Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........Posted by marie on 6/03/03 at 19:18 (120827)
WMDs? Where we misled by our leaders? What Republican Senators have lended their support to the inquiry? Will an inquiry help exonerate the leaders of the U.S. and Great Britain?
Why does 73% of the Russian public believe we are going to attack them? Turkey, Nigeria, and Pakistan have similar percentages.
North Korea started rustling their feathers about 12 years ago.....wasn't that about the time the Cheney/Wolfowitz doctrine was published in the NY Times? Do you think the leaders of North Korea reads the NY Times?
Hans Blix why does he want an investigation into WMD question?
Hillary Clinton......next presidential hopeful? I wonder who her running partner will be?
Is Martha Stewart guilty? Will she step down from her company? What do Americans really think about her products? Will they continue to buy them?
Will we ever see peace in the Mideast? Will Bushes efforts help?
Soooo many questions raised in today's news. Interesting days are ahead.
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........wendyn on 6/03/03 at 20:31 (120832)
You can add: 'Has Sosa always used an illegal bat in baseball?'
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........BGCPed on 6/03/03 at 20:35 (120833)
Chemical weapons are WMD and he ALREADY used them on his own people.He was not dumb enough to leave them laying around. He buried loads of aircraft, armored and other weapons that he was allowed to have.
Russia should worry about what is in their own country, weapons wise and how they are being treated like empty pop bottle and not dangerous materials. As for the other countries Turkey and Nigeria need to worry more about their own economy and Pakistan should worry until they stop letting terrorist bastards use their country like a KOA campground.
North Korea and about 12 years ago? Also the early stages of the Clintonistas and we dont need to mention HOW he dealt with them during his 10 years. Appeasment and pay-off didnt do a thing but fester a problem.
Hans Blix wants an investigation? after 12 years of UN 'investigations' I really think that Blix and people like Sean Penn think like Wylie Coyote, if there are any WMD they will be inside a giant metal warehouse nest to big sign that says 'A.C.M.E. W.M.D. CO.'
Hillary Clinton elected? A recent pole (not just NY liberals)but the entire country gave here about a 72% disaproval i.e. would not vote for her. I think her best shot is Al Sharpton as a mate.
Stewart guilty? Yep 100%
May see some peace in MIdeast, hopefully. Bush is getting some positive things done but the two groups have a ways to go. There are radical arms of Palistine and other Muslim factions that would keep up the violence if they gave them everything
Dint want you to think I forgot ya Marie. Dr ED the floor is yours
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........marie on 6/03/03 at 21:04 (120836)
Didn't think you forgot! Alot of interesting questions raised by the news media.....the answers will come with time. What do you think about our economy? What's Michigan like?
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........marie on 6/03/03 at 21:06 (120837)
That's another great question to add to the list! Thanks!
Wendy, hope you're feeling better. What does your son want to do now that he has graduated.....By the way tell him congratulations!
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........Ed Davis, DPM on 6/03/03 at 21:46 (120840)
How true. The families of the Iraqi citizens that Saddam murdered have no doubt about the weapons used.
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........BGCPed on 6/03/03 at 21:55 (120844)
Economy is good and bad. Lucky for me I have not been affected as I am up 15% from last year to date. Detroit is coming out with some pretty cool cars now and we have lots of homes being built. I think the general economy will swing upward you cant have too much growth for too long.
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........BGCPed on 6/03/03 at 22:06 (120848)
On a side note I look at the war there like this. Saddam, his sons and cronies were evil, rotten bastards. The did already use WMD but to some folks, unless they find 3 tons of plutonium they wont count it.
Politicians sometimes say certain things to get from a to z. They also know more than the average citizen when it applies to intelligence re terrorism. I think at this point it is like saying Charles Manson wasnt that bad cause he didnt really kill those people and they didt use guns but rather butcher knives.
It is a moot point, Saddam and his goons had to go. I think that is a point even the far left would agree. That being established how do you get rid of him? Diplomacy? UN sanctions and resolutions? Ask him nicely and hope he plays nice? Bribe him? Give him a warning for 11 years?
We did all that and it got nowhere. Bush did what he had to do and sorry to say was THE ONLY THING that people like Saddam understand.
To put it a way we ALL can understand. We tried almost 12 years of cortisone injections given by the UN and IT DIDNT WORK. Maybe one more year of injections would have worked if we just gave it a chance?
