Few would accuse Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich of pandering to the health insurance industry. He voted NO to Pelosi care, and explains why.
"We have been led to believe that we must make our health care choices only within the current structure of a predatory, for-profit insurance system which makes money not providing health care. We cannot fault the insurance companies for being what they are. But we can fault legislation in which the government incentivizes the perpetuation, indeed the strengthening, of the for-profit health insurance industry, the very source of the problem. When health insurance companies deny care or raise premiums, co-pays and deductibles they are simply trying to make a profit. That is our system."
"Clearly, the insurance companies are the problem, not the solution. They are driving up the cost of health care. Because their massive bureaucracy avoids paying bills so effectively, they force hospitals and doctors to hire their own bureaucracy to fight the insurance companies to avoid getting stuck with an unfair share of the bills. The result is that since 1970, the number of physicians has increased by less than 200% while the number of administrators has increased by 3000%. It is no wonder that 31 cents of every health care dollar goes to administrative costs, not toward providing care. Even those with insurance are at risk. The single biggest cause of bankruptcies in the U.S. is health insurance policies that do not cover you when you get sick."
"But instead of working toward the elimination of for-profit insurance, H.R. 3962 would put the government in the role of accelerating the privatization of health care. In H.R. 3962, the government is requiring at least 21 million Americans to buy private health insurance from the very industry that causes costs to be so high, which will result in at least $70 billion in new annual revenue, much of which is coming from taxpayers. This inevitably will lead to even more costs, more subsidies, and higher profits for insurance companies - a bailout under a blue cross."
"By incurring only a new requirement to cover pre-existing conditions, a weakened public option, and a few other important but limited concessions, the health insurance companies are getting quite a deal. The Center for American Progress' blog, Think Progress, states, 'since the President signaled that he is backing away from the public option, health insurance stocks have been on the rise.' Similarly, healthcare stocks rallied when Senator Max Baucus introduced a bill without a public option. Bloomberg reports that Curtis Lane, a prominent health industry investor, predicted a few weeks ago that 'money will start flowing in again' to health insurance stocks after passage of the legislation. Investors.com last month reported that pharmacy benefit managers share prices are hitting all-time highs, with the only industry worry that the Administration would reverse its decision not to negotiate Medicare Part D drug prices, leaving in place a Bush Administration policy."
"During the debate, when the interests of insurance companies would have been effectively challenged, that challenge was turned back. The 'robust public option' which would have offered a modicum of competition to a monopolistic industry was whittled down from an initial potential enrollment of 129 million Americans to 6 million. An amendment which would have protected the rights of states to pursue single-payer health care was stripped from the bill at the request of the Administration. Looking ahead, we cringe at the prospect of even greater favors for insurance companies."
"Recent rises in unemployment indicate a widening separation between the finance economy and the real economy. The finance economy considers the health of Wall Street, rising corporate profits, and banks' hoarding of cash, much of it from taxpayers, as sign of an economic recovery. However in the real economy - in which most Americans live - the recession is not over. Rising unemployment, business failures, bankruptcies and foreclosures are still hammering Main Street."
"This health care bill continues the redistribution of wealth to Wall Street at the expense of America's manufacturing and service economies which suffer from costs other countries do not have to bear, especially the cost of health care. America continues to stand out among all industrialized nations for its privatized health care system. As a result, we are less competitive in steel, automotive, aerospace and shipping while other countries subsidize their exports in these areas through socializing the cost of health care."
"Notwithstanding the fate of H.R. 3962, America will someday come to recognize the broad social and economic benefits of a not-for-profit, single-payer health care system, which is good for the American people and good for America's businesses, with of course the notable exceptions being insurance and pharmaceuticals."
Dent and Kucinich may disagree on the solution, but they see eye-to-eye on the problem.
The world has gone insane. Democrats voting for bank bailouts and insurance bailouts, Republicans voting for free trade, and talking about seccession.
ReplyDeleteI wonder what Jefferson, Jackson, and FDR would think about today's DNC and what Mr. Lincoln and Teddy would think about today's GOP.
We need another Ross Perot to save the country from these national political parties that abandoned their core principles 30 years ago.
Insurance companies are not the problem. Most are publicly owned by 86% of us who invest with the hope of stability and maximum returns.
ReplyDeleteGOVERNMENT is the problem. It crates systems that promote inefficiency and runaway cost - like health insurance.
