The Apology That Wasn't - Joe Wilson

Wow, what a different point of view I have from you Bea. I was so proud of the Congressman for finally standing up and telling the President the truth. I wish that a larger part of the republicans would have said he was a liar - I wish they would have made more noise and interrupted his speech, then I wish they would have walked out - walked away from a speech that really ticked me off. You see, as passionate as the left is for getting government run health care - the right is equally emboldened. The President's speech at that point was untruthful - the House plan that was currently the only plan to be proposed did not explicitly prohibit illegal aliens from using a government run health care system - that's just the truth. Also, keep in mind, the President just finished calling a VERY large part Mr. Wilson's constituents liars - he was reacting to that point in particular.
On a little separate issue - I can't believe that there is an actual written rule that says that Congressman cannot call the President a liar. I don't care if it's Obama, Bush, Clinton, Reagan, whomever - If the President is blatantly caught in a lie - he or she should be called out on it - and the Congressman that has the balls to do so should be thanked.

I could not agree more with SEAN....BRAVO!

Bea, if this website were up and running during the Bush era would you be on here defending him? That poor man (and GREAT man) took alot of heat for KEEPING US SAFE which by the way is the ONLY thing the united states gov't was set up to do, not try and control everything and rule us like dictators. The left just loves thier golden boy obama, and anytime anyone says anything negative about the man (and there is PLENTY of negative things to say) they automatically get very defensive. He is JUST a man and JUST our president and respect is something EARNED. He has a LONG way to go before he gets mine.

I just read were Wilson took in $750,000 in 48 hrs...So i guess alot of others feel the same way that Obama is lying..
How come its all right to cheer and applaud,just don't boo and say ,You Lie..How come they don't want it part of the bill were as you have to show proof of citizenship to get this health care..They may say no illegals can get health care,BUT IF THEY DON"T ASK HOW WILL THEY KNOW..Thats why Wilson said You Lie...

Blah Ha Ha. He said, Great Man...

You mean Great Spender and Chief, right?

Sorry, back to fair and balenced News on MSNBC.

Congressman Wilson needs to learn some manners.

Interrupting anyone while they are speaking is as immature as it is rude.

Sean, it's called Robert's Rules of Order and it keeps meetings civil.

From factcheck.org -- Illegal Immigrants
Obama said that his proposal would not cover illegal immigrants, a remark that prompted Republican Rep. Joe Wilson of South Carolina to shout "You lie!"

Obama: There are also those who claim that our reform effort will insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false – the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.

The president is correct: The House bill contains a section (Sec. 246) titled "NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS," which states: "Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States."

Give me a break. How can anyone think that this behavior is acceptable?

Bush lied us into a war that has cost us thousands of lives and over 900 billion dollars and no one yelled out from the well of the Congress. Anyone remember the "yellow cake" statement in his state of the union?

http://factsaboutreform.org/

Illegals will not be covered by the insurance presented in the bill. They will, however, be cared for by default because doctors and hospitals honor the Hippocratic oath.

Can anyone imagine a country where a seriously injured human being is denied care by a health care professional because they are not documented? Are their folks with so much hate in their hearts that they actually want people to die on emergency-room doorsteps because they are undocumented? Now that would be a "death panel". If need be -- care for the sick, check their papers, if they're illegal -- deport.

Why not mandate that while treating illegals, hospitals be required by law to notify the police and have them taken into custody after their free treatment?

Bea its about getting health insurance,not walking into ER or being help at an accidents..If this all goes thru every one will have health insurance...It about getting the insurance in the first place..and when you apply for the public option they should ask for proof of citizenship..In this bill that is not required..They say no illegals will be covered ,but how will they know....When you go to the ER they ask to see you insurance card...

Also does anyone know how much can i get health insurance thru the public option.What will is cost me to buy into it..There are people out their right know that make over 50,000 a year and don't buy health insurance,so what will make them buy this now..

Hi everyone,
I really want to make myself clear here - I'm equal opportunity. I wish someone would have said a few words to President Bush also. I don't believe he knowingly lead us into war lying, but I certainly believe that some of the actions of the last half of the first term and a good portion of the second were questionable too.
Maybe it's time we kick Robert and his rules out of the government also. Everyone in political office is so afraid to say what's on their mind they don't do anything worthwhile at all - in fear of upsetting someone.
I hope when the republicans gain power, and they lie (which they will too), someone tells them exactly what they're feeling.
Remember, first, the President was not talking about HR 3200 specifically - he was talking about the Health Care Reform that the he wanted, and has said that HR 3200 still had some work to be done to it. Also, HR 3200 has no definition or verification process to determine eligibility - from CBS news:

"Though Mr. Obama on Wednesday insisted his proposals would not apply to illegal immigrants, he told CBS News' Katie Couric in July that there may need to be an exception for children."