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........wendyn on 6/03/03 at 22:56 (120850)
Thank you Marie.
His current goal in life is to drive me crazy. Either it's issues with his car shopping, or issues with the girlfriend.
He will be upgrading some course this summer and in the fall. After that, I'm not sure if he will apply to college or university or tech school.
He changes his mind like people change their underwear.
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........john h on 6/04/03 at 07:55 (120861)
Nicely put BG. Saddam was or is pure evil.
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........john h on 6/04/03 at 07:58 (120862)
Whether you are murdered with a bullet or WMD makes no difference. The results are the same. He is responsible for the deaths of over 1 million people. He ranks up there with Pol Pot and other evil men.We cannot get them all but we can get some of them.
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........john h on 6/04/03 at 08:11 (120864)
Wendy I am a lifetime Cub fan and was wathing the game last night when the cork bat splintered. Sosa was an almost international hero. He makes 17 million dollars a year and probably makes that much in endorsements.I think every baseball fan is terrible disappointed. How could someone so rich, so adored, and with such a great baseball history risk everything. Chances are great that his home runs in the past were hit with proper bats but now the question will always be there. He came from an impoverished family and gives millions back to his home country. He has a lot of pride and he must be totally humuliated which is more punishment than baseball can hand out. He joins Albert Belle, Billy Hatcher and a long line of other players who have done this. How many of these guys are on steriods? No one knows because the players union will not permit testing. As you may know he was hit in the head about 3 weeks ago and the impact shattered his helmet. He then had toe surgery to remove his great toe nail and has really been strugling just to hit the ball much less it far. They did confiscate all his bats so it will be interesting to see if this was the only bat that had cork which might give some credance to his story that he used a corked bat for batting practice.
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........john h on 6/04/03 at 08:14 (120865)
Add this to your important questions Marie: Why do my feet hurt after 8 years?
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........marie on 6/04/03 at 08:18 (120866)
The word 'moot' is often used by some posters so I thought I'd give you a formal definition.
Usage Note: The adjective moot is originally a legal term going back to the mid-16th century. It derives from the noun moot, in its sense of a hypothetical case argued as an exercise by law students. Consequently, a moot question is one that is arguable or open to debate. But in the mid-19th century people also began to look at the hypothetical side of moot as its essential meaning, and they started to use the word to mean 'of no significance or relevance.' Thus, a moot point, however debatable, is one that has no practical value. A number of critics have objected to this use, but 59 percent of the Usage Panel accepts it in the sentence The nominee himself chastised the White House for failing to do more to support him, but his concerns became moot when a number of Republicans announced that they, too, would oppose the nomination. When using moot one should be sure that the context makes clear which sense is meant.
So if all hypothetical debates are moot than we will have to eliminate several of your arguments.
1. The Kurds were gased by someone. We know that for a fact. We believe it was Saddam but it has never been prooved. The Kurds were engaged in conflicts with Iran at the time. It is possible that Iran who we believe according to Bush has weapons of mass destruction.....all hypothetical....may have also had reasons to gas the Kurds. Aside from that Turkey also hates the Kurds. So that would make your argument about gasing the Kurds 'moot', as it is and always has been hypothetical.
My point is that unless we have evidence of WMD all your arguments will be moot. I believe that we will find some evidence of WMD. If I was Bush I'd welcome an inquiry. Afterall if he had evidence of the information that we do not know about certainly an inquiry will review that.
Sorry but I like to stick to facts.
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........marie on 6/04/03 at 08:18 (120867)
Inquiring minds want to know.
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........marie on 6/04/03 at 09:47 (120883)
After listening to Sosa say that he accidently picked up the wrong bat....the question may be: 'Did Sosa pick up his practice bat by accident?'
Re: Today's headlines in the NY Times....???????marie on 6/04/03 at 11:05 (120898)
Just an interesting article. It does concern me that so many important decisions are being based on hypothetical informantion. Bryan you are right to say the most of the left will agree that Sadaam had to go...I am one of them. I have never objected to that. My objections have always centered around the process.
Re: Rexerpt from the book "lying history"bgcped on 6/04/03 at 12:42 (120913)
Re: Rexerpt from the book "lying history"Pauline on 6/04/03 at 13:05 (120918)
If your talking about the Hillary's book, why would you have to read what you already lived?
