Go see, my friend ... don't just digest whatever the the "Washinton Monthly" feeds you. Shoot off down to Atlanta, and hang out with the defenders of your freedom for awhile. I've been there, and I know what I speak of.

"You want to see govt run health care? Go to the VA hospital and hang out for a day. It's a sad, sad thing to see."

VA hospitals earned their reputations as hell-holes for decades (mostly under Republican administrations that simply didn't care about veterans), but that's also a thing of the increasingly distant past. The Clinton administration cleaned up that mess over 15 years ago, and far from "a sad thing to see," the VA now delivers what the Washington Monthly rightly calls "the highest quality care in the country." It's been the envy of health delivery for years, and claims to the contrary denote only a lack of familiarity with them.

"He has ticked off the blacks, the hispanics, and the homosexuals. Without these voting blocks he's a dead duck. There are not enough white middle class liberals to vote the goober in for a second term."

I've been doing these election predictions for many cycles, and have yet to get one wrong. The man was voted in by a block of voters who have never voted before, and will never vote again. Can anyone say disenchanted?

There is no such thing as temporary welfare. It is an enabling system, and does not encourage people to better themselves. The FEMA money the Care mission receives is propping up those who can do better, but refuse to. Sorry, but this is a fact. The only beneficiaries of the welfare system are those who work in it, and defend it because it's their bread & butter.

I would like to respond (respectfully, of course) to a few statements and/or assertions by 'devilsnightmare':

That author previously mentioned (from 8/24/09): "I don't have health insurance, but I don't feel entitled to have it." He then goes on to criticize those who receive taxpayer assistance (particularly the poor, or welfare recipients).

Is he not aware that in the event of a calamatous event that would hospitalize him, it is the taxpayer who would cover his lack of insurance in order that the provider and physician may secure services rendered? And yet, his decision to forego medical insurance is, in and of itself, an affront to the taxpayer!

Now, if this person cannot afford basic healthcare AND THAT is the reason he has not purchased it, then he is in the same boat with nearly 46 million Americans (U.S.Census Bureau - 2007).

Next statement: "The "poor" in this country have never been neglected. They've been enabled to live out of the taxpayers pocket, while having multiple babies and driving vehicles much nicer than the average Joe can afford."

I worked as an employment services case manager for 5 years. In Georgia, it is known as the TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families) program. It replaced (in 1996) the welfare program formerly known as AFDC.

This program today is structured towards 'Temporary' assistance and 'accountability'. It is temporary in that it has set limit of time that a recipient/participant can receive such tax-payer assistance. It is accountable in that all recipients/participants MUST be engaged in coutable work activities for a minimum of 30hrs/wk (35hrs/wk for two-parent families). These activities include: community service, employment, job search, job skills training & vocational education.

And while there are still many problems with that current system, it is simply an uninformed statement to assert that these folks he refers to (he stereotyped welfare momma's here: smokers, multiple babies, etc...) are not working TOWARDS those benefits. By the way, those TANF cash benefits are hardly a motivation to stay in the system. An individual with one child can only get $142.00/month. That individual has to work for that under TANF. It isn't given to them for free.

Not a lot of money, regardless.

Pointing out that his middle name is Hussein is simply an irrelevent, yet strategic way of inflaming prejudice amongst the people. So what, his name isn't Walker, or Wilson. Your point is what? It adds NOTHING to the true debate over improving Healthcare & the economy in general.

It is exactly these types of comments that give such a terrible stereotype to good southern folk.

Finally, it is pointed out: "He has ticked off the blacks, the hispanics, and the homosexuals. Without these voting blocks he's a dead duck. There are not enough white middle class liberals to vote the goober in for a second term."

Only time will tell with that analysis. However, these same folks aren't going to gravitate to the Republican party either. And for good reason.

You want to see govt run health care? Go to the VA hospital and hang out for a day. It's a sad, sad thing to see.

The result of liberalism/socialism is always a negative. You can't take from the rich and give to the poor and have a healthy system. It's apparent that Hussein Obama is finding out that the majority of Americans feel as I do.

He'll start campaigning in a year or so, and all this junk will fall by the wayside until he is soundly defeated in his bid for a second term.

He has ticked off the blacks, the hispanics, and the homosexuals. Without these voting blocks he's a dead duck. There are not enough white middle class liberals to vote the goober in for a second term.

"...it should be quite plain to all by now that the Health Insurance companies themselves are NOT going to lower rates and/or premiums on their own. There is simply no competition to drive down consumer costs,as the industry has become a monopoly. This is a self-evident truth. Premiums go up year after year."

And the companies continue to "consolidate." From the Los Angeles Times (9 April, 2009):

"Already, 1 in 6 metropolitan areas in a 2008 study of more than 300 U.S. markets is dominated by a single health insurer that controls at least 70% of consumers enrolled in health maintenance organizations or preferred provider organizations, according to the American Medical Assn."

