It looks like they will call the new health care law "Kennedycare". They are pulling out the stops to pass this thing in honor of Teddy, it looks like the public option will probably be in there. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/TedKennedy/story?id=8420408 btw this is a Drudge story not a KOS or huffington post one.
I agree DanR, we have met in the middle, a bipartisan compromise. Thats progress isn't it folks. Far right me and far left Dan agree on healthcare reform. I'll fully support and campaign in my own little way so that every American gets the same healthcare plan as Ted Kennedy. Anything less would be a travesty and a disgrace for all things Ted fought for in his personal life. I am sure and sooo positive that Ted would want normal everyday citizens to get the best care offered in the world, just as he did. The best possible treatment. The best doctors. The best hospitals...cost be damned, lets stay alive and use Americas technology and treatments to the fullest to keep our elderly alive. We, after all, are a nation of greatness right? I am soooo glad that our congressman and Senators are all ready to sign on to this bill for themselves and their families. That does speak volumes yannow? Thanks Dan, that was a great post.
Yeah, I really enjoy paying health care for the 10 million + illegals in our country, thanks Ted! In the swimmers memory we should tax the upper class more too, to pay for the health care and maybe take a crack at our deficit!
Thats a deal. Your taxes will go to care for the illegals, and everyone else's will go to taking care of the poor and those that cannot afford good health care. And make sure you complain if your taxes go anywhere else except to illegals.
Well wouldnt it be great if everyone had as much money as Kennedy? Then they too can afford the ''very best''. But that isnt the case, is it? So why not take care of those who cannot afford even adequate care? What a great counrty this would be if we as a whole start caring for each other. Lets take away a cuople of billion from defense to pay for it. I mean afterall, theres plenty of time to kill strangers abroad after we fix things internally.
I have done some research on the guy, he actually has sponsored some pretty darn good bills on healthcare.
No where in the United States Constitution does it say I am responsible for the caring of other Americans. I think that a lot of the uninsured are either 1. Too lazy to get a job to pay for or 2. healthy and don't want to pay for insurance. If there were people who actually cannot afford healthcare, I would be fine to pay for it IF on my W2 there was a section for me to decide where my tax dollars went. And another thing, I see "poor" people with cars, television, the internet, computers, and cell phones. If someone is too poor to pay for insurance, but has these items, I don't think they are worthy of anyone's tax dollars. Cell phones and other luxury devices are NOT necessities. Health insurance is.
To all who complain about spending a bit of money on health care for your fellow citizens (Forget the Illigals dont treat them) if you stoped sending so many billions abroad to countries that hate you then it woudnt cost that much would it? This is something I think we should do here as well. So if you realy do care about were your tax money goes start raising a fuss about overseas aid and development.
You are right. No where does it say you must care for each other. I thought that would be a natural thing, a thing no one had to put on paper in order for it to be done. But that doesnt seem a good defense when you are at the gates of heaven. I have enough crap to explain without the burden of inhumanity. However I do agree that some folks consider themselves ''poor'' if they dont have a camera on thier cell phones or cannot afford an HD TV. But dont assume that half the poor are just lazy.
I believe it is our duty as individuals to help the less fortunate...those who actually need a helping hand, not those who want a freebie rather than working hard to improve their own lot. I believe we can put our money to better use at the local level rather than have it taken by the government & wrapped up in the bureaucracy, red tape & special interest. Government has tried the same expensive, pointless subsidies for 50 years yet we still have third & fourth generations in public housing, on welfare and dropping out of school. People get "hooked" on government and it simply doesn't help them, they lose their motivation and they are easily exploited by Obama-types who promise to keep the handouts coming.
Why just Obama types? If its true that its been goin on since 1959, then the right is equally to blame.
The laws in America require treatment to anybody for any illness or cause, regardless of ability to pay , no questions asked. Don't fall for that fallacy. EVERYBODY in America has access to healthcare. PERIOD. It is the law. Steve has a point. We spend more on other nations than we need to when we have those at home who need help. I just think naming this bill after Kennedy is pimping his death. Kennedy did not use the same care he would have forced on us. None of the elite politicians in the house or senate will get the care thay are trying to force on us. That is so telling isn't it?
Thats not quite true. A hospital cannot kick you out. But it is required to either treat you or take you to a facility that will. And thats not really health care. Thats only treatment. And are there any politicians that arent elite? I cannot think of one that doesnt accept a govt paycheck for thier service.
Yes, that's in regard to the reasoning for making the US constitution. It doesn't say that's the governments purpose nor the citizens responsibility. I'll finish the quote for you: "general welfare,.....do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
That's the preamble. It has no legal force. Have you ever heard of a lawsuit claiming that someone's preamble rights were violated?
Directly from your link: "Unlike most General Welfare clauses, however, the clause in the U.S. Constitution has been interpreted as a limitation on the power of the United States Congress to use its powers of taxing and spending"