No need for a Holocaust victim to read a book to tell them what hppened? They lived it and no book could or would change their mind.
If your interest is in making a donation to Hillary, spend your money.
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........bgcped on 6/04/03 at 13:09 (120920)
Fact, The subhuman man named 'Chemical Ali' was not a Turk or an Iranian
Re: Rexerpt from the book "lying history"marie on 6/04/03 at 13:38 (120928)
I'd want to ring his neck too if I was in that situation.
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........marie on 6/04/03 at 13:39 (120929)
Re: Rexerpt from the book "lying history"bgcped on 6/04/03 at 14:20 (120936)
Well I dont know her but I think his womanizing was not a revelation to her. I think what she was po'ed about was how it made her look public wise and how it would affect her personal political aspirations. She is many things but she is not stupid. Thats why I think she was not so mad for the normal reasons most wives would want to ring his neck over.
It is odd he picked an intelligent woman as his wife then cheated on her with either trailer trash types ot young bimbos. If you have ever listened to Lewinsky talk she sounds like a giddy 14 y/o. I cant see a rhoades scholar having a 2 minute exchange with her. I guess that was not the purpose of their relationship
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........Ed Davis, DPM on 6/04/03 at 14:27 (120939)
It was not just the Kurds that Saddam used WMD against. His use of WMD against numerous opposition political and ethnic groups is well documented.
He had plenty of time to stash his current supply while we were preparing to invade and while the Saddamites in our country and Europe were doing everything they could to delay our action.
Re: Rexerpt from the book "lying history"Ed Davis, DPM on 6/04/03 at 14:31 (120940)
Hillary supposedly has 3 ghost writers to write the book. Supposedly, none of them are given credit by her.
If Hillary ever becomes President, I will consider leaving the country -- unlike some of the Hollywood types who promised to do if Bush became president, I am more likely to keep my word.
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........marie on 6/04/03 at 15:04 (120943)
I wasn't questioning Saddam I was questioning the use of the term 'moot'. Sadamm admitted to having chemical weapons after the Gulf war. That is a fact. He was ordered to destroy them. Unfortunately we don't have any evidence to prove that he destroyed them and we are still looking for information as to whether he still had a signifcant supply.
The term moot has been used here several times by some of the more right wing folks...it's kinda like 'Talk to the hand.' If you identify and select hypathetical information as 'moot' than you will have to resign yourselves to the fact that you also cannot use hypathetical information in a debate.
Our leaders may have gotten some unrealiable information that was used as a reason to attack another country. We felt we had the right to attack Iraq because we thought they were in violation of resolution 1441. That is it all other explanations and would be moot because they were not the reasons given prior to the war or to the UN.
I'm just exploring the term 'moot.' I kinda like it....thanks righters.
Re: Rexerpt from the book "lying history"marie on 6/04/03 at 15:09 (120944)
Hmmm....Where would you go? We've managed to tick off alot of countries. Maybe you could go to Great Britain or Australia might be nice. At least you wouldn't have to learn a new language.
I don't think Hillary is likely to run in the next presidential campaign. She is to smart for that. I do have to give her some credit though as she is the first first lady to run and be elected to office.
Re: Rexerpt from the book "lying history"marie on 6/04/03 at 15:13 (120945)
I pretty much agree with you. I think Hillary was ticked about their public image and I think she was hurt by what he did. I can't say as I blame her ...afterall this kind of thing could not only ruin their marriage but cause them to loose their clout in the political arena.
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........Ed Davis, DPM on 6/04/03 at 15:37 (120947)
Thank you for the background informnation on the word 'moot.' Keep in mind that the WMD was only one of several reasons for our action in Iraq.
Re: Rexerpt from the book "lying history"Ed Davis, DPM on 6/04/03 at 15:38 (120948)
Re: Rexerpt from the book "lying history"Kathy G on 6/04/03 at 15:51 (120950)
Does anyone else wonder why she wrote the book at all? I mean, she was already publicly humiliated. Why go through it all again? Does she think it makes her look better in the public's eys? I know she was paid a great deal but couldn't she have just skimmed over that episode? Or maybe it was part of her bookdeal that it be included.
I don't believe for a minute that she hadn't known about his little dalliances throughout their marriage. I truly believe she is one of those asexual women who didn't care where he got sex as long as he didn't bother her. If that's sexist, so be it.