Congress is filled with lawyers. Is it any wonder why there's NOT A SENTENCE of tort reform? They always protect their own class of parasitic lawyers, first.
Portability is another completely unaddressed issue by this bunch. Ds support state by state fiefdoms with no portability and no recourse against denials for dreaded "preexisting conditions."
The real problem of availability and affordability are not being addressed. They are simply being used as excuses to garner centralized control over more and more of our economy.
we cringe at the prospect of even greater favors for insurance companies."
ReplyDeleteThe legal industry to the right of us, ACORN to the left of us. Ahead of us is Goldman, Sachs.
.
I'm beginning to really miss Dick Cheney and Halliburton.
Hell No! Dent got to go!
ReplyDelete"I'm beginning to really miss Dick Cheney and Halliburton."
ReplyDeleteAgree. It seems a bad situation has been made much, much worse.
Cheny and Halliburton almost destroyed this Country. Of course you bigoted Republicans can't see past your own ignorant hatred.
ReplyDeleteBetter go, I hear Rush is looking to have a teabagging party.
Name-calling is counterproductive, whether from left or right. Above, you see why an unrepentant liberal is opposed to Pelosi's plan.
ReplyDeleteDennis is a free thinker.
ReplyDeleteHe thinks outside the box.
I like that about him.
What I derived from this is that he is for government run health care, in the TRUE sense of the word, not as a hot button cheap cliche.
That would never fly!
That is far too progressive for this place.
Good ole Boy USA is 37th in health care in the world, far behind government run health care countries. What do the haters have to say about that?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html
Agreed, and that will not change under the measure adopted by the House.
ReplyDeleteI think Kucinich may be right or Charlie Dent may be right, but both of them are going after the real problem. All it guarantees is that everyone will now have to dig into their pockets for the same lousy health care we currently get.
Dent is boldly marching up his overlords backsides. The Republicans have never liked any socially progressive bills.
ReplyDeleteIf they had their way they would end social security, medicare, and the last thing they want is any kind of decent healthcare policy.
They love the fact that government subsidizes new drug research, medical technology improvement and medical corporate tax breaks as long as it helps the big boys and not the average working stiff.
It is only socialism when it doesn't benefit people making over $1 million a year.
While I get that Dent and Kucinich both voted "no" on the bill, I do not get the connection beyond this that you are trying to make. I really do not know what Dent - or the Rs for that matter - would do to "reform" healthcare.
ReplyDeleteI think the real issue is that in countries with a more universal model for delivering health care, once that system is implimented, the people never would go back to what we have now. And this scares the Rs. And lets remember that Charlie is a Republican who generally votes the party line.
Kuchinich is right and voted based on his principals and a sense of morality. Who knows if your boy Charlie voted "no" for any reason other than politics.
There is no need, for example, for tort reform in Great Britian because, as long as a doctor follows procedure he/she cannot be sued. There is protocal that when followed protcts the doctor. With the wild west system we currently have, that is simply not possible.
But hey, if Government run healthcare (and anything else run by Government) is so bad, by all means get rid of Medicare. And while you are at it let's also get rid of Social Secuirty ... the armed forces ... you get the picture?
If a politician really believes that Government cannot run these types of programs, then do it, get rid of them and see what happens. Sure, it would mean many a senior citizen would be out on the street eating cat food without medical care ... just like it was back in the 1930s.
I think it's a shame that Charlie has his health care paid for by the taxpayer but
Dent has expressed the same reservations about Pelosi care as Kucinich. There is no effort to rein in the insurance industry, which is the real source of these runaway costs. Kucinich and Dent differ on solutuon, but they see eye to eye on the problem. If Kucininch's opposition is viewed as principled, then I'd suggest to you that Dent's opposition may be principled as well.
ReplyDeleteThe truth is that Dems and Rs agree on about 85% of what is wrong. The House squandered an opportunity to adopt meanimgful legislation in favor of bullshit that will never make it thru the Senate.
He has a point. If you have a mold growing on your shower that is getting bigger and uglier (insurance companies) and you don't bother to clean it up, you can't keep yelling at the mold.
ReplyDeleteWhy are we always so behind other countries...that's what gets me. Why are we 37th? Why does everyone have public option but us? What happened? How powerful are insurance company execs and why are Americans powerless against them but every other country can handle the situation? How did Americans get so weak and powerless? always so afraid?