"The one exception that I think has to be discussed is how are we treating children," he said. "Partly because if you've got children who may be here illegally but are still in playgrounds or at schools, and potentially are passing on illnesses and communicable diseases, that aren't getting vaccinated, that I think is a situation where you may have to make an exception."

Then at the beginning of the same article:

The legislation produced by the House of Representatives also expressly prohibits illegal residents from getting tax credits. As CBSNews.com's Declan McCullagh reports, however, the House bill does not restrict illegal residents from purchasing health care off the proposed health insurance exchange -- a marketplace of both public and private plans. Some illegal immigrants already obtain private insurance now, through their employers or individual plans.

In the House bill, illegal immigrants would also be subject to fines if they did not purchase health care, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service.

Democrats have been reluctant to expand citizenship verification programs to more government-funded health care programs because studies have shown that such requirements for Medicaid have increased administrative costs for states and have made it difficult for some Americans to join the program, the New York Times reports.

Mark,
The answer to your question, "what will make them buy it", is that the Obama plan calls for a fine if you do not.

"The one exception that I think has to be discussed is how are we treating children," he said. "Partly because if you've got children who may be here illegally but are still in playgrounds or at schools, and potentially are passing on illnesses and communicable diseases, that aren't getting vaccinated, that I think is a situation where you may have to make an exception."

I find this to be a good exception, whether it makes it into the bill or not. Undocumented children are in our schools. In fact, in our rural region, where illegal farm workers are prevalent and the kids are enrolled in many of our Genesee County schools, kids without access to health care could be a local public health concern.

Regardless of whether the "gentleman from South Carolina" was right or wrong, he was out of order and disrespectful. He was lock-step with the ditto heads that have disrupted town meetings across the country- only this time it was an address to Congress on national television. As often as I have sat in front of my television and reacted rudely to a jerk spewing lies and nonsense (Johnson, Nixon, Bush I & Bush II, Reagan, Ashcroft, Gingrich, Agnew, Ollie North, Poindexter, Scowcroft, Cheney, etc.) I have never witnessed such a breach of decorum by a Senator or congressmen in response to a president.

If this is a trend, then the brown shirts can't be far way. Welcome to the new Reichstag. Who will lead the putsch... Gary Miller? Richard Pombo, John Doolittle, Duncan Hunter, Jerry Lewis? Sarah Palin?

Posted by Mark Potwora on September 11, 2009 - 8:32pm
I just read were Wilson took in $750,000 in 48 hrs...So i guess alot of others feel the same way that Obama is lying..
How come its all right to cheer and applaud,just don't boo and say ,You Lie..How come they don't want it part of the bill were as you have to show proof of citizenship to get this health care..They may say no illegals can get health care

--- It's okay to cheer and applaud, because it's what you do when you agree with what is said - it doesn't matter if you're majority or minority party. When you disagree with what is said, you stay seated, silent, and write it down as you prepare your rebuttal - again, doesn't matter which party you're in. If you look at many of Bush's addresses of joint sessions, a big deal was made over groans. A big deal would've been made over the signs and bills members of the minority party were holding this week, but that got overshadowed. You don't speak in the House until the Speaker recognizes you and approves of the reason you wish to speak. It's etiquette, and it's also in the rules. The Speaker polices the House. The Sergeant-At-Arms enforces the rules. And it is his/her job to control the flow of debate by questioning why a Representative has stood at his desk, and it is his/her job to approve of the reason they wish to speak. Going forward, he may be passed over every single time he stands at his desk to be recognized - being totally useless in the flow of debate.

And Rep Wilson didn't receive 750 grand in contributions... his opponent did, Rob Miller.

Rob Miller's Actblue page is now $845,560.

A new poll of Rep. Joe Wilson's (R-SC) district by Public Policy Polling says that the controversial Congressman may have seriously landed himself in hot water through his "You lie!" outburst -- and is now trailing his Democratic opponent by one point.

Democratic candidate Rob Miller, who has received a ton of money from donors around the country since Wednesday night, now has 44%, to Wilson's 43%. The two both have 75% support among their own parties, but Miller leads among independents by 47%-39%. Only 29% of the total pool of respondents approved of Wilson's actions at the speech, compared to 62% who disapproved.

