The Senate Democrats are worthless!

[Joanne98]

The health care debate on c-span 3...

Senator Barbara Mikulski is just sitting there while the Republicans are using the Frank Luntz talking points almost word for word.

DIDN'T SHE GET THE MEMO?

Please email the dumb *&^% and tell her to STOP letting them use Frank Luntz's talking points.

http://mikulski.senate.gov/

Here's the Frank Luntz article if she needs it!

Here are some suggested arguments for Republicans that Luntz calls “clear winners”:

—“It could lead to the government setting standards of care, instead of doctors who really know what’s best.”

—“It could lead to the government rationing care, making people stand in line and denying treatment like they do in other countries with national healthcare.”

-“President Obama wants to put the Washington bureaucrats in charge of healthcare. I want to put the medical professionals in charge, and I want patients as an equal partner.”

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=130628F1-18FE-70B2-A81BBE8E2316F81D

:banghead:

[sarcasmo]

1. To many blue dogs to accomplish anything.

[PassingFair]

7. Only when they're in cahoots with the "new dems"..

Blue Dogs are like the "baptists" in the
abortion saga....they are out front,
taking the spotlight and the hits, but
"new dems" are like the catholic church,
quietly funding and getting the "faithful"
to the ballot box.

Both are aligned against progressive
legislation.

[GoesTo11]

2. So do you really want

Government bureaucrats who know nothing about medicine deciding how you should be treated, and rationing your care on the basis of whatever political whim blows their way, and with doubling of your income tax, by the way? That's what Obama wants, and it's obvious why senate Dems can't defend it.

Sicko was a good movie, by the way.

[Joanne98]

3. WTF?

[Kalyke]

5. I'd rather have government officials who aren't in it for profit than

insurance companies who are.

[GoesTo11]

6. I wonder if there's some possible system

that would have government paying but doctors and patients making the decisions. That would be better than either insurance cos or bureaucrats.

[bertman]

8. Yes, it's called Medicare and it's worked very well for a lot of years.

There will always be a "bureaucrat" in the mix. It's WHAT power and HOW MUCH power the bureaucrat will have that is at issue. The government bureaucrat's chief function will NOT BE to safeguard the profits of an insurance company, but to ensure that the patient is getting the care his/her doctor recommends.

[Billy Burnett]

12. Yep When you call your doctor's office does the doctor answer the phone?

No. He has hired a bureaucrat to answer the phone and deflect/direct your call. Without bureaucrats the doctor would never get to the patients in his/her office.

[bertman]

15. That's exactly why I said what I did about the bureaucrat's power. The receptionist or

appointment scheduler is not charged with finding every possible way of denying or minimizing treatment so the profits of the ULTIMATE BUREACRACY THE INSURANCE COMPANY are maximized.

[BlueJac]

4. The Democrat party has been sold to the lobbyists.........

Now there is one "Good Old Boys" party.

[sarcasmo]

9. I think some have been sold to the Insurance companies as well as the Lobbyists.

[roseBudd]

10. That is one of the peculiarities of the Senate, everyone gets to talk ad nauseum

[Joanne98]

11. Jesus frigging Christ! No wonder we never get anything done!

[kentuck]

13. Mark my words.

If they keep this shit up, we are going to end up with two Parties - one Party of Independent voters and Progressive Democrats and another Party of Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats.

[sarcasmo]

14. I think we are already to that point.