Meanwhile, costs go up, up, up, and coverage goes down, down, down. Most Americans with health insurance get it through their employers (60%, a number that has declined for years). From 1998 to 2008 (this is, BEFORE the worst of the current recession), premiums for employer-provided insurance rose 119% (Kaiser Family). Meanwhile, between 2000 and 2007, the profits of the 10 largest publicly traded health insurance companies increased an incredible 428% (HCAN). And the coverage offered through these plans has gotten progressively worse--some of it is "coverage" in name only. Health care costs became the the #1 cause of personal bankruptcies some years ago, and has doggedly held on to that #1 spot. By 2007, these accounted for 62% of all bankruptcies, and 80% of those were from people who had health insurance.

These are the on-the-ground facts that no amount of ranting against government can change. An entire day, month, or year spent in weaving puerile mythology about how well off the poor have it won't change one of these numbers, or make life better for a single human being.

The "poor" in this country have never been neglected. They've been enabled to live out of the taxpayers pocket, while having multiple babies and driving vehicles much nicer than the average Joe can afford.

Go down to the Care Mission in Lafayette and see them come and get their FEMA (taxpayer money) supplied groceries each week, while talking on cell phones and smoking cigarettes. Liberalism/socialism is what's sinking this country.

As far as the public education system goes, it is a complete and utter failure. Kids are graduating dumber & dumber each year. That's a poor example of the usefulness of Govt. We are entitled to the pursuit of happiness, not free lunch.

Dr. Wilson asks the pertinent question: "Why is it the gov-ernment’s business to fix it?"

While Dr. Wilson is certainly much more knowledgeable than I in these matters, it should be quite plain to all by now that the Health Insurance companies themselves are NOT going to lower rates and/or premiums on their own. There is simply no competition to drive down consumer costs,as the industry has become a monopoly. This is a self-evident truth. Premiums go up year after year. And as more and more people are losing their Group Insurance through their employers due to the economy, this specter is hitting consumers very hard!

Pre-existing conditions are popping up more and more these days as reasons for denial of coverage. That, coupled with rate increases year after year, is alone worth the admission for thorough reform.

This is not (as one poster has stated) simply a matter of people 'pulling themselves up by their bootstraps'. We are not talking about elective procedures or surgery here, but basic preventive care and health & hospitalization.

I would simply ask those who state that government has "no business" in health care, if you truly have that kind of perspective on government -- just give up your Medicare and Social Security. Give up public education as well, as it is not a so-called 'right'.

A nation as prosperous as the USA, that neglects the poorer and the working-class to such a degree, will not long endure. It is the classic Burgeiouse-Proletariat class struggle that has been handed down through history.

You're required to buy insurance on your car so you don't leave some poor slob holding the bag for your ignorance & negligence.

I don't have health insurance, but I don't feel entitled to have it. I sure don't want Hussein Obama meddling in the system, and it's apparent that the majority of Americans feel the same way. I will be so glad when his "one term" presidency is over.

Gimmee, gimmee, gimmee ... what's wrong with people?? What happened to working toward bettering yourself, instead of waiting on handouts?

Yeah, doc, I have noticed how the govt. has came between me and my doctor since going on Medicare. Come to think of it, the REPUBLICAN govt. wasted a billion or so on the drug plan for Medicare patients. And tell me, why am I REQUIRED to buy insurance on my car but not on my body? More people wind up bankrupt from medical bills then from car accidents!

"...the government has gotten the industry into the mess it is in now. In the first place, the Medicare/Medicaid system pretends to provide access to healthcare for a segment of the population who is very much in need of care, but the restrictions placed on providing the care, which these patients need, makes the proper care for them very difficult to deliver. This is why fewer and fewer physicians are accepting new Medicare and/or Medicaid pa-tients."

The sole reason physicians are turning down new Medicare patients--and they make no secret about it, even when they do behave like yourself by trying to hide it behind euphemism--is because of the reimbursement rate. The operative word, here, is "greed." They can't gouge the fortune out of Medicare patients that they can out of privately insured ones. That's not a government problem. That's a problem of private greed.

And it should go without saying that, even with scores of greedy physicians turning away Medicare cases, what does exist is certainly preferable to what would exist in the absence of Medicare, which would be most of those patients having no coverage at all.

"A second problem is that the government has placed itself where it has no business be-ing: in the middle of the patient-physician relationship. This has destroyed the privacy of that relationship"

Private insurance long ago destroyed the privacy of that relationship. There isn't a doctor in the U.S. who operates a practice of any size who doesn't spend a part of his day either arguing with insurance companies that are trying to deny his patients the carer they need, or paying someone to do the arguing for him. Try to do anything, and it's a running battle with a gaggle of business-suited, bean-counting bureaucrats who never never darkened the door of a med school anywhere but who insist they're more competent to practice medicine than the doctor. That isn't the case with Medicare patients--they just have less to pay.

Anything that gets in the way of the physician/patient relationship is certainly a potential problem, but anyone who thinks Medicare is a big problem with U.S. health care (or, indeed, in the top 10,000 problems with U.S. health care) is either being paid to "think" so, or is so far from the sharpest tack in the box as to be more properly categorized as a coin.