Great headline -- No lie! Poll shows Joe Wilson trailing in reelection bid
http://blogs.reuters.com/frontrow/2009/09/11/no-lie-poll-shows-joe-wils…

Re: Wilson

Wilson is frankly a bit short of a full deck. This is in addition to his outburst problem. I heard on the news that he had apologized. Maybe MSNBC isn't a reliable source.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32767813/ns/politics-health_care_reform/

From MSNBC:

<i>WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama accepted a South Carolina Republican's apology for shouting, "You lie!" during his speech to Congress, and House Democratic leaders showed no interest in sanctions against Rep. Joe Wilson.

Obama said Thursday that Wilson apologized "quickly and without equivocation" and the congressman told reporters the shout-out was "spontaneous."

"We all make mistakes," Obama told reporters, a day after Wilson stunned the president and his colleagues with his outburst. </i>

It is also inappropriate for congressmen to boo during a state of the union address, but they have. Not sure if they apologized.

It could have been worse, much worse:

LOL!

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/1yJVdkCBKCI&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl… name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/1yJVdkCBKCI&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl…; type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

If Mr. Obama was man enough to accept the apology and move on, I believe we should as well.

On a side note, it struck me as odd that Wilson was so enraged over the statement about illegals having coverage. There were other questionable statements which could have been found more offensive.

I get the facts from Factcheck.org. Good site for filtering the muck.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/09/obamas-health-care-speech/

Just another Republican nutjob boor. They are all too common these days. Anti-education right wing NASCAR fans who can't spell and don't read. They consider themselves informed because they watch Fox News Propoganda and listen to a self inflicted deaf drug abusing bigmouth. In years past they would be considered the fringe and rightfully ignored. Now the fringe element of the party are the moderates and the majority are a bunch of ignorant conspiracy theorists who scan the night skys for UFO's. Go forward BHO and do what needs to be done. That's why the MAJORITY, a TRUE MAJORITY, not plurality, elected you as OUR PRESIDENT. We're absolutely going to do it for a second term too, just wait and see.
Oh, and thank you again President Obama for keeping us safe since January 2009.

Here's a little comedic relief form late night host, Craig Ferguson. This is hilarious no matter what side you fall on --

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/11/craig-ferguson-devotes-en_n_28…

I love Craig Ferguson! "Joe Wilson got his manners the same place Michael Vick learned pet care." Very funny.

Uhhhh....Didn't Bush/Cheney LIE to get us into a war??

Don't blame ME, I voted for Ron Paul!

Hmmm-one thing as far as I'm concerned-ALL POLITICIANS LIE!!!!!! They are all snakes that can't be trusted- it's getting to the point where I hate to vote-as they all say one thing and do another.It's basically voting the lesser of two evils......

Bravo George, couldn't agree more.

I find it interesting that the biggest story of the day turned out to be Joe Wilson. He was wrong for what he did, and should be disciplined according to House rules on decorum. That being said, the left needs to stop feigning outrage over this and get on with the punishment. It was only 4 years ago during President Bush's 2005 State of the Union address that Democrats booed and catcalled his comments on Social Security reform. There was no media outrage, and no calls for discipline then, so the Democratic response is political at best.
The reason I find it interesting that this is the big story, is that the speech itself was suppossed to be a turning point in the healthcare debate and finally clear up all misconceptions and outline a clear and detailed plan. The fact that in the days following, Joe Wilson is the big story and not the speech itself is evidence that it lacked impact and substance. The only new information given in the speech is the drop in uninsured from 47 million to 30 million. From the beginning of his campaign to now, Obama has maintained that there are between 45 and 48 million uninsured Americans. The number never went above or below that. In the speech he quoted the number at 30 million. Even on a teleprompter a 30 doesn't look like a 47.
Finally, one of his advisors pointed out that if he was going to tell the country that illegal aliens would not be covered, he had to stop counting them in the number of uninsured. Ironically, the very next day Kent Conrad(D) and Max Baucus(D) ammended the legislation to include proof of citizenship. Now it is interesting to point out that Republicans had twice proposed proof of citizenship during committee and were voted down both times along party lines.
So the crux of this situation is, that although Wilson was wrong in the time and place of his outburst, his statement was not inaccurate.
I think the left has handled the story all wrong, the longer "you lie" remains the news, the breakthrough speech fades away, Joe Wilson rakes in donations to spite the Democrats and healthcare reform goes farther and farther into the distance.

