It's not that Something is better than Nothing, it's that Nothing is Nothing

[FrenchieCat]

I want to know is why some believe that anything trumps
providing 31 million people health coverage?

Why is covering more, but just maybe later in order to spite Insurance Carriers
and to get coverage for everybody the upmost priority?

In otherwords, why don't those 31 millions not mean enough?
Why are they not worth compromise and consideration?

If 47 million were homeless instead of uninsured, and they were sleeping in the streets, and there was some law that could be passed tomorrow that would provide 31 millions of them with a home (not anything grand, just a basic roof over their head),
but because homebuilders could possibly profit more than some would judge acceptable,
why would the idea of 31 million gaining a home become meaningless?
And why would some determine that they would not want to participate in contributing getting those
homeless off the streets, simply because there's wasn't a bed made available for everyone?

But back to health care; I saw this little 11 year old boy begging Congress while talking about his dead mother covered on television. What kind of people would that fail to move towards understanding what the right thing is to do here? Towards what the principled choice really is?

But it's not just about this brave young man; it's also about Babies, other young children, mothers, fathers, entire families, all being told to fucking wait some more by those who believe they know a better way. Those who believe themselves so intelligent and so righteous that their priority is to make 31 million wait for something better, just in case it is out there, and if not soon, perhaps in another year, or another 5 years, or another 10 years, another 15, or sadly perhaps never.

How could anyone look another in the face to say.....well, "since we couldn't do more for all of us, we ain't doing shit for you either! But hang on.....cause there maybe something later, but maybe not!"

I want to know what is this emotion; what is this value called?
cause it ain't empathy; it ain't sympathy; it ain't humanistic concern,
and it ain't human related principle.....
no matter how much folks try to disguise it as such.

Because I personally don't know why Americans' lives
equal lesser value than sticking it to the suits?

Who could actually walk around really truly believing that they are doing anyone a favor,
by literally advocating handing death sentences to scores of real breathing Americans
(who ain't got no fucking choice as it stands),
in order to say "Fuck you" to Insurance companies and/or to Pres. Barack Obama?

Not Dr. Howard Dean.
Not Sen. Sanders.
Not Sen. Franken.
Not Mr. Krugman.
Not Weiner or Grayson or Barbara Lee.

So where does all of this righteousness come from?
Because the sorry exaggerations and underselling of this bill
don't even start to explain why lives of ordinary Americans matters
just so little to some.

What is being told to these people is exactly that they aren't even worth it, because they really don't matter.
The 31 million are mainly the poor who will now get health coverage through this bill,
and I guess smart people just really don't like that shit,
unless they get just as much if not the same as those who have fucking nothing!

The more I think about it, the madder I become!
because as of now.....
with all of the concern about Cost and money and "doing the right thing",
or under the guise that Barack Obama just wants a political win,
while leaving out the fact that this President appears willing to risk more than most,
in order to help those 31 million....

So to those advocating for this legislation to fail,
in saying that nothing is better than something...
and that nothing is better at this time.....
I just want to get one thing straight on that;
NOTHING is NOTHING
and SOMETHING is SOMETHING,
and those are the facts.

and if feeling so superior to earnestly believe that they can righteously
choose nothing for everyone,
to them I say you are wrong.
People will die, and offering them nothing,
is not an answer, and for sure it belies who we say we are,
and what we say we believe in.

So I say, advocating against this bill is not a principled stand,
as it equals nothing, and will result in nothing,
and nothing is not a principle, it is inaction, ineffectiveness,
and reflects an inability and unwillingness of doing something when
Yes, we can.

[Captain Hilts]

1. I support the bill, but we gave up too much too early. nt

[frazzled]

2. Actually, nothing is worse than nothing

Because not passing these reforms, imperfect as they may be, is giving the insurance companies free reign to do even more damage: to raise their premiums even further, causing employers to hire fewer people, fire people, or even drop insurance coverage altogether. It gives them free reign to refuse even more people who have pre-existing conditions--even the most minor things. It gives them free reign to drop people when they actually get sick, or to impose ever lower annual and lifetime caps and higher co-pays and deductibles.

So doing nothing doesn't mean things will remain the same ... it means they will continue to get WORSE.

Otherwise, your argument is beautifully put. It's a moral decision now.

[rufus dog]

8. it is way worse than that

Nothing does not only impact Health Care, it will impact the ENTIRE agenda. The press and the repubs will try to crucify him and then they will attempt to block EVERY thing the Dems and Obama try to push through.

[Vincardog]

3. How does requiring people to buy private insurance they can not afford and can not afford to use

providing 31 million people health coverage? How is enshrining the parasitic private insurance companies and giving them another 70 billion dollars going to help?