She only got upset when his actions jeopardized their power. If you read any of her biographies, the reason she set her sights on Bill Clinton was that she was politically ambitious and knew the time for a woman president had not yet come. She met him and realized he had the potential to become president and that they'd make a good political team. That's what she wanted and that's what she got: a political team.
Just my opinion!
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........Ed Davis, DPM on 6/04/03 at 15:53 (120952)
Where, O Where Have the WMDs Gone? Part Deux
By Chris Weinkopf
FrontPageMagazine.com (PIPE) June 4, 2003
THE REASONS FOR THIS WAR just keep on changing.
That was the complaint, any way, back in the glory days of weekly protests, vomit-ins, and left-wing grumbling about the 'neocon' conspiracy of 'Bush Jr.' Unable to grasp the notion that a single policy can have multiple causes and goals, critics of the war in Iraq eagerly pointed to the Bush Administration's varying explanations as proof of some sinister, underlying motive (usually oil or empire).
One day the White House would talk about weapons of mass destruction. The next it would champion liberating the Iraqi people or severing the country's connections to terrorists. It made appeals to enforcing United Nations resolutions and the Gulf War ceasefire. It even offered lofty visions of a Middle Eastern democracy other than Israel, and the need to dismantle the Islamofascist enterprise piece by piece. There were so many explanations for the Administration's Iraq policy, opponents said, that it was impossible to trust any of them.
But after spending months complaining about the war's manifold justifications, the left is now able to remember only one: The WMDs, or, more accurately, the inability of American forces to unearth any so far.
One of the great ironies of this war is that those who once clamored to give UN weapons inspectors 'more time' (as much as a year) after four months of snooping around Iraq now believe that two months should have been more than plenty for US forces to complete the same job. (For that matter, they thought that American troops should have been able to locate Saddam Hussein's 'smoking gun' in less than two weeks.)
Yet as they were all too eager to point out just a few months ago, the war was never just about WMDs. It was about all the reasons the Bush Administration outlined, and in hindsight, most of those have been amply justified:
The Iraqi people have been liberated, and the periodic discovery of mass graves (most recently, one containing some 200 children's bodies, complete with dolls) underscores the depths of their former oppressors' wickedness. There has been no shortage of findings connecting Hussein to terrorists, most prominently the arrest of Abu Abbas. UN resolutions, including Security Council Resolution 1441 have been duly carried out, with the council's tacit, ex-post facto endorsement. A democratic Iraq is in the making, albeit slowly, and the liquidation of Islamofascism, Inc. is visibly underway just see how leaders in Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia have begun to squirm.
Even on the WMD front, the Armed Forces are doing better than some in the establishment press care to admit.
During the war, U.S. Marines seized a massive cache of Iraqi chemical decontamination equipment and chemical suits. And since the war, allied forces have discovered two Iraqi mobile biowarfare labs, which were not only prohibited under UN resolutions, but which the Iraqi regime vowed, repeatedly, not to possess. Critics have pooh-poohed these findings because they don't contain actual biological or chemical agents, but it's hard to imagine any benign purpose they might have served, and why if they weren't what they appear to be Hussein would have gone to such lengths to hide them.
But the hallmark of the left, both before the war and even in light of the many horrific discoveries that have followed it, has been to give Hussein the benefit of the doubt. The Bush Administration, having learned well the lessons of 9/11, took a more cautious approach.
Even in the unlikely case that, by the start of the war, Hussein no longer had any WMDs, he indisputably behaved as though he did, chasing out UN weapons in 1998 and refusing to cooperate with them in 2002. While his obstinacy could, in theory, have been little more than the manifestation of a disordered personality, it could also have been an indication of a feeble effort to conceal a diabolical scheme. Given his past attacks on three other nations, as well as his previous use of WMDs and his ongoing support of terrorists, that seemed the more likely case. From an American national-security standpoint, it was certainly the safer assumption to make.
It's probably true, as one senior military officer complained to Time magazine, 'There was a predisposition in this Administration to assume the worst about Saddam.' All things considered, that was a rather healthy predisposition to have.
And it wasn't only the U.S. that believed Hussein possessed WMDs. The entire UN Security Council backed Resolution 1441, which formally recognized 'the threat Iraq's non-compliance with Council resolutions and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles poses to international peace and security.' Before the war, left-wing critics often cited the WMDs as a reason not to invade, for fear that Hussein might use them against allied troops, or pass them along to terrorist sympathizers (a claim which may still prove true).