Eugene Robinson, Pulitzer Prize winning author, described the behavior of Wilson and his colleagues best in this piece from the Washington Post -- No Way to Treat a President http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/10/AR20090…

"Anyone who watched Wednesday night as President Obama explained his health-care reform proposals to Congress saw a chief executive making what sounded like a genuine appeal for bipartisanship -- and his opponents behaving like a bunch of spoiled first-graders. Obama should ignore them, even if they hold their breath until they turn blue."

The difference is the first graders that I know have much better manners.

From the 2008 Census Bureau figures on the unisured -- http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/chronrx/detail?entry_id=47366 Are illegals counted? I'm not sure.

Obama has kept us safe for about 8 months, Bush for 8 years.

John - I'm sure that the families of the 911 victims would beg to differ with you. 9/11/01 was under Bush's watch.

Beth,
It has been clear that that started under Clinton. He was the one who made it illegal for the FBI to talk with the CIA.

Everytime there was an attack on us (the USS Cole, etc), nothing really happened to the bad guys. OBL even said we had no heart.

You can try to blame Bush, that's ok. But don't lie and not blame Clinton.

You can say that Bush kept us safe since 9/11 but for 8 years? I don't think so. I know I didn't feel very safe that day.

On 9/11/01, nobody felt safe. Of course, that day, we had no idea what was really going on, did we. It was a day or so before it became clear who attacked us. Until then, 99.9% of Americans never heard of OML.

Hi Lorie :)

Re: Are illegals counted?

From factcheck.org - http://factcheck.org/2009/09/obamas-health-care-speech/

<i>Choosing Words Carefully

Some of the president’s factual claims, while accurate, were notable for his careful wording.

Obama: There are now more than 30 million American citizens who cannot get coverage.

“Citizens” is the operative word here. And even so, the 30 million figure is an understatement. <b>The official Census figure for 2007 was actually 45.7 million persons in the U.S., but that figure includes an estimated 10 million who are not U.S. citizens, including 5.6 million who are here illegally, according to the National Institute for Health Care Management Foundation.</b> That still leaves about 35.7 million U.S. citizens without health coverage in 2007, well above the president’s figure. And hours after the president spoke, Census released new figures for 2008, showing the total number of uninsured went up slightly, to 46.3 million.</i>

So did Obama lie,when he said no illegals would be covered..Why were they including them in the total uninsured count..Why did Baucus and Conrad ammend the legislation to include proof of citizenship the next day...Seems like someone was streching the truth...And maybe because of Wilson calling out the President on this something did get done to make sure they aren't covered..

Lets thank Fox News for calling out Acorn for all there misgivings..Because of them we won't have ACORN having anything to do with the census count..And lets thank them also for bringing to light Van Jones, President Obama's point man on “green” jobs,for all of his questionable back ground activities ..If we left this up to NBC,CBS,ABC, none of this would of come to light..

And also i do think Bush lied about the weapons that Sadam Hussain had...And i voted for him..I just wish you Obama supporters would admit that he is wrong on certian things..Cap and Trade,and Health care..And that he does lie to make his arguements...

Hundred of thousands of people marched on Washington DC today to protest all these spending policies of Obama..Are they all just crazy wingnuts ..

Go to factcheck.org and see for your self. <em>"Overall, Obama got good marks for clarity and accuracy from at least one expert who’s sometimes been critical. John Sheils, senior vice president of the Lewin Group, which has analyzed the House bill and health care proposals, told us that there was “a lot of stuff you could quibble with” in the president’s speech, but overall he was “impressed” with the way Obama explained a “hugely complicated issue.” “I think in the main of it, I think he did pretty well.”</em>

The lies are coming from the vitriolic, fringe -- http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/personalities/chain-email/state… This is from politifact (nonpartisan fact checking site) This is a list of the viral emails that have been circulating from the fringe for months. I received one in my inbox on Friday, I wasn't surprised to see it 6th one form the top. These are the lies, Mark.

From NY Times columnist Maureen Dowd http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/13/opinion/13dowd.html-- <em>"I’ve been loath to admit that the shrieking lunacy of the summer — the frantic efforts to paint our first black president as the Other, a foreigner, socialist, fascist, Marxist, racist, Commie, Nazi; a cad who would snuff old people; a snake who would indoctrinate kids — had much to do with race."</em>

We voted, Mark. 53% of us voted for environmental legislation. We voted for Cap and Trade. Progressives and most Democrats believe what the scientists and the research is telling us regarding the seriousness of global temperature change. And armed with scientific facts come the need to reduce carbon emissions to protect this Earth for our children and grandchildren. Cap and Trade worked in 1990 and saved our lakes and rivers from acid rain. http://www.epa.gov/airmarkt/cap-trade/docs/ctresults.pdf There is no reason why it won't work with carbon emissions.