[FrenchieCat]

11. Asking a question still means nothing.

go check the health care calculator. http://healthreform.kff.org/SubsidyCalculator.aspx
Those who have nothing will not pay; they will be subsidized.
Therefore they will be able to go to a hospital, see a doctor,
although they have nothing.

You clearly care more about what will happen with insurance companies,
cause that is your priority; your concern.

The truth is that you want nothing for those who have the least,
and nothing means zero no matter how you dress it up.

[damonm]

15. That calculator is a GREAT resource.

Thanks for posting that.

[Hun Joro]

16. That calculator shows that the senate plan will cost me $2500 a year

that I DO NOT HAVE. After the subsidy. Yes, passing nothing is better than this bill, which will destroy me. I will lose my old and decaying home if I have to come up with any more money. Screw this.

[FrenchieCat]

20. Than you earn a decent living.

that's what that tells me.

It also tells me that you've got this wrong.....
this ain't only about you,
cause whatever you have now, if its better, you can keep it.

It also says that if you have a pre-existing condition,
you don't have to worry. Right now you do.

A friend of mine has a teen-age daughter who got into drugs (meth)
when she was 16. She went through a recovery program through her parent's HMO,
graduated with flying colors and has been recovered for the last 2 years,
and attends college.
but now, the HMO doesn't want to provide coverage for her because they are calling
her prior drug addiction; a pre-existing condition.
Now she can't get any insurance anywhere.
She is 20 years old.

Why do you count so much more than she does?
What makes you so special that if you don't get what you want out of this,
than you believe that no one else should either?

[damonm]

31. Or it will cost you $750/yr...

(or $62.50/month)if you opt out of insurance - 'cuz that's the fine under the mandate.
If you DO go with it, that $2500/yr breaks down to $208.34/ mo.
If you can't afford either of these - PM me. I have some info I can send you (no, I'm not trying to sell something) that may help.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

70. $2,500 is a great price for health insurance...

It's less than what I pay.

[Hun Joro]

77. Fantastic. I can be homless with affordable insurance. Can't wait.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

82. Read the fucking bill, would you?

Persons with little or no income don't pay ANYTHING for their coverage -- which is pretty much the case now under Medicaid and other state health programs. The subsidy is based a sliding scale, depending on your income. No income, no cost for health insurance.

[Hun Joro]

86. Gosh, thanks for the wonderful advice!

Why can some of you not understand that many working people are fucking DROWNING right now??? I have an income, I should not be considered poor, but no way in hell can I afford what I would have to pay under this goddamned bill!

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

87. For a family of four

You'd need income of more than $40K per year to trigger a $2,500 payment for insurance. It comes to less than 6% of your income in return for guaranteed health care --- that's less than what you're paying for Social Security. The alternative is you don't have any insurance and you declare bankruptcy if you have a major medical incident.

$200 per month vs. economic devastation.

You pick.

[Vincardog]

28. I want NOTHING for the Parasites. I want UNIVERSAL SINGLE PAYER.

[damonm]

47. That would be best, yes.

But it's also not gonna happen with this Congress and in this political climate. If you know how we could get it past the tools in the Senate, I'd love to hear the plan.

[Vincardog]

84. WE could vote to get a new set of tools

[damonm]

12. "can't afford and can't afford to use" is an assertion - where's the math?

I've seen this assertion cropping up like weeds here lately, and as yet, nobody has explained their math.
This assertion doesn't add up to me, as preventive care (which, thank Heaven, covers just about everything for me and mine) is 100% covered and there are annual caps on out-of-pocket expenses.
So where does this assertion come from? With numbers, please.

[Vincardog]

30. 45 Million are uninsured. Do you think that is because they like doing without health CARE?

[damonm]

32. And this answers my question how...?

[Vincardog]

35. You seem to think having parasitic corporations bleeding off obscene profits is the answer. Good luc...

[damonm]

45. And you STILL haven't answered the question, that being...

"I've seen this assertion cropping up like weeds here lately, and as yet, nobody has explained their math.
This assertion doesn't add up to me, as preventive care (which, thank Heaven, covers just about everything for me and mine) is 100% covered and there are annual caps on out-of-pocket expenses.
So where does this assertion come from? With numbers, please."

Or are you just reading headlines and knee-jerking?

[Vincardog]

50. I do not work for you. But I do know who is jerking

[ClassWarrior]

4. Why didn't those 31 million mean enough while we waited a whole year for Max Baucus to...

...shiv us in the back?

:shrug:

NGU.

[FrenchieCat]

13. If you think your questions gives anything to those who

don't have any health insurance at all,
and gain to become covered with the passage of this bill
without having to pay a dime,

it simply doesn't.