So far, none of the weapons has turned up, although U.S. forces have still only searched about a third of some 900 suspected sites. There's also the possibility that Hussein used dual-use facilities to conceal his WMD production stockpile, or that in the days leading up to the war, he either found some especially ingenious site to hide it or shipped it off to Syria.
For any number of reasons, Iraq's WMDs might not turn up any time soon, or at all. Either way, the moral legitimacy of the war remains unchanged. If Hussein didn't have WMDs, America was prudent to assume he did, and he was either a fool or a lunatic for refusing to prove otherwise.
In any case, Iraq and the world are both better off for the demise of his regime, dismantled for myriad reasons each good enough to stand on its own, and taken together, beyond reproach.
Chris Weinkopf is an editorial writer and columnist for the Los Angeles Daily News. To read his weekly Daily News column, click here. E-mail him at (email removed).
Make Comment View Comments Printable Article Email Article
Re: Rexerpt from the book "lying history"Ed Davis, DPM on 6/04/03 at 15:56 (120953)
My first negative response was when she introduced 'Hillarycare,' a health care 'reform' package that would have literally destroyed health care as we know it in the US.
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........bgcped on 6/04/03 at 16:01 (120955)
Good point John. I would submit that several large passenger jets, loaded with fule and people, being run into several skyscrapers and large buildings is a WMD.
Like I said that is the only thing the Bush haters can cling to. The operation went better and faster than expected. The biggest thing you can say is 'but they didnt find wmd, and if they dont this was all a farce'
In my previous post I said we can almost all agree that he needed to go. He had 12 years of 2nd chances. Please refer to my '12 years of cortisone injections' comment
Re: Rexerpt from the book "lying history"Peter R on 6/04/03 at 16:17 (120957)
and health care in this country has not been destoyed by the insurance bandits?
Re: Rexerpt from the book "lying history"john h on 6/04/03 at 16:57 (120958)
I lived in Little Rock along with Bill Clinton while he was Attorney General,Governor, and just a regular guy. This is a small community. Little Rock is around 160,000 people. Small enough that I have talked to then Governor Clinton on several occasions. Bill Clinton's activities with women were legendary long before he ever decided to run for office. You cannot keep secrets in a small town like this. Hillary, by the way is not beyond suspicion with one former local lawyer. No way did Hillary not know of Bills fooling around. I have not read any of Hillary's book or even any excerpts..
Re: Rexerpt from the book "lying history"BGCPed on 6/04/03 at 17:28 (120964)
I would think of the Canada thing myself or maybe we could set up a clinic in Jamaica or something. I have too much faith in our general populace to think they could really vote her in as President. She had to do polls to figure that NY was the ONLY place she could get a senate position. Last I saw she had a very very anti favorable when the entire US was polled
Re: Rexerpt from the book "lying history"marie on 6/04/03 at 18:38 (120969)
I like that. I have heard many nice things about New Zealand. I had a student that went there as a foriegn exchange student. She loved it. She told me that she saw ZZ Top in concert there and it was great.
Re: Rexerpt from the book "lying history"marie on 6/04/03 at 18:40 (120970)
I am with you on that. Insurance companies have to much control on healthcare.
Re: Rexerpt from the book "lying history"marie on 6/04/03 at 18:43 (120971)
Oh your on the right track...I don't think she'll run. So it looks like you guys get to stay. But Jaimaica would be nice about right now. The weather is still cold and gloomy here. I can't believe it's June.
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........marie on 6/04/03 at 18:56 (120973)
I see the author is an editorial writer. More opinions. It amazes me how news shows can spend an hour on one question that no one really knows the answer to. It's all what they think may be the answer. That's why I started this thread. I thought I'd be like a news reporter and pose a bunch of questions that no one can really answer factually. It's all in the question and evading too I suppose.
Well Ed, the congressional inquiry I am sure will ask questions that will have to be answered with facts and I doubt diversion like 'well we did this great thing so it makes this bad thing ok.' That's just my take on it. What is yours?
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........marie on 6/04/03 at 19:00 (120974)
Here is the original question.....