ReplyDeletePlease stop comparing Kucinich to Dent. You're making my eyes bleed.
ReplyDeleteKucinich is an ideologue and I respect him for that. I agree with him that HR3962 is a handout for insurance companies. Adding 30-some million people into a system is obviously going to be beneficial to those companies. And it's unfortunate for guys like him (and me) that this overhaul isn't resulting in single-payer, but now's not the time for purity. If we all sat around whining about how good things could've been, we'd never get anything done. While it's far from perfect, the fact is that the House bill bends the cost curve, lowers average prices for consumers, excludes pre-existing condition discrimination, reduces the deficit, strips anti-trust exemptions, and the list goes on-and-on.
Dent, on the other hand, voted for the Republican alternative (if you can call it that) to the House's health care reform legislation. To their credit, this bill does slightly lower costs and reduce the deficit. However, the CBO confirmed that buying insurance across state lines would not lower cost as much as a robust public option and that the Republicans' bill reduces the deficit by $68b, while the Democrats' bill reduces the deficit by $104b. Isn't Dent supposed to be a deficit hawk?
Should we get into how allowing insurance companies to move across state lines with lax reform would result in all the insurance companies going to wherever regulation is the weakest? (See Delaware and credit card companies.) Or should we talk about how he voted to cover a measly 3 million more Americans with his parties' plan (which is something that barely keeps up with population growth), while HR3962 is slated to cover 36 million more people -- cutting the uninsured down to 4 percent?
Sounds like a great representative.
Kucinich may have voted 'no' on HR3962 because it didn't go as far as he wanted, but at least he also voted 'no' on Boehner's poor excuse for an alternative -- something your favorite congressman can't also claim.
"Please stop comparing Kucinich to Dent. You're making my eyes bleed."
ReplyDeleteHate to break it to you, but this is my blog, and I believe that liberal Kucinich and moderate Dent both see the fatal flaw in Pelosi care. The comparison is therefore appropriate.
Dent correctly voted against this disaster, as he explains himself.
"“It’s bad for Americans because it won’t reduce health care costs — in fact many will see increased costs — and it will cause millions of working Americans to lose their current coverage.
“It’s bad for seniors. The bill includes nearly a half-trillion dollars in cuts to Medicare benefits. It will mean less choices, as well as increased premiums and prescription drugs costs for thousands of seniors in the Fifteenth District.
“It’s bad for Pennsylvania’s children, who will be forced out of the state’s successful CHIP program into plans offered through the national health insurance exchange where families will face higher costs.
“It’s bad for Pennsylvania’s already struggling budget, forcing an unfunded Medicaid mandate of at least $2.2 billion on our cash-strapped Commonwealth.
“It’s bad for small businesses. It will stifle innovation and job creation by imposing punitive surtaxes. It’s bad for the Pennsylvania economy in particular, with a $20 billion tax on the makers of medical devices, an industry that employs thousands in my district and the surrounding region.
“And above all it’s bad for America, spending more than $1 trillion in taxpayer dollars to create an unsustainable new federal program and saddling our children and grandchildren with debt. Only in Washington can someone say with a straight face that by creating a new trillion dollar program that we will not add a dime to the deficit now or in the future. Overall, this bill moves our nation in the direction of a European-style Welfare state — the type of nation where 10 percent unemployment will be the norm rather than an aberration.”
Gee, he took a position and even explained it, unlike Callahan.
Its not just single payer. Congress could have tried to regulate the insurance industry and their runaway costs, but failed to do so.
I appreciate your blog! Gives me something to do.
ReplyDeleteSince you didn't respond to any policy and posted more of Dent's talking points (you're real into that, aren't you?), I guess I'll have to go through them one-by-one.
(1) The CBO has stated repeatedly that it would reduce costs. The stronger the public option, the lower the cost. Also, how can Dent have the nerve to say that people would lost their coverage? The bill covers 36 million new people!
(2) The savings out of Medicare come from fraud, waste, abuse and Medicare Advantage. If you want to talk about a handout to insurance/drug companies... Man! Medicare Part D: A complete handout and not one dime paid for. I'm glad Charlie is so supportive of it. Seniors can get drug prescriptions for less money because of the money that HR3962 cuts from the insurance/drug company profits. This is also not to mention that the House bill will cut brand name drug costs in the donut hole be 50%.
(3) I agree with Dent on the CHIP program. And I am thankful he voted for it. I don't think that the right move is to eliminate CHIP and move kids into Medicare, but I'm willing to see where this debate ends up after conference.