You can rail all you want about Baucus,
but now is the time to put up or to shut up....

recrimination is one thing,
inaction when action is called for
is something else....

or else, how are you better than Baucus?

[ClassWarrior]

14. I'm just asking what's the hurry now when the administration gave Conservadems all the time...

...in the world to gut major, key provisions of the bill.

:shrug:

NGU.

[FrenchieCat]

17. If you think they waited too long and were willing to do too little,

then why do you now think that waiting even longerm
and giving absolutely nothing is the right answer?

Doesn't that just make you worse than conservadems?

Why do you want to justified doing something even worse
based on what someone else did that you judge as wrong?

Kind of like one saying, well, I know I'm thinking of giving nothing,
but they they gave barely nothing too!

At least they did something.
if what you advocate is not doing anything, how is that superior?
That's what my op specifically is asking.

[ClassWarrior]

22. Who said I advocate doing nothing? All I'm saying is that the "people are dying" argument is...

...blatantly disingenuous, and it makes anyone who uses it look callous and opportunistic.

NGU.

[FrenchieCat]

23. No, People are in fact dying.

What is disingenuous are those who deny that this is happening,
because their concern is not about that.

If you think that the young woman who was diagnosed with terminal cancer;
terminal because she waited too long to go get her routine check ups
where the cancer could have been caught earlier
but because she wasn't insured, she didn't go for routine check ups,
and now, she is dying........tell that to her child,
and see if the child believes you.

We've argued for a year on this.....
it's now time to act,
or time to sit on one's hand and pretend
that somehow they are doing somebody other
than Republicans and Insurance companies a favor.

you can rework it all so that you can sleep well and feel justified,
but you are incorrect in the assertion that you are making.
Even Republicans don't go there.....they don't deny that
folks die every day because they don't get proper care.

[ClassWarrior]

24. And people stopped dying while LIEberman and Baucus picked their asses? Of course people are dying!

So that gives you permission to exploit their predicament when it's politically advantageous to you, and to ignore it when you're busy cutting deals??

Sure, keep arguing with people who are working to get this thing passed, despite the fact that it stinks to high heaven. Maybe you can turn them against it as well.

I'd always hoped that you weren't just a cheerleader, French.

~sigh~

NGU.

[FrenchieCat]

27. So for you, two wrongs makes a Right?

But if as you say, you are arguing to get this passed,
than you are righting a wrong, and this op is not about you.

As for me being a cheerleader....
that's right....I'm cheering for the sake of 31 million people.
You've got it!

[ClassWarrior]

37. You're using them as a political prop and it's making you look silly and sycophantic.

NGU.

[FrenchieCat]

38. I'd rather be silly than to do NOTHING!

[ClassWarrior]

43. You'd rather undermine your cause than do nothing? I'll bet those 31 million are glad to know that.

NGU.

[FrenchieCat]

44. I think we have taken our debate as far as it needs to go.

and anything beyond this,
will most likely be unconstructive.

I do thank you for the civil conversation to this point,
and I will agree to disagree with you,
but I will refuse to be disagreable in so doing.

:hi:

[damonm]

5. My feelings on this...

..and I agree with you, BTW;
were summed up here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=212665&mesg_id=212665

[Jennicut]

10. That was a great post, and I agree with you.

[dave29]

6. Nothing is what happens when "pride" and "principals" collide

.

[Jennicut]

7. wrong place

sorry.

[flamingdem]

9. We have to start by passing it, changes will happen later nt

[Schema Thing]

18. my exact thoughts, FrenchieCat.

but much better expressed than could be by me.

[jonnyblitz]

19. nothing is better than something worse. nt

[FrenchieCat]

21. No.....nothing is nothing

and something worse is what you've made up to justify
your position in your mind.

You know it, and I know it.

[rapturedbyrobots]

25. thanks for checking in from middle class white america

now...lets consider this from the dirty, brown, black and invisible underside.

from a recent study by the insight center for community economic development:

'...while white women in the prime working years of ages 36-49 have a median wealth of $42,600 (still only 61% of their white male counterparts), the median wealth for women of color is only $5.'

and to make things worse:

'While the 2007 data is the most recent release of the SCF to date, it is important to take into consideration that most of the data were collected prior to the economic downturn and therefore present a more favorable portrait of levels of wealth than is likely to be the case currently. Nonetheless, the overall patterns depicted with respect to wealth of whites versus non-whites are likely to hold. If anything, the portrait of wealth holdings for people of color is likely to be less favorable today than it was in 2007 since people of color hold greater amounts of their assets in homeownership (see Table 4) and communities of color have been hardest hit by the foreclosure debacle. Therefore, the data provides a “conservative estimate” of the current wealth holdings for women of color.'


now try tell these women (like my mother), who have a net-worth of $5 !!!!!!!!!! that they have to buy ridiculously expensive private insurance. yeah, yeah...you can talk about subsidies all you want, but when you're worth $5 only a 100% subsidy is really enough to make this affordable. and i've run the numbers, my mother would not qualify for a subsidy. neither would i for that matter, and i don't make much from a grad student stipend.

get real. this is a rip-off for many, many people. maybe not for you, but stop telling other people what is good for them. (http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/2008/02/10/62-knowing-whats-best-for-poor-people/)

[dave29]

26. you should know more about Frenchie, friend :)

.