We voted for health care reform, Mark. It was a campaign promise. We expect the President to fulfill the platform that he ran on.

For too many, this is about hatred and the delegitimizing of our duly elected Commander in Chief. I'm not broadbrushing. There are many people that simply have strong ideological differences and can debate the issues without the vitriol, but unfortunately the screamers are drowning out reasonable voices.

It is clear that with the 5 or 6 bills out there now, illegals would have been given insureance.

We'll see what comes out when they put all the bills togther and send one to Obama.

But so far, he has not shown we can trust him.

Who's "we", John?

Well, among the 4.4 million documented is my uninsured daughter in law.

Let's be very afraid. The people with the darker complexions, that are here picking your fruits and vegetables, want to get their grubby hands on your health care. Not true, John. For the most part they're here to do the jobs that you and I aren't doing. When they do get hurt, like I said up thread, we will be paying. Hospital emergency rooms do not turn people away.

What we need next is an immigration bill. Let's see how well that goes over. Health care has been such a picnic.

They're writing stronger language into the Senate bill to appease you, John. http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/09/11/politics/politicalhotsheet/entr…
<em>After President Obama on Wednesday said his proposed health care reforms would not apply to illegal immigrants, Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) shouted out, "You lie!"
To ensure that new programs or benefits created through health care reform do not apply to illegal residents, Sen. Max Baucus and his bipartisan "gang of six" legislators from the Senate Finance Committee are reportedly considering adding a citizen verification component to their health care bill, which should be unveiled next week. </em>

But. lets clear something up right now. There was NEVER any provision in any of the proposed bills to give insurance to illegals. The only thing the President mentioned in that interview was children and public health risks.

So here's your conundrum: <em>Democrats have been reluctant to expand citizenship verification programs to more government-funded health care programs because studies have shown that such requirements for Medicaid have increased administrative costs for states and have made it difficult for some Americans to join the program, the New York Times reports.

In the case of six states where the program was reviewed by a congressional committee, the Times reports, verification increased federal costs by $8.3 million but only detected eight illegal immigrants using Medicaid. </em>
New state mandates.

Bea,
The lies are coming from both left and the right. My objection to most of this is the failure to admit both sides have lied or tried to hide things in this "bill" so far.

And the beat goes on... Nixon Lied, Bush I&II certainly lied, Kennedy Lied, Lyndon Bains and his co conspiritor Robert McNamara were compulsive liars, And how about waving a finger and saying I never had sex with that woman??? They ALL lie. That is not the point. The congressman was wrong with his outburst. Save it for the floor of congress, then call the President a liar if you want. But the point is well taken, the emphasis was taken off Health Care and shifted to the outburst. Wasting the Presidents Addresss to Congress. How about talking about Health Care Reform, and not Health Insurance?? I think ALL American citizens should have GOOD Health Care. Don't Insurance Companies pay the bills they are presented by Medical Organizations and personel?? Why are they now the villian? Get back on track and get Health Care for every American Citizen. That shouldn't take all this time and debate..

Insurance companies are the "villians" to take your mind off what was in the first bills floated out there. Now that people have seen what was in some of them, like HR 3200, things are getting better.

Nobody likes to pay insurance, for anything. So they are nice targets. And they do things wrong sometimes. But every State and the Feds. alread have offices to watch them.

If the goal is to help cover more legal people, then let us have true tort reform first, then insureance regulation reform next. Let me buy health insurance across state lines, to help lower costs.

Then increase funding for more doctors, something the Obama plan does not do.

Do that first, before you tell me the Public Option/single payer plan is needed.

John,

Thought I would enter the fray here to address some of the things you said.

You repeat, in your mind, the fact that this health care plan would insure illegal immigrants. That is false. You can deny it, but Lorie's links prove it. Lorie's links aren't from some partisan website. They come straight from the source of the bill! What better source than the bill itself?

Factcheck.org is also non-partisan and they have been known to anger Democrats AND Republicans because they speak the truth. They are a good resource. You should use it.

Can't figure out the love affair that the opposition has with the insurance CEO's. They represent the real "death panels". I know who gets between me and my doctor and me and my pharmacist because I have experienced it. The person on the phone from the insurance company that stamps DENIAL on a procedure or a drug. It has happened to me numerous times.

