• SeanRenaud said on Aug 23, 2008....

  Is this official?

• Zayda said on Aug 23, 2008....

  Yes, it's official.

• husbandhater said on Aug 23, 2008....

  Yeah he went to left field with this one. My guess is that he had to match McCain's Army background and show that he had the experience behind him also. A wise old hand who could make up for his short commings and show him the way. Now who is McCain picking? All that hypoe and I'm more like huh?

• SeanRenaud said on Aug 23, 2008....

  Obama/Biden.  I'll have to look more into Biden.  I wasn't expecting this to come out until later.
   
  Seriously considering that Obama has played the media like a harp for nearly a year and a half he announces soemthing huge Friday night?  Either he's utterly brilliant and knows that people are tired of hearing about him and figured that if he announced it Friday at fucking Midnight that it would be old news by Monday or he fell asleep at the wheel.
   
  I wish I knew for sure.

• TinSoldier said on Aug 23, 2008....

  They've been saying for a few days now that Obama would announce his running mate, and I've been waiting for it.
  
  Interesting -- Biden's foreign policy and government credentials are pretty strong. I'm not too sure of his politics yet. The talking heads (and McCain who already has an attack ad out) have been talking about Biden's previous words with regards to Obama and the vice presidency.
  
  McCain is supposed to announce soon, too; by Friday by most accounts.
  

• SeanRenaud said on Aug 23, 2008....

  They have been saying for a while, but the way the news cycles work is based on the work week.  The only reason you would announce something midnight on Friday is so that it would be a dull roar once the media cycle started.  For maximum impact you would announce it early monday so that would be brand new during the Monday Morning Commute.
   
  I don't know enough about Bidens politics either, but I'm  not concerned at all about what the Repubs have been saying thus far.

• andora said on Aug 23, 2008....

  I thought Richardson would have been a strong pick because of his experience in foreign relations and the fact that he has governed a state and improved this same state's stats...plus the hispanic vote would be a great pick-up. But, it is Biden, who I respect because he has enough job security to speak his mind...yes, it gets him into 'trouble', and he is big enough to admit his foibles. Compared to Dick Cheney this guy is a breath of fresh air.
  
  I guess Obama feels as though he is capable of garnering the Southern vote because of the large black populace in the South. People in the South don't usually like liberals from NewYork, but Biden's record for the working class is good enough to change the demographics of the South, especially if the blacks in the South come out in numbers.
  
  I bet Obama is getting his ground game in order in the South - he has enough capital to shore up the grassroots Southern vote by organizing county after county to register urban and rural minority votes. Many of the new voters are not able to be polled because most new voters do not have land lines and I think land lines are the only ones being polled. Besides, the polls were wrong in the last two elections, so I'm not sure why people use those numbers to predict anything.
  
  As far as having to look over his shoulder at the Clinton's, if he had chosen Hillary, especially when she insinuated the risks of assassination, I think Obama was smart to stay away from them. Biden does not seem so ambitious that he would stoop to gaining power through assassination, but the Clinton's are so power hungry that I would have been frightened for Obama if she was in the wings, next in line. Yes, I just called the Clinton's heartlessly ambitious...I think their actions speak louder than my words!
  
  While I'm at it, why does Hillary think anyone should help her with her campaign debt when she is the one that chose to continue when it was statistically impossible to win?
  

• ALIENated said on Aug 23, 2008....

  
  This is like in the movies when a guy digs his own grave. I was starting to have
  some doubts that McCain would pull it off, but this is like Obama set himself on
  fire in a parking lot while waiting for the KKK to arrive. I think the long campaign
  has fried his brains, but he did not have much of a brain to fry. Biden is a Catholic,
  but the Catholic bosses are trying to cut off Catholics who support abortion from
  communion (it is about time). Can Catholics support Obama or even Biden with a
  clear conscious? Can any true Christian support Obama with is life starts at three
  days old attitude? 
  
  Of course, I have to wrestle with whether I can support McCain and Romney when
  Romney believes the fairy tale that is Mormonism. However, I doubt that we will
  ever have a true Christian president. Bush has certainly fallen short.
  
  Can this election get any weirder? Gotta love American politics.
  
  

• travelr712 said on Aug 23, 2008....

  another example of the democratic party snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory?

• D6fer said on Aug 23, 2008....

  I heard that there is a big bombshell about to explode.......Obama may not have been U.S. Born......anyone hear of this?  .......Hillary has not yet released her delegates has she?

• TinSoldier said on Aug 23, 2008....

  I got an email a week or two ago stating that Obama had not released his birth certificate, but it was patently false. His mother was a US citizen, and Obama was born in Hawaii, hence he is a US citizen.
   
  Just more stupid misinformation.
   
  http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/06/obama-birth.html
  http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/08/mystery-solved.html
   
  But why let facts get in the way of a good story?