[rapturedbyrobots]

29. i know

that she's parroting the arguments being put forth by middle class white america. i don't care if she's black, orange, or purple. its based on the assumptions and logic of a particular relation to capital in america. wasn't that supposed to be the beauty of the system? anyone can be (or at least emulate) a white middle class american!

[dave29]

33. . . .

[FrenchieCat]

34. I disagree that you make any sense at all......

You posting an article railing about the net worth of Black women,
has nothing to do with this bill.

If anything, this bill provides relief for the Black community;
for single mothers, for children, for young people!
Ask my Representative Barbara Lee. We go to the same church.
She'll tell you better than I ever could how wrong you are,
no matter what names or description you give me.

As for what I espouse, you are not the one that will be making that determination,
not while I'm around.


The De-Facto Segregation of Health Care

Opponents of health care reform haven't shied away from invoking race. Why are advocates afraid to point out that people of color suffer the worst inequities of the current system?

It's not just infant mortality. According to a 2004 analysis published in the American Journal of Public Health, if the mortality rate of blacks had been the same as that of whites between 1991 and 2000, 880,000 deaths could have been avoided. People of color are more likely to suffer and die from chronic diseases such as diabetes, cancer, and cardiovascular disease, they're less likely to get the kinds of life-saving treatments that whites get, and they're more likely to receive the kinds of treatments you would avoid if you could -- such as limb amputation for diabetes.

African Americans made up almost half of the new cases of HIV infection recorded in the 2000 Census. People of color are less likely to have seen a dentist. Only 27 percent of African Americans and Hispanics, 36 percent of Asian and Pacific Islander Americans, and 41 percent of Native Americans and Alaska Natives reported seeing a dentist in the past year, compared to nearly half of whites who had. A fifth of black adults report being in poor or fair health, slightly more than Hispanic adults and nearly twice as many as white adults. Some of these conditions are due to disparities in employment, education, and wealth. Language and cultural barriers also hinder effective care, preventing patients and doctors from communicating effectively about medical problems and treatments. But disparities persist even when controlling for income and education levels, the most reliable indicators of quality coverage.

"The reasons why many racial and ethnic minority groups have poorer health literally from the cradle to the grave are many and varied; they're primarily related to socioeconomic differences," Smedley says, "but they're also profoundly related to living conditions."

Some health care experts argue that in addition to expanding coverage, the key to reducing racial health disparities lies in prevention measures. "They're putting more focus on prevention and quality services, wellness care as opposed to sick care," says Dr. Willarda V. Edwards of the National Medical Association. "That's what we need to be focused on."

Both the House's and the Senate's proposals offer funds for community-based programs that focus on prevention by addressing issues like obesity and smoking -- things that contribute to the onset of such chronic diseases as diabetes and cancer later in life. "Ensuring that the final legislation includes prevention could actually be one of the most important steps decreasing if not eliminating some of these disparities," says Judith Bell, president of Policylink, an advocacy organization focused on social and economic equality.
http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_defacto_segregation_of_health_care

[rapturedbyrobots]

36. that does absolutely nothing

to address the question of affordability. so i'll take it you have no response. thanks for nothing.

edited to note:

affordability is THE key issue when the bill includes a mandate. take out the mandate, and you have absolutely NO problem from me.

[FrenchieCat]

39. Affordability for those who are 133% of the poverty level is not an issue,

as they would be 100% subsidized!

These are the people who have nothing,
and they will, I'm sure thank you for nothing,
cause nothing is what you are arguing for. period.

[rapturedbyrobots]

40. you have no grasp on the economic situation

keep holding on to the illusion that the subsidies will make this affordable for everyone.

i'm of the opinion that people should be able to decide for themselves what that very little extra money in their pocket this month should go towards.

for some people that is health care. for some it is not. for some it will never be enough to cover the price of mandated premiums PLUS deductibles and co-pays (set by monopolistic industry). you obviously can't understand that.

i'm not looking for anyone to thank me for anything. if that's what is motivating you...a sense of pride in helping out 31 million poor folks with no health insurance...then you keep on with your patronizing quest.\

instead of telling folks what they need (health insurance, according to you) why not just ask? oh...that's right...because the answer is consistently an overwhelming NO to mandates and YES to public option. but nevermind that...remind me again why poor folks don't know what's good for them. remind me why they don't know anything about how affordable access to health care really is. remind me again why they don't realize that health insurance will guarantee that they will see a doctor, be able to pay the bill, and never have to worry about health-related bankruptcy. poor people are just so stupid! we really need to get them on the insurance companies subscriber lists ASAP...for their own good.