And again, John, you heard in the President's speech. Tort reform will be used as a bargaining chip to get this much needed reform passed. The President wants this to be a bi-partisan effort.

John,

I, as a young high schooler at the time, knew who Osama Bin Laden was prior to Sept. 11. There were others who knew as well. The attacks on Sept. 11 weren't his coming out party.

Also, you charge the following:

<blockquote>"It has been clear that that started under Clinton. He was the one who made it illegal for the FBI to talk with the CIA.

Everytime there was an attack on us (the USS Cole, etc), nothing really happened to the bad guys. OBL even said we had no heart.

You can try to blame Bush, that's ok. But don't lie and not blame Clinton."</blockquote>

This didn't start under Clinton. Any terrorism expert will tell you that. This started long before Clinton in the days when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. This dates back to Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. Now, Barack Obama is included in the list of presidents who have had to live in a world where Osama Bin Laden was an active threat against peace and democracy.

I don't blame Bush completely for 9/11. But I will blame him for ignoring the specific threat of 9/11. There were signs in the first several months of the Bush presidency that pointed to the fact that terrorists were looking at striking within the United States. It happened early in the Clinton presidency (within the first few weeks, actually) and it happened within the first eight months of the Bush presidency. Bush had the luxury of being warned. He and his administration did not take the warning. Richard Clarke, a counterterrorism expert who served under four presidents, said as much.

But the general threat of Osama Bin Laden has existed for a few decades now.

"It is clear that with the 5 or 6 bills out there now, illegals would have been given insureance."

Proof? All of the links provided to date have proven you to be wrong. So if you are going to make such a claim, you might want to provide a link.

"We'll see what comes out when they put all the bills togther and send one to Obama.

But so far, he has not shown we can trust him."

Examples? I wish I had the ability to judge a president by his first eight months in office. I don't have that kind of ability. I can discuss individual issues, but saying you can't trust him at this early stage (he does serve for four years, after all). With Bush, it took his second term for America really to oppose him in a bipartisan manner. But in his first term, he had a lot of support, especially during his first year or so in office.

"Bea,
The lies are coming from both left and the right. My objection to most of this is the failure to admit both sides have lied or tried to hide things in this "bill" so far."

It is impossible to hide something in a bill. That is just an excuse for those who don't actually read the bill. Either they read an executive summary of the bill or they get a summary fed to them by a staffer. So if it's not in that summary, then it's considered to be "hiding" in the bill.

Hiding in a bill is a lazy excuse. Basically, it is an admission that you haven't read the bill. Even if a bill is 1,000 pages long, you have staffers that can divide up the bill and read it. Or (here's a noble idea) read it yourself (that's directed at the representative, not you John).

I haven't seen where the progressive movement has lied about any of this. We have challenged members of the Democratic Party to support a more progressive bill. We haven't lied or cheated to get there.

In addition, it is hard to work in a bipartisan manner with people whose activists are displaying signs featuring swastikas, carrying signs that say "Bury Obamacare with Kennedy", among other things.

"If the goal is to help cover more legal people, then let us have true tort reform first, then insureance regulation reform next. Let me buy health insurance across state lines, to help lower costs."

John, the goal is to cover more people, lower costs and improve the quality of care provided. Tort reform will address none of that. All tort reform will do is loosen the regulations on doctors that have to pay for medical malpractice insurance. The patients wouldn't see a benefit in that. Only the doctors would. It wouldn't address the uninsured at all.

Buying insurance across state lines has been proven to be a poor concept. It is something that John McCain proposed on the campaign trail and it was debunked by many. The reason? Well, there are a <a href="http://www.newamerica.net/pressroom/2008/across_state_lines_explained_w… lot of reasons</a>:

<blockquote>How would selling insurance across state lines impact...

* Premiums? Health insurance premiums may decrease for many young, healthy individuals. Yet, premiums would likely go up for many other Americans, especially those people with health conditions or individuals who prefer comprehensive insurance policies.
* Benefit Mandates? Most benefit mandates would be eliminated by an across state lines proposal. In fact, selling health insurance across state lines would eliminate any guarantee that important benefit mandates like maternity care would be included in insurance packages in the future. Consumers would get little in exchange - overwhelming evidence shows that benefit mandates per se are not why health insurance costs so much.
* Access to Coverage? Many people would find it more difficult to access health insurance if health insurance were sold across state lines. This is because there would be fewer guaranteed issue policies and because insurers would have an increased incentive to deny people coverage and charge people more based on their health history.</blockquote>

Also, the whole "buy insurance across state lines" idea would harm consumer protection and would let insurance companies get away with more than they do now.