• D6fer said on Aug 24, 2008....

  could be
  
  

• stopmediabias said on Aug 24, 2008....

  As far as this choice I am not surprised.  Biden is huge on civil rights.  I think it is a good choice as far as bolstering the experience issue.  In the end I think they are going to come up short.  Biden has a history of contradicting himself, his voting record (outside of Iraq going into the war) is a far left as you can get.  This country seems to like moderates (except Reagan.)

  I also don't think pro-choice Catholics set well with mainstream Christians.  The pro-choice (abortion) and Catholics (not to popular these days because of the priest thing) sours a lot of people.

• ALIENated said on Aug 24, 2008....

  
  I would think that if Obama had not been born an American, that genie
  would have popped out of the bottle long ago. I think McCain can beat
  Obama without any genies. Just as Gwhore should have won in the eyes
  of many, the right man will revail one way or another. Obama is not 
  the right man for America. That is blatantly clear. However, he might 
  be the right man for some left-leaning African country or Middle East 
  country. Or maybe even the mayor of Bejing. That was a telling remark. 
  China a better place than America. Oh ... my ... god. Can you get any
  more left than Borax Oblahma?
  
  

• SeanRenaud said on Aug 24, 2008....

  No no Gore DID win in the eyes of the majority and the Supreme Court gave Florida to Bush.  I'm not going to debate the right or wrong (if for no other reason because I think they had two choices.  The real right choice was to have a revote, the second less right choice was to give it to Bush and a distant third would have been to give it to Gore.  But Bush lost the majoritt vote for all that it counts in 200.
   
  When did he say China is a better place than America?  (and China is about as conservative as you can be and still manage breath without asking permission.

• ALIENated said on Aug 24, 2008....

  
  That is my point. Gwhore maybe did win, but he could not win because he was
  the wrong person for the job. The powers that be, the system, will make sure
  the right man gets the job, no matter what the vote count is. Plus, Gwhore would
  never have responded to the 9/11 attack as Bush & company did, which, in 
  general, was the right response. I would have left Iraq after wiping most of the
  threat out, but Bush is much more humanitarian than I am. 
  
  Last week Oblahma made a remark about how great China is, how great the
  infrastructure in Bejing is, how American businesses have to be thinking that 
  China is a better place to operate than here in America. While showing his love
  for socialism / communism (what he wants for America), he was showing his
  ignorance about China in general. Just outside Bejing the place is a century
  behind most everywhere else. Plus, he made no mention of people who were
  put out of their homes (and thrown in prison camps for complaining) so they
  could build the Olympic stadium. Not to mention how they cheated in the 
  games with underage gymnasts and replaced a little singer because she was 
  too ugly. Sorry, but I will stick with America. As Mark Levin says, no country
  is perfect, but America is as close as it gets.
  
  

• SeanRenaud said on Aug 24, 2008....

  I've always found that accusation to be Bullshit.  That Gore wouldnt' have declared war on the Afghanis after 9/11 (or somebody hopefully the Saudis who were probably more responsible seeing how virtually all of the hijackers (to include Bin Laden) are Sauds and I don't care what they SAY I think they were in on it.  It's just a right wing talking point with no basis in reality.  We probably wouldn't have attacked Iraq which. . .honestly doesn't matter.
   
  I agree that America is as close to perfect as it gets.  I still haven't seen any links to what Obama said though to know how much of it was being "polite" I mean you are one of the people that believes that Bush stared into Vladmir Putin's eyes and knew it was a good man club right? 

• TinSoldier said on Aug 24, 2008....

  Yeah, it's kinda hard to take seriously without a link, Alien. It's also kinda hard to take you seriously when you use the sophomoric technique of purposely misspelling the names of people with whom you disagree.
  
  Most people outgrow that by the eighth grade, at least.
  
  But I'm still interested in seeing a link where Obama praises China in the manner which you say.
  

• ALIENated said on Aug 24, 2008....

  
  I did not read it, I heard it on several radio shows. I heard him say it with 
  my ears, not my eyes. I doubt any of his buddies at ABC, CBS, NBC, or CNN
  would play it. But I will try to find a link. (Doubting my credibility is a mistake.)
  
  Sticks and stones, Tinman. I do not take Oblahma seriously so I toy with his
  name. Get it O ... blah ... ma. It is a joke. He rattles on and on about nothing
  but change for the sake of change in our time that we need a change, Blah,
  blah, blah. He is a joke. At least to me. He is a duffus. He represents everything
  that is bad about the Democrat party, and a link to his statements will not cure
  that.
  
  

• ALIENated said on Aug 24, 2008....

  
  Everybody's watching what's going on in Beijing right now with the Olympics.
  Think about the amount of money that China has spent on infrastructure. Their
  ports, their train systems, their airports are vastly the superior to us now, 
  which means if you are a coporation deciding where to do business you're starting
  to think, "Beijing looks like a pretty good option."
  