[Ozymanithrax]

41. What that 133% will get is Medicaid.

They are not simply forced to buy a plan.

[FrenchieCat]

49. Correct.

Means they can go to the doctor.

[rapturedbyrobots]

54. ok

so pass a bill that only gives free medicaid to those at 133% of the poverty level.

and don't force the rest of us to buy crappy insurance.

problem solved.

or wait...is getting medicaid for those at or near poverty levels not enough for you. why isn't it enough for you? aren't their lives and health worth it? what's wrong with you?

In otherwords, why don't those (insert arbitrary number) not mean enough?
Why are they not worth compromise and consideration?

wait...this is starting to sound familiar....

[LibDemAlways]

58. I suspect it will all ultimately be for naught. This insurance industry

rip-off will end up in the courts, and the litigation will drag on for years. No one should expect any big changes anytime soon.

[tekisui]

42. I hope this bill passes so we can get on with it.

If it fails, the reason will be because too much was given to the conservative-Dems too early (and they were still unreliable). We lost the give and take with them, they just took. The repugs were never on board and never would be on board. The leadership buckled and folded far too early and never held the frame.

Then liberals are told to sit down, shut up and vote for the shitty bill. Because if this bill doesn't pass, as is, the liberals will blamed for every medical tragedy and death from now on. Never mind that the fault would still be with the crooked insurance companies and a party whose leaders are so ineffective that no one is excited about the bill. But, they are all so politically tied to it they will chase it off a cliff.

[rapturedbyrobots]

53. wrong place nt

[swilton]

46. I support 'reform'; this isn't

[FrenchieCat]

48. Nice catch phrase.

It is reform. Just not the reform you think we should have.
That's not the same thing.

[Cha]

51. 0 = 0 ..and the time is now to get this

Bill into law and build on it. So many respected people backing up the President..I'm so heartened.

Even though my blue dog is a coward.

[FrenchieCat]

52. You want him to write to him/her?

Cause I will.

Just give me his/her name!

[Cha]

55. I've called and talked to his aides..

Steve Benen has featured him on Washington Monthly and Mitch Stewart email me the other day and asked me to call Michael Arcuri bc he was caving to special interests.

Washington, DC:
127 Cannon House Office Building

Washington, DC 20515
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

Hours: 9:00am-6:00pm (In Session)

9:00am-5:00pm (Out of Session)

http://arcuri.house.gov/

Conveniently doesn't have anything about the Health Care Reform Bill on his website that I see.

It's a very brainwashed District up here but there are a lot of people who do face reality and could be helped by this Bill. A lot of my friends around here have called his office too.

It wouldn't hurt..thanks Frenchie.

[janet118]

56. I think these plans pretty much suck but . . .

at least, we will finally have a something real to work with. For the past year, we have been shadow boxing against potential bills. I want something passed. Hell, I live in Mass., I know what mandated health insurance without a public option looks like and it ain't pretty if you're not poor or rich or work for the state. I wanted single-payer, universal health care but was willing to settle for the public option. I feel totally betrayed by our so-called representatives, and yes, President Obama, because they kept giving away the farm for no Republican votes. I would rather that they had used their time and energy taking the Blue Dogs out to the woodshed and threatening to expose their corporate sugar daddies very publicly if they refused to toe the line.

If this bill passes and sucks as badly as the Mass. plan does, there will be hell to pay. Scott Brown ran against health care reform and, unlike what the media keeps saying, it was because of, not in spite of, our experiences with a similar plan here in Mass. When Gov. Patrick recently scheduled a meeting with the insurance company and hospital executives to get them to brainstorm about how to keep costs down, they snubbed him, making him seem naive and ineffective. It was Romney's plan, but Patrick owns it now and his reelection in November is not looking real good at this point. I truly believe that without a public option and/or enforceable regulations, Obama will be in the same boat come 2012. It makes me very sad.

That's all water under the bridge. I am still fighting as hard as I can for a public option, yet I agree that any bill that's passed will be better than nothing because it will also stop all the guessing about what it includes and who it covers. It will finally give us something solid to build upon or change for the better.

[FrenchieCat]

57. I see it that way......without a foundation, we have nothing.

At least now there would be that.

