our party believes in it just as strongly as the Republicans do.