Comments on: Health care reform: as Maine goes…

By: Monte

Monte — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 17:14:30 +0000

Thanks for another good post.

Let me extend your arguments just a bit.

Statewide Health Care reform has also been tried (TennCare) in a conservative southern state – Tennessee – which voted for McCain over Obama by 15% if I remember correctly.

It failed as well for most of the same reasons.

By: Baklava

Baklava — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 16:27:06 +0000

Neo, Sorry off topic.

http://whenfallsthecoliseum.com/2009/11/12/lionel-mcintyre-assaults-woman-english-language/

It stucky me about the active and passive voice also….

By: Assistant Village Idiot

Assistant Village Idiot — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 14:10:15 +0000

Double whammy. The western border of Maine also relies on NH hospitals from Portsmouth to Berlin. As with all hospitals nationwide, some of this is care that has to be written off. So even with that extra advantage, Maine can’t afford it.

OB, that batteries image is indeed a good one. But with state economies, folks seem to be perennially convinced that there are lots of rich people “out there” who will pick up the tab if we go federal. Class warfare rhetoric persists because it perpetuates a myth necessary to garner Democratic votes. Some of the politicians even believe it, but that’s optional when it comes to campaigning.

By: Thomass

Thomass — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 07:10:23 +0000

I like how the democrat in the article called the deaniacks a special interest group.

It’s been a big big problem for conservatives with how to label the left. The left controls the mass media and has pushed the meme that financial self interest (re: who benefits) is the only way to gauge ulterior motives… which conveniently doesn’t account for their ideologically motivated ulterior motives (why would they lie about wanting to nationalize healthcare, they just want a public option to lower prices… blaw blaw blaw.. [i]what do they get out of it???[/i])…

Anyway, just calling them another ‘special interest’ sorta works… and doesn’t fight upstream their own narrative (which is now well established in the general population)… it just dovetails with it…

By: Beverly

Beverly — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 05:27:50 +0000

Hmmm. There’s more than one reason for SF’s crashing birth rate.

Anyone else get the feeling that the Dims have passed the point of giving a damn what the citizens think about anything? They figure if they can get a Marxist clown like Obama elected, they don’t have to give two hoots in hell what the patriots think about anything. At all. Ever.

And they show it by their astounding behavior. They really are counting on the big media to continue to be their propaganda machine to shut out all dissent and to create the storyline.

By: elcrain

elcrain — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 05:18:03 +0000

Tom: “San Fran is an example [of lousy urban economies run by the left]: the wealthy, the professional beggars aka homeless, but a crashing birth rate, much of the economy dependent on tourism as a source of exogenous financing.”

I totally agree. I live very close to “The City” (everbody kowtow to the great San Francisco) and I will never spend another dime in that filthy, overcrowded, claustrophobic, urine-soaked city/county.

What did it for me was the photograph taken after the 2004 election of a young San Franciscan (who obviously had voted for that blithering doofus Kerry–tell me again, who are the rubes?) holding up a sign that said “F— Middle America.”

When family or friends from back east come to visit, I make it clear to them that they will have to find some other stooge to take them around that horrible place. If it’s tourism that San Francisco is relying on, they might want to quit insulting half their potential customers. Of course, nobody else does, so why should they?

By: Tom

Tom — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 04:31:10 +0000

“High taxes that discourage industry and force young people to leave” is the shoe that fits all urban economies run by the Left. “Young” as in young families. San Fran is an example: the wealthy, the professional beggars aka homeless, but a crashing birth rate, much of the economy dependent on tourism as a source of exogenous financing.

By: martin bebow

martin bebow — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:56:25 +0000

Go Ben Nelson!! What a guy.

By: Perfected democrat

Perfected democrat — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:28:15 +0000

More ho, hum…
http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2009/11/dems-turned-away-11-votes-that-would-require-congress-to-enroll-in-pelosicare/

By: Mr. Frank

Mr. Frank — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:44:02 +0000

Part of the way out of this mess is to see health insurance as coverage for major illness or trauma. That is what people fear most. Automobile insurance does not cover oil changes, tires, wiper blades, or front end alignments. People are responsible to maintain their cars. They should also be responsible for basic health care like office visits and shots. Thus, if health insurance were for major problems with high deductibles, it would be affordable. That would be especially true with a national market and tort reform. Government requirements that insurance cover every possible problem make insurance to expensive for many.