(4) The fact is that up to 14,800 small businesses would receive tax credits to provide coverage to their employees. And let's not forget that most small businesses are exempt from the employer mandate, so Dent has no idea what he's talking about.
(5) The House bill reduces the deficit! Why does Dent embrace the CBO whenever the news is good for the Republican party, but completely ignore it when it makes him look like a jackass? The non-partisan congressional budget office that Dent loves to site constantly states that HR3962 will reduce the deficit by $104 billion dollars.
That was fun.
And it was meaningful because Dent is voting on whether or not I can afford health care in the future. (It's a shame that he doesn't seem to think I deserve it.) John Callahan will never vote on health care reform for any of his potential constituents in the Lehigh Valley.
Next time you're talking to Shawn Millan (maybe dishing on the phone tonight?), try to grab some more Dent talking points! I'd love to see them presented on this blog as rational thought.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAh, crap! I just quick looked that over and wrote "Medicare" instead of "Medicaid" with regards to CHIP. Apologies all around!
ReplyDeleteI'm glad you like my blog. maybe you'll learn something. First and foremost, you should learn that it is bad form to accuse someone of being paid to support another candidate, simpley because you disagree. That does not demean me. It demeans you. Second, you should recognize that many Democrats like me are very pleased with Congressman Dent and the time and attention he spends on his job. Third, you should by now recognize that Callahan's refusal to say a word is political cowardice, not the strong leadership that we deserve. Fourth, your little swipes about Shawn Millan demonstrate only that you yourrself are a little person who must resort to ad hominems when all else fails.
ReplyDeleteNow onto your talking points.
1) Because Pelosi care does nothing to address soaring medical costs, it is only a mttter of time before more of us will be unable to afford health insurance. We will not be able to meet the "low income" standards set forth and will instead end up being forced to pay the IRS for NOT haviong insuirance.
2) Gee, if there is so much fraud going on, then why on earth has nothing been done about it? And why would you want to replace one system so full of fraud with another that is just as bad. What you want to do is provide insurance for the dincs at the expense of old farts.
3) Any plan that does not continue CHIP should be opposed for that reason alone. That program saved my grandson's life. It's bad enough that you gut care for seniors, but now you go after the children, too.
4) Um, Dent knows exactly what he's talking about. This program will be paid for by imposing even more taxes on small businesses, giving them no reason to continue, thus hurting our economy even more. You are way off on that one.
5) Even the New Yorker, hardly known as a conservative source, acknowledges something is askew with those CBO figures.
You're right. It is fun to show pure partisans they are full of shit.
I do agree with one thing. Callahan will never have to vote on health care.
I don't see the connection. Kucinich wants healthcare for Americans like the rest of hte world has and Dent is protecting the economic investments of the small but wealthy minority of insurace executives.
ReplyDeleteI don't see the connection. Kucinich wants healthcare for Americans like the rest of hte world has and Dent is protecting the economic investments of the small but wealthy minority of insurace executives.
ReplyDeleteI don't see the connection. Kucinich wants healthcare for Americans like the rest of hte world has and Dent is protecting the economic investments of the small but wealthy minority of insurace executives.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad you're realizing that you're mostly full of shit! However, I wouldn't totally call you a "pure partisan." I've seen things on this blog that I agree with, too. Don't be so hard on yourself.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I said that I hoped you were on Dent's payroll. I never said that I thought you were. I was just hoping that you at least got some money for your blind following.
(1) I agree that the House bill can do more to address soaring medical costs, but it makes a good start. The public option (even at negotiated rates) will act in the insurance exchange, through increased competition by the exchange and the public option, rates will go down. Also, the House bill caps out-of-pocket expenses while it also requires coverage for preventive care -- also bringing down costs.
(2) You really think that they're going to cut $500b out of patient-care in Medicare? That is completely ludicrous. There are billions of dollars in unwarranted subsidies going to drug and insurance companies through Medicare Part D that should be cut to pass the savings along to consumers. Do you seriously believe that if they were going to cut $500b (or anything close to that) out of patient care for seniors, that AARP would have endorsed the bill?
(3) I'm with you on CHIP. I think there should be much more debate on it. Thankfully, I think there's a serious amount of opposition about removing CHIP from Sen. Rockefeller, so I would imagine that CHIP will stay in the Senate version of the bill and they will hopefully prevail in conference. The Senate usually does, anyway. Remember that the process is far from over.