  Wow, that was hard to find. Try ...
  
  http://search.yahoo.com/search?ei=UTF-8&fr=yfp&p=obama+beijing+infrastructure 
  Enjoy.
  
  

• SeanRenaud said on Aug 24, 2008....

  http://hotair.com/archives/2008/08/22/obama-know-where-its-really-great-to-do-business/
   
  Ok you're quote doesn't seem to be out of conext.  What did he say that is either untrue or that you take offense at? 

• ALIENated said on Aug 24, 2008....

  
  I am not offended. I just think he is making stupid statements. Beijing may 
  be in good shape, but that is not indicitive of the whole country. Not to 
  mention that it is a totalitarian slave state. Can you imagine Ronald
  Reagan making that kind of statement. China is better than America. No
  way.
  
  

• TinSoldier said on Aug 24, 2008....

  
  In context it seems pretty straightforward to me. I agree with the basic premise that our infrastructure needs more investment. Your other statements seem to be reading more into the comment than were there.
  
  And there are a lot of reasons why US businesses prefer to do business in China. It seems to be a relatively popular topic lately.
  
  
  edit: I don'tthink he said that China was better than America. But you can't deny that many businesses have outsourced a lot of jobs, many of them to China and the surrounding area.
  

• SeanRenaud said on Aug 24, 2008....

  Ditto Tin.  He didn't say China>America.  He is trying to keep jobs in America and pointing out one of the reasons why jobs are fleeing America and one of them is the is that their infrastructure has surpased ours (and their wages undercut ours)  Your really reading too much into this statement.

• stopmediabias said on Aug 25, 2008....

  I heard him say this somewhere and it is a stupid comment, one of many stupid comments he has gotten a pass on.  China spent a ton of money to paint a grand and glorious picture for the Olympics when it is the equivalant of putting lipstick on a pig.  Their ports, train systems, airports are vastly superior to ours?  Is he kidding with this comment?

• ALIENated said on Aug 25, 2008....

  
  You can lead the blind to water, but you cannot make them see, I guess.
  
  

• silverwhisper said on Aug 25, 2008....

  the consensus view in the media that i've been seeing is that biden was a safe choice, and i'd agree with that assessment. having said that: biden's got about as serious foreign policy cred as obama's going to find in a prospective running mate: chair of the foreign relations committee and all.
  
  having said that: i'm actually thrilled that it wasn't hillary. that would have been the death kneel of this ticket, IMHO.
  
  ed

• TinSoldier said on Aug 25, 2008....

  Amen, brother! I would have seriously reconsidered my vote if Obama had chosen Clinton as a running mate.

• ALIENated said on Aug 25, 2008....

  
  That could not be more wrong. While Hillary is one rung above Oblahma on the
  goofus scale, picking her as VP would have made the Democrats unbeatable.
  All the wingnuts, morons, crackpots, witches, abortionists, gay marriage 
  advocates, nutjobs, taxationists, and environmental global warming wackos 
  would have been equally represented.
  
  Picking Biden is a horrible mistake. Borax claims to be about change and Biden
  is old school, smoke-filled backroom politics. Not to mention he is a goofus 
  maybe two rungs below Oblahma and Hillbillary. Of course, I cannot understand
  why anyone would want or vote for any of them.
  
  After the Democrat convention, and after McCain announces Romney as his 
  running mate (oops, hope that does not mess up the timeline), Hillary Democrats
  will start to migrate to the McCain camp. Watch the polls (not NBC, CBS, ABC, 
  or CNN, someone reputable) and you will see what I am predicting. The future 
  is not pretty, but it turns out better than it would with Borax dragging us into
  the dirt (as Jimmy Farter did).
  
  

• D6fer said on Aug 25, 2008....

  Companies are relocating to china for no other reason than its cheaper.....so yeah....it was kind of a stupid statement.....but it really is irrelevant.......Obama could take a leak on mother Theresa's grave and half the people that are voting for him would cheer him on.....the other half would find some way to justify it as no big deal.
  

• stopmediabias said on Aug 26, 2008....

  D6-ROFL-harsh but funny.

• silverwhisper said on Aug 26, 2008....

  you'll have to excuse me if i think your political analysis is less than ideal, alienated, esp in light of your juvenile misnamings.
  
  ed

• ALIENated said on Aug 26, 2008....