[Forkboy]

59. 31 million props to you.

You're everything you hate in DK, just for different reasons. I so wish I could make you see this.

[FrenchieCat]

60. I don't hate DK.......

I just believe that his vote against this bill will be wrong;
deadly wrong.

And I'm not the only one.....
Here's some more "props" as you call people,
and they all say what I say....

Pass the Damn Bill!

Signed
Dr. Howard Dean.
Sen. Sanders.
Sen. Franken.
Mr. Krugman.
Rep. Weiner.
Mr. Wendell Potter.
Rep. Barbara Lee.
Rep. Grayson.
Not Mr. Reich.

DK is not superior to any of these folks, not in my book.

So no, no 31 Million Props, just 31 Million real lives.
Ignore them if you will, but don't try to pretend that it's about something else,
cause it's not.....not at this point.

[Forkboy]

61. I posted here months ago that I'd vote for the bill.

But lets not kid ourselves...people are being used as props. You've even gotten personal with it, and used your own family as one. Yes, real lives, lives that may not be part of YOUR world, and thus easy to forget. We all have our stories, and we all have our victims if things don't go our way. Some have the class not to use their own family to score political points.

Ignore them if you will, but don't try to pretend that it's about something else,
cause it's not.....not at this point.

No shit. Hence the fight. Don't YOU pretend it's about something else either, Frenchie. Righteousness goes both ways.

[FrenchieCat]

62. My nephew is not my prop, he is one of the main reasons that I fight for this bill.

How dare you would arrogantly tell me otherwise,
and try to make me believe that his personal story
isn't something that I should tell as I advocate for what I feel is right.
Not only how dare you, but how stupid of you to believe
that this shouldn't be the case.

What is obvious is that People may just be props to you,
as that is how you seem to consistently refer to them.

[Forkboy]

64. Meh...if someone on the other side of what you think did what you did you'd think differently.

Why are the ones these people fight for not equal to your nephew and what YOU fight for? To you they aren't, they're just another prop....just as you decry in others. People on both sides of this issue have stories like your nephew's...but you only act as if one side is valid.

What is obvious is that People may just be props to you,
as that is how you seem to consistently refer to them.

What's obvious to me is that people on both sides of this issue have valid reasons for the position they take, but only one is valid to you. It's also obvious that both sides will use people, people like your nephew, to further their goals. Get back to me when I use my own family illnesses before telling me I see people as just a prop. I didn't post about any of them and their health issues (or my own, for that matter) to emotionally blackmail people into seeing my side. But you did.

And please, show us proof of your "consistently" charge above. This is the one and only time I've used the term, and in this case it fits. I await links to my previous posts calling ANYONE props before tonight.

Tell me, Frenchie, why is that only YOUR POV is valid? Why is that when others post of their own problems or that of their loved ones and yet come down on the other side of the HCR equation it isn't just as valid as that of your nephew's? Do you think these people don't love their family? Do you think they're just tools using their family to score some points online? And then tell me how your posts should be perceived as any different?

Spare me the "how dare you" crap. You're totally talking to the wrong person for guilt trips. That shit works on those still scared of their mothers, but I passed that point about 30 years ago (sorry, Mom, but it's a fact....). Once again, do you think your concern for family is the ONLY concern for family out there? Are the rest just posers sent here to piss you off, or do they maybe, just maybe, have the same right to be worried about their loved ones as you do for yours? No offense, but your nephew isn't a trump card, and deny it all you want, but that's EXACTLY how you used him. The guilt is on you for doing so, not on those for pointing it out. :shrug:

[FrenchieCat]

65. Obama's Dead Mama is a trump card too then......

so are all of those who have gotten in front of microphones
to share their personal stories, and there have been many!

All are just pimps, trying to profit from their personal tragedies somehow.

Just like the 11 year old little boy who lost his mother, and was lobbying congress
to pass health care. I'm sure he used his dead mother too,
and that he shouldn't sleep well at night trying to profit from
his personal tragedy, although I'm not sure how.

Marcelas Owens, 11-Year-Old Whose Mother Died Without Health Insurance:
'Get The Health Care Bill Passed'

"I am here because of my mom," said Owens. "My mom was diagnosed with pulmonary hypertension in 2006. She missed so much work she lost her job. And when my mom lost her job, she lost her health care. And losing her health care ended up costing her her life."

He continued, "I don't want any other kids to go through the pain that our family has gone through. My grandma and I want Barack Obama and Congress and everybody to come together and to help get the health care bill passed."

Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) has been telling her constituent's story for months, most notably at the White House health care summit in February. Speaking before Owens, she recalled how she met him at a rally in Washington.