(4) and (5) I'm providing you numbers generated by the most respected, objective analysis-giving offices in America! I'm sure that, like Dent, whenever the numbers are bad for "PelosiCare," you latch onto them, but whenever it states something like "HR3962 will reduce the deficit by $104b" or "HR3962 states that small businesses with 25 employees or less and average wages of less than $40,000 qualify for tax credits of up to 50% of the costs of providing
health insurance," you completely ignore them or claim that the numbers are 'askew.'
"Also, I said that I hoped you were on Dent's payroll. I never said that I thought you were."
ReplyDeleteBullshit.
What you said is that you would be checking Dent's next expense report to see if there was a payment to me. You were not hoping that I get rich. You were suggesting that I get paid what to write, an insulting and mean-spirited jab typical of partisans who have no argument. Believe me, I've read it before.
And we can go round and round on this topic, but there is little point in talking to someone unwilling to listen to reason. That bill will never make it thru the Senate so it is pointless to carry on defending it.
While you make all kinds of srguments, where's Callahan? I was able to quote what Dent said. What is Callahan saying? Let me respond to his words, not those of some partisan who makes blind accusations.
Bernie, you know I'm a big fan, but are you serious? First off, the existence of a public option in and of itself is a control on insurance companies. Why? Because it's a huge non-profit health insurer, who doesn't need to cut a profit, and who can operate in large bulk, so it's using the market to lower prices. This is market solutions at their best. The public option should be far more robust like Dennis Kucinich would like. Charlie opposes that.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, you and I both know that the Medicare Bill passed under the DeLay regime was full of wasteful spending, specifically the Medicare Part D part. Cuts to that, even in the hundreds of billions of dollars, will not harm Medicare recipients one bit, it will just take money out of company pockets. Don't confuse that program with the Public Option though, and say it's replacing one wasteful program with another. The two are wildly different.
Bernie, I also have to take issue with you saying small businesses will be taxed. Show me that in the bill. They are generously protected from the mandates and penalties in the House Bill. I also don't think Charlie is a reliable source on taxes in general. He voted against the largest middle class tax cut in American history this year. In fact, federal taxes have net gone down under President Obama and the Democratic Congress, and will begin to be noticed next year when most of the Stimulus tax cuts kick in. This constant GOP line of attack that all federal spending is going to cause tax hikes is not grounded in reality thus far, but is a nice try on their part.
As for the CBO, there's absolutely no reasonably sane reason to think anything is wrong with their estimates. Nothing was wrong this August when they trashed the original bill. Charlie voted for a bill that does not lower the deficit as much as the Dem bill, and also is said to not increase coverage in any measurable way to the uninsured.
It's important for everyone to understand exactly what the issue here is. We cover the elderly under Medicare already, so they do not have an uninsured problem. We cover the poor under Medicaid. We cover Vets under the VA. We cover kids under CHIP. We cover government workers under great private exchanges. The people who are under insured, or are being crushed by rising costs are middle class private sector workers. The plan that Charlie Dent voted for did absolutely nothing for these people. The plan that passed created a non-profit option large enough to push the market in directions we want, lowering costs to consumers, and lowering the uninsured rate. Charlie's plan of striking down state boundaries would do little more than create a race to the bottom. This idea also removes the power of state legislatures to set levels of care that are acceptable in their states, meaning we're all at the mercy of states with low mandates on care.
In general I just think you're wrong saying Charlie's a moderate by putting him next to someone on the farthest reaches left. I'm a blue-bleeding Democrat who disagrees with Dennis about single-payer, as well as other issues. The reaches of both parties will sometimes disagree with their rank and file, and vote with the opposition, it doesn't mean they have anything in common with them. I think you went a little far here.
For the record, I said: "I'll be sure to check out Dent's next finance report. I hope they're at least giving you something! Apparently you can't pick up on sarcasm? No big deal. It was no different than you calling me a "pure partisan" or that I was "full of shit."
ReplyDeleteIt's also very interesting that you accuse me of having "no argument" and "not listening" when I continue to post policy arguments to which you attack me for being a fall-in-line Democrat simply because I support health care reform and, to your knowledge, John Callahan, simply because I don't think it matters that he hasn't come out with a stance on health care reform yet.