WMDs? Where we misled by our leaders? What Republican Senators have lended their support to the inquiry? Will an inquiry help exonerate the leaders of the U.S. and Great Britain?
So far neither Brian, Ed or John have answered it. Why is that fellas?
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........BGCPed on 6/04/03 at 21:56 (120986)
My opinion is what I stated before. Bush did what he felt he had to do. That is supported by over 70% Americans. I also think being 'exonerated' is a 'moot' issue. Bottom line is the people that support the action will support it. The people that didnt and dont like Bush will NEVER change their mind i.e. they dont like the man and dont like the action so a truckload of anthrax would not sway them.
A great example is the many on the left that supported Clinton and remained silent when he didnt get UN app to go into Bosnia, Somalia and a few more. While Milosevic bad Saddam is far worse. So from my perspective I dont need any 'proof' of WMD since I know he has ALREADY used them. He is a serial mass murderer and based on his actions in any given 1 week period in the last 20 years he needed to meet justice.
Hope I shed some light from the right
Re: Parliment and Congress will hold inquiry........marie on 6/04/03 at 22:28 (120992)
Well finally you answered the question. Thanks. You really didn't have too but I'm glad you did. Exonerated is a word that was brought up on the news I was watching. Actually almost all of the questions I listed were the questions the news media was posing. All of these questions were asked in about a 8 minute time period. It just goes to show you how asking people to answer hypothetical questions seems to draw them into the news.
And some of the polls....come on. I loved this one on CNN the other day. Do you think Scott Peterson is guilty? How is it going to help or not help anything. He'll be tried on the evidence. It doesn't matter what I think.
Why doesn't the media come up with real issues to poll. Like how many of you are unemployed? etc... Maybe we could come up with better questions right here on the board.
Re: You can bet the farm I WON'T be reading her book! I wouldn't waste my time or money! (NM)Necee on 6/05/03 at 00:01 (121004)
Re: Rexerpt from the book "lying history"Ed Davis, DPM on 6/06/03 at 12:28 (121147)
Yes. Unfortunately, Hillary wanted to turn even more authority over to insurance company health plans.
Re: Rexerpt from the book "lying history"Dorothy C. on 6/07/03 at 02:00 (121236)
Just a few comments: This seems to be a closed conversation among many of you who post amongst yourselves quite a bit, but I am going to insert myself and then 'butt out' because I feel compelled to say something about health care and then I will sign off. Many people who use this website spend a lot of their time, and express a lot of anguish, about their insurance coverage or lack thereof. The number one cause of bankrupticies in the US is health care debt and the second cause is credit card debt which is so high because people get into deep water when they have to use their credit cards to pay for their health care expenses.(See Cause #1) I absolutely support single-payer, universal health care coverage for all Americans and I think all Americans should support it. ALL Americans should have the same level of health care that our Congress people have! It is unconscienable that those same Congress people toss out that old meaningless cliche 'socialized medicine' - as if that makes an inherent evil - whenever the notion that the same Americans who support those Congress people in THEIR 'socialized medicine' system should have the same system. All polls show that the ONLY group of people satisfied with their health care in the US are those on Medicare i.e. 'socialized medicine' and OHMYGOODNESS! run by the government, something that (again, a destructive cliche) is anathema to people on the right, who have successfully equated 'government run' with something terrible - an absolute lie! Many of those 'bad' government-run ideas have historically been what contributed to America's greatness, versus simply enriching a small elite. Shall I remind you all that 'socialized' Social Security was implemented because elderly people were dying in poverty and want; Medicare ('socialized medicine' for a select group) was implemented because people were dying for want of medical care or the means to pay for it. Americans pooling resources together to help the larger group is a beloved tradition to our marvelous system and it has made us good. What has hurt us is the pervasive idea that 'special treatment and privilege' is ok for some, but not for most. All you have to do is 'follow the money.' The actual redistribution of wealth in this country has occurred from the lower and middle-class into the accounts of the wealthiest. Nowhere is this truer than when it comes to health care.