"I went to that rally and, after I spoke, I turned around and there was this little boy looking right straight up at me with his big brown eyes," she said. "And he said to me, 'You can't let anybody die like my mom did.'"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/11/marcelas-owens-11-year-ol_n_495207.html

A Boy and his prop/Trump card while she lived



Here more Folks playing their "Trump Cards" in what you obviously consider is a card game:

The Children's health Funds are just using children! Lookit! Pics and everything!
http://www.childrenshealthfund.org/child-health-care/KCW


Grayson Launches Site To Honor, Name Those Dead From Lack Of Health Care
Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL), who launched himself into the heat of the health care debate by arguing that Republican-styled health care reform encouraged the sick to die quickly, once again is using the specter of death to push for legislative action.

The Florida Democrat announced, while on the floor of the House of Representatives on Wednesday, that he was launching a new website to list the names of the nearly 45,000 Americans who die every year because they lack health insurance.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/21/grayson-launches-site-to_n_328956.html



I'm sure you would think that we are all simply using people as props,
and that somehow that is something that shouldn't be done, since this is how you think,
and it may be true for you that you may not care enough to feel compeled
to tell someone else's story, but that would be your problem.

I'm not going to argue about this any further with you, because in the end, it is obvious
that you are free to think what you want, even when it doesn't make a lick of sense.

[freddie mertz]

76. I don't think "Obama's Dead Mama" (your unfortunate words) got in front of any microphone.

The president did, of course, and spoke about her in ways that I interpreted as sincere.

What happened after that, I cannot claim to know.

But that woman in Ohio was being exploited as a prop for absolute sure.

I was sickened by that spectacle.

[FrenchieCat]

80. Well, that's ok......

because again, you make no sense.

If folks cannot advocate for their loved ones
without being judged by people like you and Rush and the rest of the RW,
than we are truly fucked.

You understand that you are the spectacle in this,
and that I hope those reading this will always remember
that you, alias freddie mertz, deemed that people
have no right speaking up for rights that they feel their loved ones deserves.
I hope you remember this too,
because we wouldn't want to find out that you ain't
nothing but a big ass hypocrite a bit later on down the road,
now would we?

[boppers]

63. My lungs collapse.

I am uninsurable without CHANGE.

Why? Because I can go many years, and cost nothing, or cost $10-20K in a random week.

I have no insurance now, and can't afford it.

My big question is if I can afford it *with* changes.

[FrenchieCat]

66. It will certainly depend on how much you make,

and I'm thinking the real details on that will be in the reconciliation bill.
I think that because I believe this will be an important issue that can
demonstrate the worth of this bill when implemented.

I know the timeline shows that yes, you will be able to gain insurance,
but no, with particulars from either you and because this plan is going
to be changing, and I think this is one of the areas that will,
I can't answer you beyond that.

[Cleobulus]

67. Coverage is useless if you can't afford treatment...

Under the 4 tiers that are mentioned in the senate plan, the only two I could afford, maybe, for treatment is the gold and platinum plans, the bronze and silver are useless for the majority of Americans that don't have insurance.

The fact is that adding 31 million people to the rolls of insurance companies is going to be useless if they still can't afford access to medical treatment.

[FrenchieCat]

68. Without real numbers, I can't discuss what you will pay.

What I can say is that 31 uninsured Americans who will be covered is not a mirage.
And when it is done, it will be more than any other President in a long time has
been able to do. Was it supposed to become free insurance for all? Free insurance
for you? Most likely not. Even Single payer wouldn't be that;
it would just be a premium added as a withholding from your paycheck.
That's how it works in other countries. So no, there wasn't gonna be
an imagined panacea Insurance bill that was ever gonna pass....just like we didn't
elect a President with a magic wand. Them's the facts.

[Cleobulus]

69. Single payer systems do not expect you to pay upwards of 5,000 dollars a year...

out of pocket for your medical care. This has nothing to do with free, it has to do with affordable.

For example, under the Silver Plan(called basic in the House bill), the deduct will be 2,000 dollars, and the co-insurance about 20%, with a maximum out of pocket expense of approximately 5,000 dollars or so. These are the basic average numbers of a insurance plan with an actuary value of .70.

Bear in mind that the above figures are for an individual, for families you approximately double the deduct and the maximum out of pocket expense.

So, with this info in mind, and knowing that the deduct calculator is calculating for a plan just like the one above, I can figure out what I can afford. Assuming I get my insurance on the exchange, I can get it for 50 dollars a month, which I can afford, that's great, except if I ever wanted to get treatment I'd have to pay 2 grand before the insurance even kicks in, then 20% after that, until I hit the annual maximum of 5 grand, which, by the way is over a quarter of my income for the year. So I can get "coverage", no problem, I just don't get access to health care, but hey, as long as it looks good on paper, who cares?