"Then increase funding for more doctors, something the Obama plan does not do."

More doctors? Really? That is like telling GM and Ford to build more cars so more people will buy them. That's not how it works! The problem isn't the number of doctors. The problem is the lack of access to care because people don't have health insurance or they don't have good health insurance. I know people who don't go to the doctor because their insurance is poor and they would have to pay a bundle just for a regular visit. They have a doctor. That's not the issue. The issue is being able to go to that doctor when you need to.

For the uninsured, the problem is similar. They avoid the doctor because they would have to pay out-of-pocket for the visit. When you don't have insurance, it's a high price to pay for what some might consider a regular visit to the doctor.

"Do that first, before you tell me the Public Option/single payer plan is needed."

John, the public option and single payer plans are two very different plans. You clearly confused the two, which tells me you don't know the differences.

The single-payer plan would create Medicare for all. That is the easiest way to put it. Instead of having insurance companies, the government would be the insurer. This would be a system similar to Canada's (although, Canada's is more of a Medicaid for all system) but you get the point.

The public option would create, well, an option for the uninsured to get health insurance from if they aren't offered insurance from their employer. A stronger, more robust public option would include offering insurance to the underinsured who don't have a strong plan through their employer.

Here are a few key points to remember the differences:

- Single-payer would impact every American citizen. The public option would impact, AT THE MOST, 15 percent of the U.S. (The 46 million-plus that are uninsured.)

- Single-payer would be a full, government-run system. The public option would still be similar to a private insurance company, only it would be a system that operates off premiums from those who seek insurance. The premiums would be lower and more reasonable for those seeking insurance.

- Single-payer is the progressive, liberal, left-wing way of addressing health care reform. That is coming from a progressive, liberal, left-winger who would love to see a single-payer system come to the U.S. However, it's not going to happen. In the House of Representatives, there are less than 100 co-sponsors of H.R. 676, which is the bill that would create a single-payer system. Republicans are all opposed to such a system and there are plenty of Democrats (most of the conference) who oppose it.

The public option is a moderate resolution. If you remember, Hillary Clinton's health care reform proposal was considered more progressive than Obama's on the campaign trail. Obama's health care reform proposal - virtually the same one he is proposing now - was called the moderate proposal. Instead of going with full-blown government-run health insurance, he went with a public option that doesn't interfere with anyone who is happy with their current insurance, but does provide an avenue for those who don't have insurance to get insured.

Now, Obama's plan is being attacked as "socialist" and "communist." I find that very interesting, considering it was being labeled as "moderate" and centrist" a year ago.

Robert, I haven't seen any picture of this, so it's not verified, but I heard that there was a sign yesterday that read:

WE LEFT OUR GUNS HOME......THIS TIME

If true, what message is being conveyed here?

Signs that I have seen --
OBAMA HALF BREED MUSLIN (some of the sign author's certainly have trouble with their delivery)
THE BORROR IS THE SLAVE OF THE LENDER HOW DO YOUR CHAINS FEEL AMERICA?

I would find all the typos and crazy rhetoric funny, if the underlying message conveyed by the fringe isn't so scary.

Robert,
Here is an example. In the state of Alabama, one company has about 80% of the health business. But if you live there, you can not buy a less costly plan sold by a company in Mississippi... You can buy auto insurance from Mississippi, but not health insurance. That’s crazy

Now if you let one company have 80% of the market, and forbid competition, then what do you think will happen?

Tort reform: If you sue your doctor, and lose, and the judge has the ability to decide if the case was frivolous and/or harassing, you should be made to pay the doctors court cost. Right now, many times insurance companies pay out just to save money on the court case knowing even if they win, it cost too much. That is the way it is in many other types of cases, but not when it involves doctors, why?

Lowering the insurance cost on doctors is not a bad idea. Maybe, just maybe, your own doctor might not raise his fees as much if he was saving a little bit also.

The thing is, everything has to be done is a manner that does not raise taxes, lower care for seniors and provides for more doctors, the one thing nobody has addressed in any of the current bills yet.