Final point: Hillary actually did not do anything to further health care reform. At that time, the country was actually ripe and ready for universal health care - all polls showed it and unemployment and the economy were in bad shape at that time just after Bush I and early Clinton - it was unprecedented that the country was in a majority in favor of universal health care. Hillary - and Bill - usurped that enthusiasm and destroyed all potential for progressive change and reform. Remember, they received huge donations from big insurance companies and remember the wealthiest companies in the US are insurance companies and remember, Hillary was criticised at the time for the secrecy of the proceedings until, after it was all a done deal, some of the Q & A was televised. Some of their biggest donors were insurance companies, trial lawyers, the AMA. Hillary gets credit from Democrats for 'trying' to promote health care reform but being trounced by 'the right' in spite of all her saintly efforts. It is myth. Hillary and Bill have manipulated the myth, but it is myth all the same. And it hurts health care reform and it has hurt all Americans. In fact, the opposite is true: she and Bill destroyed that moment of hope for change and in one fell swoop, got credit from Democrats for doing what was, in truth, very destructive and anti-Democrat, blame and ridicule from Republicans for doing what they wanted done anyway, and blessings from big insurance and the AMA. What a coup. And ALL of those people have 'Cadillac' health care gratis you and me, while the rest of us - if we are lucky enough to have jobs and/or health care coverage at all - are left with the debacle of 'managed care' - and now, the health care system is once again in increasingly deep trouble, while unemployment is once again rising (highest in nine years, most recent reports). I beg all of you, who actually are users of the health care system in one way or another if your health conditions described on this website are any indication, to read and study and think and don't just fall for the propaganda of those who have a vested self-interest in keeping the status quo, which may be good for a few, but it's bad for the many.
Howard Dean and Dennis Kucinich have some original, progressive, worthwhile positions on health care. Hillary and Bill never did. But then, I submit, that Hillary and Bill have never really been true Democrats. The cult of personality around them has been a very damaging force to the Democratic party and to America.
If people don't see the devastating progression of events that our governmental 'leaders' have led us through, both Republican and Democrat, then they must be blind: first they removed the safety nets that protected people in time of need (are you all immune to times of need? Are you sure you will always be immune to times of need?); then they so destroyed the potential for single payer, universal health care that it has become equated with something completely beyond consideration, and then they have so damaged the economy that unemployment is again on the rise (of course, one can always go to China, Mexico, Guatamala, India, etc. to find one's old job - that's where they are going, going, gone). I am glad to see other nations prosper, but I don't want the US to become a third-world country in the process; and then they urged - and in some cases forced - American workers to invest in the stock market for retirement savings, where all of those honest, non-greedy, corporate CEOs have enjoyed using your money to fund their lifestyles while the rest of us watched our savings go down the tube, and they permitted and, in fact, rewarded the removal of American corporate headquarters to 'off shore' locations to further rob the tax coffers in the name of greed and exploitation, and now we have the added wisdom of, again, a hugely growing national debt, wars, tax cuts (for whom? could it be those same folks who move their operations to China with headquarters on Isla Paradiso?) - and yet, some have the amazing gall to say that universal health care is 'the worst thing that could happen.' Give me a break! The worst thing that could happen for whom?? The main way that the educational system in this country is failing is in its failure to educate us for intelligent citizenry, i.e. civics and analytical thinking and reading and research. Folks, we elect representatives, not an aristocracy. Taxes are a fact of life and are not inherently evil. The question is: how are our taxes used? What kind of country do we want?
I get very frustrated when myths are perpetuated so often and for so long that they take on the aura of truth. The myth of Hillary being a proponent of true health care reform is a Big Myth. If you like celebrity and the 'movie star' mentality, then the Clintons and their 'FOBs' are for you. If you value a true Democratic point of view, then they are not. Republicans used to be conservative and conservative used to mean fiscally conservative and socially 'mind your own business.' How things have changed!
I would urge you all to take a good look at the records and positions of Democrat presidential candidates Howard Dean and Dennis Kucinich.
I wish you all well and much good health and open minds and open eyes.
Re: Rexerpt from the book "lying history"john h on 6/07/03 at 09:51 (121247)
I think the greatest road block to Univeral Health Care in the U.S. is any proposal that would limit you to a choice of a few Doctors. Even Medicare receipants will fight that. When I read many of you post about waiting months to see a specialist it gives me the willys. I can walk into my family Doctors office 6 days a week without an appointment and be seen within 30 minutes. If I want to see an orthopedic surgeon I call an make an apointment. Not all Doctors accept Medicare but most do. Our problems exist for the self employed and those employed who are not covered by insurance. There is still a large segment of young workers who will not even buy insurance even though they can afford it.