[FrenchieCat]

78. I need some cites from the law to back up what you say......

it's too easy to say stuff, just cause you've got a keyboard.

[Vinca]

71. It's highly unlikely 31 million people will be able to afford private insurance,

even if it's subsidized. Their best hope is to impoverish themselves and get into Medicaid. It's astonishing to me how many Democrats think continuing a failed system is a good idea. Something may be better than nothing for a limited number of people, but at the onset this bill leaves out 15 - 20 million people and that's just ridiculous. As Lawrence O'Donnell said this morning on Morning Joe, you could pay $3,000 in additional taxes for single payer (and everyone will be covered) or $6,000 premiums for questionable coverage to big insurance.

[FrenchieCat]

72. Going on a "It's highly unlikely" uninformed preface of a theory that doesn't cite

anything other than O'Donnell on Morning Joe, you develop this spew.

:rofl:

[Vinca]

79. Time will tell, Frenchie, time will tell. I hope I'm wrong.

[freddie mertz]

73. A lot of words. But it's still a boondoggle.

Sorry.

[FrenchieCat]

74. That's easy to say......

especially since that's all you've always said.

a one liner negative post does not say much to me
about anything. It's like what you offer to support for
the American people; not a daman thing. NOTHING.

You not only want offer NOTHING after a year's time,
but you don't mind losing the next elections....
which means your words alignS exactly with that other party....
which means you may be posting in the wrong forum.

[freddie mertz]

75. You can accuse me of anything you like.

Nothing changes the facts in play.

As summarized HERE:

http://www.salon.com/entertainment/comics/this_modern_world/2010/03/15/this_modern_world

[ncteechur]

81. Well the replies have been predictable from the people that are against the bill.

Justifying their stances against the something. Saying that the status quo is actually better than passing this bill.

I don't think anyone can say it as eloquently as FrenchieCat.

Maybe they just don't give a rip. A real rip.

I mean it is easy to have "principle" when you don't have skin in the game.

Let those who want to vote NO give up their insurance. Let them give up their kids' insurance.

[FrenchieCat]

85. I sent this post, a bit edited, to Dennis Kucinich the day I posted it here.....

I hope he read it, and perhaps it helped him see my view....which seems to now
mirror his own.

[MadHound]

83. You aren't providing coverage to 31 million people, you are forcing them to buy it

In fact you are handing all of us over to the tender mercies of the insurance industry, along with a mandated monopoly. That is worse than nothing, that is actually doing harm.

The first thing, not just in health care, but in the world at large, is to do no harm.

[FrenchieCat]

88. No, it isn't worse than nothing, and your intepretation is lacking.

Harm being done is what we have now.
You may not see it, because it's not affecting you,
but it is obviously happening.

[mdmc]

89. I support the bill but can tell you exactly why I think it is crappy

When I was healthy my insurance was fine. I really didnt need it at all. I didn't access medical treatment. I didnt need to.
Then I got sick.
My medical treatment became un affordable.
I have insurance, but I cannot afford my co-pays.
I dont have enough money to pay my co-pays.
So
This bill will give people the same type of insurance that I have.
If they are healthy they wont need it.
If they are sick they will still need to be able to afford medical treatment.
If they are poor, they will not be able to afford medical treatment. Like me.

Thats why I dont like the bill. But I support passing the bill and Obama getting re-elected.

[angrychair]

90. Thank you FC

I wish more people would see it like this. I have read through every post here and find those that are against the passage of this bill are focused on the fact that they will not have the ability to pay, based on income and co-pays. Strangely, they fail to acknowledge that they currently have nothing at all or very poor coverage. Second, they fail to acknowledge that preventive care (i.e. check-ups and normal visits) are either free or the price of an office visit ($25 or whatever it may be). Preventive care will save more lives than doing and having nothing at all. I fail to understand the "all or nothing" focus of some of you. First, NOTHING in real life works like that. In real life you have to take the im-perfect. You aim high and take the best you can which hopefully is somewhere in the middle or better if your lucky. Second, bills are RARELY the final say on an issue. Equal rights for people of color and women and those with disabilities were not perfect when they were first written or passed. They were worked and re-worked over the years, ALWAYS in favor of these groups. WHY WHY WHY do you think the re thugs fight so hard to prevent the bill even coming up for a vote?? Because once it becomes law-it is law-and there is NO take back. Second, the bill, even once it becomes law IS NEVER the final destination, it is only the first step of the journey. Relax, take a deep breath and SUPPORT THE HCR bill and keep fighting for your cause for better, cheaper universal health care. I and many others will be right there with you every step of the way.