I am more than willing to listen to reason! Is the "reason" that you're talking about the Dent talking points that you threw in my face that are easily discredited? And if I'm so unwilling to listen, do we not agree about on CHIP?
You must have lost that in your blind following of a bad representative.
Yeah, and it was a cheap shot. It takes a special kind of writer to be able to convey sarcasm. You lack that gift.
ReplyDeleteAs for your policy arguments, I believe I can diminish them by calling them talking points and then go on to say that I've discredited them.
You might disagree w/ Dent. I do myself on many issues. But I would never make the mistake of calling him a bad representative. In fact, he is a hard-working, dedicated Congressman that you disparage because you disagree with him. You have that luxury bc he is willing to say where he stands and go to 17 town halls and numerous other events to facehis constituents. In the meantime, Callahan is hiding in his office, finger in the air, trying like hell to figure which way the wind is blowing.
Let me answer his talking points, not yours. Are you running for Congress?
Hey Rylock, thanks for your clarity. Don't be put off by Ohare. He lives in a cave.
ReplyDeleteOhare you really are a narrow minded Dentophile. My God, I do not agree with Kucinich on the all or nothing aproach but he has principles and integrity. All Dent has done is drag out the Republican Party line on healthcare.
What is with the constant reference to Callahan, who gives a crap what he thinks right now. I as many others want movement on Healthcare reform now. If it spills over into next year I guess Mr. Callahans views will be relevent. As of today I have only one congressman. You appear to be the partisan constantly deflecting to Callahan when his opinion is no more helpful than yours or mine.
Rylock and RisingSun make the clear points that have so often been made and you deride but donot disprove..
Of course controlling costs is critical for healthcare reform but merely allowing Insurance Policies to be sold across state lines does not end the abuses that exist.
If we all waited for the perfect solution it would never happen, as the Republicans have shown themselves to be disingenuious on the topic of healthcare reform. They have a strategy and it is delay, delay, delay. They have done it for over 60 years. They are good at it and you are an apostle of one of the best.
I rarely agree with the ultra-liberal Kucinich, dispite his uber hot wife, but I respect his principles. Charlie is a nice guy but he is your standard issue pol, no more no less. He is spewing the Party line and that takes no principles only a press agent.
Hey Ohare, how many good elected and/or appointed officials have you torn apart because you just didn't like them.
ReplyDeleteI remember this past year when you complained about people running against Stoffa, you tore up some good people just because you were angry. If you want to dish out the hate you should at least be able to accept some honest criticism. That is all you got from Rylock.
Don't be such a baby.
Let me start off by saying that we can definitely agree that I am by no means a talented writer.
ReplyDeleteAnd I know Charlie. He knows me. We get along well. I stand by the fact that he is a bad representative, because he does not represent the needs of his district. However, if you want to talk about constituent services, I will be the first to admit that he is one of the top. But that, by no means, qualifies you as an effective congressperson. There is far more to it than that.
It's also unfair to not respond to those pesky "facts" and "statistics" I presented with regards to your post, simply to have you not reply (again) and say that I'm spouting off talking points when you literally copied and pasted quotes from Dent's website, to which I responded with more truths backed by non-partisan offices for you to say that I'm not willing to listen and that we're talking in circles. Totally unfair! I was just getting into the policy debate.
What actually has us talking in circles is the whole "Callahan not coming out on HCR" argument. I stick to my reasoning that I don't care about it this early on in the campaign and I'm bored with the dispute already.
Anon 1:05,
ReplyDeleteI have every right to take exception to anyone suggesting that I get paid to write. That's an attack on my integrity, and I don't take it lightly. But that's what people do when they have no argument. You've seen it and probably have participated in it and I'm still here, three years later. I will argue points but will not allow someone to get away with that smear, nor will I stand idly by while his own standard bearer is too cowardly to take a position on anything.
Bernie, Charlie being a good representative is in the eye of the beholder. I don't agree with a single one of his major votes this year. I think he was wrong on the war funding, wrong on the stimulus, wrong on cap and trade, wrong on the budget, and wrong on health care. You're welcome to say you think he's good, but I don't give a rat's behind how hard he works. I expect any member of Congress to try and do constituent services well, it's a cheap way to grab votes, and it works well. I've been at events of his this year, and I think that's fine and dandy, but it's not going to sway me to have town halls. I'll take a lazy slug that votes for solutions over a worker bee that tries to kill solutions.