Re: Rexerpt from the book "lying history"Ed Davis, DPM on 6/07/03 at 10:42 (121248)
You have done a good job in revealing the myth that Hillary promoted universal healthcare. Hillary's plan was a gift for the big insurance companies that supported it. A thorough study of her plan shows that the biggest insurers would have monopolized healthcare as pseudo-utilities.
Milton Freidman, a very conservative economist, has proposed a national health care plan which is basically a catastrophic plan for everyone. In other words, no one could go bankrupt due to healthcare costs. The most intelligent users of healthcare in my practice are small business owners. They have high deductibles, negotiate fees and try to make intelligent, informed choices about their care. You will almost never see such an individual ask for plantar fascial release surgery because they cannot afford to take time away from their businesses and must spend their healthcare dollars wisely.
Re: Rexerpt from the book "lying history"Dr. Z on 6/08/03 at 12:00 (121302)
Medicare is the best run healthcare system in our country . It also since I last took a look has the lowest administrated overhead. Its a very choice good to expand to the entire public but there is no way the other healtcare insurance players are going to allow this with the hugh profits
Re: Rexerpt from the book "lying history"Dorothy C. on 6/09/03 at 15:45 (121391)
But John H., most of us already are limited to a choice of a few doctors!
That is how most managed care systems work. You are limited to a choice of a few doctors and, the most maddening of all, you have to go through your 'primary care' doctor for any and all concerns - and that person determines whether and what and whom you will see/do/be treated and how.
That person may be less informed than you are about your condition and treatments, but no matter.That person may provide no service, inadequate service or inappropriate service, but no matter. John, it seems to me that you are very fortunate and, in my experience, atypical in your ability to walk into your doctor's office without an appointment and be seen within 30 minutes. For urgent care, my family can be seen usually same day or within 24 hours, but we never know who we will see and it better be determined to be urgent. The managed care provider frowns on use of urgent care and emergency care is really out of bounds. For routine care/issues that are not necessarily emergencies, we are talking MONTHS to wait. I have relatives who are on Medicare and they receive excellent care and attention for any and all health issues. We all pay for that and that is fine; I am just saying that we all should be receiving that same level of care! My family and I do not abuse or overuse the medical system in any way; we use the system very rarely to almost never and only when there is no other choice - so we are not and never have been the source of unusual expense to the whole system. But we pay and suffer the consequences just like the heavy user and the system does not serve either the very sick or the fairly well. It serves the insurance companies and the doctors.
Managed care is only managed for the patient, as if we are undisciplined children, and the outcome of that system for patients has been a reduced level of quality of care.
Re: Rexerpt from the book "lying history"Sharon W on 6/10/03 at 10:27 (121436)
Marie, Dr. Ed,
New Zealand is a terrific place! We went there once, kind of by accident, on our way to Mellbourne -- and it was a delightful surprise! The country was beautiful, and the people were, too...
Re: Rexerpt from the book "lying history"john h on 6/10/03 at 10:54 (121442)
Dorthy: I of course was not under Medicare until I was 65. Up until I was 21 I had no insurance. At that time I joined the military and came under military care for me and my family. In the militray at least up unitl I retired you went to the base hospital when you were sick and just waited your turn for who ever was on duty. You might wait an hour or you might wait 4 hours. If you needed a specialist you usually had to be referred to a nearby town. It was not great but it was free. Medicare seems to me to be well run. Most Hospitals and Doctors accept their payment which requires a copay of 20% by the patient. I had a kidney stone removed several years ago by Lithotriptor which required a visit to the emergency room and overnight stay in the hospital. The billing from the Hospital,Urologist, Anathesologist, Lithotripsy,etc was in excess of $10,000 and Medicare's approved payment for this procedure was on the order of $3000 which the Doctors and Hospitals have to accept so you can see they very much control cost. Like other Insurance they will not allow some procedures such as ESWT for PF in most states but I think it is better than many private plans. You currently pay $55 per month with a 20% copay and have a $100 yearly deductable. Medications are still not covered which can be a killer. Some chronic meds like meds for diabetes are covered. There are three Doctors in my family clinic where I have been going for 30 years. They are there 6 days a week and I can request which ever one I want to see. They do not even accept appointments. First come first serve. They readily refer you to specialist if they think you need one.Insurance for the 20% copay is available and reasibable.