I voted for Obama and I am still very glad I did. I do not agree with everything he says or does, but I find it much more reasonable than anything that came out of McCain's mouth. No matter who the politician is, there will always be misleadings (lies), an agenda and bias. That is part of living in a democracy, one group is constantly trying to sway the opinion of the other. I don't think its right, but its definitely reality and we really need to accept that and move on. In this case, however, the radical right wing has taken advantage of American's laziness. How many people took what Wilson said to heart without ever researching the bill? I can tell you it was quite a few. How many people have actually read through the bill? Probably not many because its 1018 pages long. But, the summary is available for the world to see!! I wish we Americans would take advantage of the opportunities afforded to us and do our homework to make our OWN opinions instead of following whatever big mouth is loud enough to stick their thoughts in our brains. Not many other countries have these opportunities, and here so many sit on their rump, following the crowd rather than searching for the truth and making an informed judgment!

As far as Obama goes, lets be honest. This man has been crucified since beginning the race. He has been called a Muslim (not that there is anything wrong with that) when he has publicly attended a Christian church for years. I still hear people saying that he never supplied his birth certificate WHEN IT IS AVAILABLE ON THE INTERNET JUST TO PROVE THE RUMORS FALSE! Others have questioned his ability to lead when he changed the community he lived in DRASTICALLY for the better. He has been in office 8 months-give the man a chance. Anyone who says Obama did NOT walk into a TOTAL disaster is lying through their teeth. 8 months is not enough time to make significant progress-especially when radical right wingers are constantly spreading lies about him that seriously deter his support. As a nation, we are in difficult times, and it is time for some long overdue changes. Obviously what we have been doing isn't working so well and while not everyone is going to be happy with the changes we have got to inform ourselves before making our judgments.

As for Wilson, the behavior was just inappropriate and immature. This is a man who represents an entire state. I know if that were the man representing me, I would be very ashamed. We should expect more from our representatives.

Whether or not you LIKE Obama DOESN'T MATTER! He is our President and that office deserves respect. I HATED George W., but respected the position (other than the little Bushism jokes, but come on, that was just too easy).

We are ONE NATION-not Republican Nation and Democrat Nation. Let's act like it!

"Robert,
Here is an example. In the state of Alabama, one company has about 80% of the health business. But if you live there, you can not buy a less costly plan sold by a company in Mississippi... You can buy auto insurance from Mississippi, but not health insurance. That’s crazy."

John,

That's not a very "free market" way of thinking. Based on conservative or Republican thinking, the problem in the state of Alabama isn't the inability to purchase insurance across state lines. The problem is the lack of competition. When one company has practically a monopoly, that tells me that there is a lack of competition.

Competition isn't forbidden. It just doesn't take place in Alabama. Why wouldn't another company want to go in there? And what is the company doing successfully if they have 80 percent of the state's insured under its belt?

"Tort reform: If you sue your doctor, and lose, and the judge has the ability to decide if the case was frivolous and/or harassing, you should be made to pay the doctors court cost. Right now, many times insurance companies pay out just to save money on the court case knowing even if they win, it cost too much. That is the way it is in many other types of cases, but not when it involves doctors, why?"

What you propose sets an ugly precedent. Basically, if you say that should be the case for a patient versus a doctor, then others will seek to make this widespread for all litigation. If you are a patient suing a doctor, you have to pay for legal representation too. You aren't free from that responsibility.

I have proposed medical liability reform as a way to bring Republicans on board and to see just how much they think it can reform the system. So if we include that with a public option, Republicans should support it, right? That is what I'm thinking.

"Lowering the insurance cost on doctors is not a bad idea. Maybe, just maybe, your own doctor might not raise his fees as much if he was saving a little bit also."

I once saw my previous doctor on his day off. I went to his office and was diagnosed with bronchitis. I had to pay a pretty penny for that office visit, as well as the prescriptions.

He was out driving his golf cart home from the golf course. My timing was impeccable. It spoke volumes for the situation I was in.

My point is that the insurance cost is overstated and that it's something drummed up more as a way to address a longstanding Republican issue (tort reform) while trying to squeeze it in a health care reform bill. And there are many other factors that go into a doctor deciding to raise fees.

"The thing is, everything has to be done is a manner that does not raise taxes, lower care for seniors and provides for more doctors, the one thing nobody has addressed in any of the current bills yet."

You say provide for more doctors like that is a sure way of addressing the problem. A lack of doctors might be a problem in some areas, but there are still doctors in those areas. The problem isn't more or less doctors. The problem is the <strong>ability to see a doctor</strong>. If you have insurance, you can. If you don't have insurance, you can't (unless you have a big wallet). That is the problem we need to address here.