ReplyDeleteComparing him to Mayor Callahan at this point is silly and little more than an attempt to use incumbency to Dent's advantage, which is fine, it is an advantage. Mayor Callahan is not in Congress, with a Congressional staff to help him read through all the fine print of these bills. If he were out spouting off about every issue, some would call him a fool. He's doing a fine job running his city, as most of his constituents would attest to. He's created thousands of jobs this year, while Charlie voted against any attempt to create jobs this year.
"I have every right to take exception to anyone suggesting that I get paid to write. That's an attack on my integrity, and I don't take it lightly."
ReplyDeleteDude, take a breath. We've already been clear that I was being sarcastic, but I don't have the talent in my writing to pull it off. I'm cool with that. To put it blatantly clear, my 'sarcastic comment' (now to be delivered void of any sarcasm, so you can follow) was that I would hope that you are getting paid by the Dent campaign to spew your mindless, blind following of his talking points. Because, if you weren't, you'd look pretty stupid ignoring all of those CBO estimates and fighting websites like factcheck.org.
Can we put that behind us now? If we (finally) could, maybe we could actually move on to a rational debate on health care.
"It's also unfair to not respond to those pesky "facts" and "statistics" I presented with regards to your post, simply to have you not reply (again) and say that I'm spouting off talking points when you literally copied and pasted quotes from Dent's website, to which I responded with more truths backed by non-partisan offices for you to say that I'm not willing to listen and that we're talking in circles. Totally unfair! I was just getting into the policy debate."
ReplyDeleteLet me get this straight. You come into my house, accuse me of being paid to write for Dent, refuse to accept the obvious political cowardice of Callahan in not taking a position on anything, and then attack me for not responding to your own talking points that respond to my talking points responding to yours.
Now apparently, I'm supposed to do that while simultaneously writing three separate blofs about Northampton County for posting today.
I'm good, but not that good.
OK, so I bounced you around a bit. Sorry about that. I'll make you an offer. Write an essay to justify Pelosi care. Rich (Rising Sun), you can help this dude if you want. I'll respond with my own. No personal attacks if you can manage that. I'll post them both, side by side, and let the readers decide.
You will see very quickly that Dent does, in fact, reflect the views of his constituents. That's why they've elected him repeatedly.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm writing about a racist smear directed at a Norco Council member-elect.
Bernie, Barack Obama won 56% here last year. It's tough to argue that Charlie is representing this area correctly voting "no" to everything the President proposes.
ReplyDeleteI'll take you up on that, sure. I think making the argument for the status quo, or a bill that leaves 30 million uninsured is tough for even a talented writer.
I've enjoyed our time together! And I will admit that I was impressed seeing two more blog posts popping up in the midst of our debate.
ReplyDeleteExcept, I don't see how you keep accusing me of personal attacks! I do think that you're blindly following Dent on health care, but how is that more or less of a personal attack than you calling me "full of shit" or a "pure partisan?"
Can't we all just get along?!
I'll try to find time to write a blog entry on why passing the health care reform bill in the House was the right thing to do over the next few days and I'll let you know when I'm done. However, based on your posts, I doubt you have an accurate (conservative/liberal) representative sampling of Lehigh Valley constituents reading your blog, but I'll take the bait anyway.
Rylok, you didn't accuse ohare of anything. BO you take offense quickly, maybe too quickly. If you think people think you are compensated for your opinions maybe it is because the people you love, Angle, Stoffa et al, bought you a "gift" of a new computer.
ReplyDeleteYou continually distort the truth and repeat whatever they tell you to write. You attack and smear the good name of any who disagree with your mancrushes.
So, yes, I guess some could jump to the crazy conclusion you are at the very least "tainted" in the prsentation of "your" facys.
Um, my friends did chip in to buy me a laptop for my birthday in June. Angle and Stoffa did chip in, as did six or seven other people who had no idea they were financing Charlie Dent. I wrote about that gift here, and that's why you know about it. Just because I blog does not mean I must stop being a human being. Believe it or not, I have friends.
ReplyDeleteAt no time have I ever been directed what to write or compensated by anyone for what I write.
For any other commenters that also didn't comprehend the Dent/Kucinich comparison:
ReplyDeletehttp://rrrylock.blogspot.com/2009/11/if-kucinich-and-dent-both-voted-against.html
Thanks RyLock, you will get nowhere on this blog. Ohare drinks Dent's koolade every day.
ReplyDelete