Comments on: Ed Schultz on Single Payer

By: moonbat

moonbat — Fri, 08 May 2009 21:20:51 +0000

Bill H – Yeah, I winced a little when he “explained” single payer. He’s a bit of a blunt instrument in that regard. And it’s not rocket science. Ed has a national soapbox now, and so he should put a little more thought into something he and so many are so passionate about – before opening his mouth.

By: Bill H

Bill H — Fri, 08 May 2009 16:51:18 +0000

I wish he, and others, would do a better job of distinguishing between health care and health insurance. Single payer is health care, health insurance is a money making scheme which makes profit by denying health care. One of the great con jobs of all time, and this argument should have been resolved before it even started.

Stabenow rolls out the “Most people are happy with what they have now and want to keep it” nonsense. The best answer to that is, “Wouldn’t you rather have something that you didn’t have to worry about losing?”

By: Alan

Alan — Fri, 08 May 2009 15:40:54 +0000

The uniquely American way is to ensure the profitability of the insurance industry. This is done by government burdening itself with the riskier, cash absorbing parts while letting the private companies ride the gravy train. A couple examples of this are government flood insurance and the prescription drug benefit for the elderly. If we don’t get single player, the whole insurance industry should be forced to function nonprofit. Any other solution won’t bring down the cost, IMHO.

signed by a former Republican and former conservative (some of us are finally waking up)

By: TurboKitty

TurboKitty — Fri, 08 May 2009 15:36:37 +0000

For profit Health care has to go and it has to go now. I am a type 1 diabetic and have been for 39 years, I take very good care of myself however for the past 3 years due to unforseen circumstances, I have been without any kind of health insurance what so ever. I can’t afford health care and the one time I had to go to a doctor under emergency circumstances, I couldn’t pay. Everytime someone like me sees a doctor and cannot pay the premiums go up for people who do have insurance … something is very very wrong with that picture. Makes me wonder what would happen if everyone went to the doctor and didn’t pay … what would the insurance companies and pharmacorp do then?

By: Kevin K.

Kevin K. — Fri, 08 May 2009 14:21:04 +0000

I’ve never been a fan of Ed’s radio show, but I’m pleasantly surprised by how good his television show has been. As you noted, he’s done a pretty good job of pushing health care out front.

By: Pat

Pat — Fri, 08 May 2009 13:53:51 +0000

Bgi mouth, good heart I think. The first time I heard him I thought is was Rush Limbaugh gone over to the side of forces for good… Well, the voice sounded similar anyway.

…glad to hear he’s adding his drops to the bucket.

It takes all kinds doesn’t it? Big, oafish, affable ones like Limbaugh. Cerebral, eclectic, reflective types like Hartmann. Caustic, angry ones like Mike Molloy. Even clear thinking, teeth grinding, no-nonsense Buddhists. LOL.

By: Chief

Chief — Fri, 08 May 2009 11:43:27 +0000

I don’t want my tax dollars going to a CEO of an insurance company.

Single-payer is the only way to go.

By: Marshall

Marshall — Fri, 08 May 2009 10:38:21 +0000

That was an interesting piece. Of course, being “at the table” doesn’t actually mean that you’ll be listened to, but it would be a step.

This is off topic, but are you following Andrew Sullivan’s posts on Buddhism ?

By: csm

csm — Fri, 08 May 2009 05:19:41 +0000

Stabenow’s full of it. The bottom line is the insurance companies have bought and paid for her, Baucus and the rest of them. They know single payer is a threat to the insurance company gravy train, which their paymasters have charged the senators with keeping on track.