  
  I know. The truth can sometimes be painful. It must be painful for the Clintons
  as well, but Democrats are fickled. The president and first lady once considered
  to be the first blacks in the White House have been replaced, due to political
  correctness, by a blacker (a small percent blacker) candidate. Sorry, but the
  rules of political correctness are a little hard for sane people to follow. It is
  amusing to watch any group of people who are motivated by weird causes,
  like believing in UFOs or political correctness or global warming. Or that a
  candidate is qualified just because of their color. Biden was most likely 
  chosen in hopes of wooing Catholics to the Oblahma fold, but Catholics, like
  most voters, are smarter than Democrats think. Neither Biden nor Nancy
  Pelosi know the first thing about being a real Catholic. The pressure is on
  for real Catholics to reject the abomination that is abortion. Especially the
  kind of abortion Borax wants to be legal, abortion even after birth. Who
  could vote for such a monster?
  
  

• stopmediabias said on Aug 26, 2008....

  Even though Biden adds experience to the ticket he got less than 1% in Iowa and New Hampshire.  Obama is likeable, Biden comes off as mean and he occasionally drifts off into the crazy.

• ALIENated said on Aug 26, 2008....

  
  Biden is a typical arrogant Democrat that knows what is good for everyone
  but himself. He claims not to like abortion yet helps to keep it legal. These
  are the same people who are starting to advocate pulling the plug on older
  people. (Life is either sacred or it is not.) He makes racist slurs about Obama
  and then accepts his appointment to the VP position. Strange bedfellows
  indeed.
  
  

• SeanRenaud said on Aug 26, 2008....

  I forget that your such a strong supporter of human suffering.  I always give you that extra assumption of humanity.

• stopmediabias said on Aug 27, 2008....

  Life isn't sacred if it is not worth living.

  And how does Biden get away with a comment like that?  Imagine if McCain said that?

• SeanRenaud said on Aug 27, 2008....

  If McCain said it he'd be a hypocrit.  Life isn't sacred if it isn't worth living.

• TinSoldier said on Aug 27, 2008....

  "Life isn't sacred if it isn't worth living." Did Biden say that?
  
  I find that sentiment to be pretty sad, actually. Life is almost always worth living.
  
  Sorry, OT I know.
  

• SeanRenaud said on Aug 27, 2008....

  Considering that Biden's speech is tonight not yesterday I imagine it was random Democrat A rather than Biden, but it might have been him. 
   
  And almost always isn't always and in that case we are clearly discussing cases like Mary Schavo and other people kept alive by machines not little girls who just found their boyfriend cheated on them.
   
  Whatever kind of horrible murderer it makes me or suicide advocate it makes me I don't care.  If I'm going to be a vegatable stuck in a bed for the rest of my life.  Pull the fucking plug.  If it's a republican. . .well you guys are against universal health care so I guess I'll keep the machine running as long as your family can afford it.

• TinSoldier said on Aug 27, 2008....

  I'm not talking about euthanasia, which I support to a limited extent (see Oregon's Death with Dignity law), but rather a lot of people use that argument to support abortion.
  
  And this is one Republican who does believe in some kind of health care reform, even "universal health care", just not "nationalized health care".
  
  And I'm not the only one, either.
  

• stopmediabias said on Aug 27, 2008....

  Sean-How is universal health care paid for?  People seem to think UHC is free from the government, no you pay for it in taxes.

• TinSoldier said on Aug 27, 2008....

  Oh my gosh! Captain Obvious strikes again!!
  
  I see (well, saw when I was employed) how much health care insurance is costing companies and individuals every day. I've said it before and I'll say it again: there has to be a better way.
  

• stopmediabias said on Aug 27, 2008....

  I was pointing out the fact that Democrats belch the stupid idea of universal health care as if suddenly everyone will save so much money. 

  The better way is to improve on the system we have, which is the best system in the world.  We don't need the government turning our healthcare system into a full or partial bureaucracy, like our public schools. 

• TinSoldier said on Aug 27, 2008....

  Well I like to think that our schools work pretty good, too. And I disagree that our medical system is the best in the world -- have you visited a doctor recently? Or gone to an emergency room?
  
  Maybe it's the best in the world if your name is Paris Hilton or something. For us regular joes? Not so much.
  
  While I've heard some horror stories, for me the best medical care that I had was in the military. And yes, that is run by the government, with far less bureaucracy than our current system has (insurance companies).
  

• mOOn_platOOn said on Aug 27, 2008....

   

  I'll admit that I consider Obama's choice for VP pretty damned disappointing. Biden has failed at his own attempts to get the nomination BADLY, has put his foot in his mouth many times, and is in his high school yearbook listed as "Most Likely To Commit Campaign Gaffs."

  If this is the kind of decision we can expect from Obama, there are going to be a lot of "hopeful" people in a depressed state a year from now if he wins. What this tells me is that Obama is not confident that he could rule the White House with the Clintons in the wings. Silly Barack.

  The President is the President. Hillary as V.P. would have created a formidable offense against the GOP unmatached by any other possible candidate. She's the best speech maker on the campaign trail today. More than anyone, she speaks with utter confidence about her piositions and decisions. Apparently she wasn't even considered.

  This is Obama's ego in play. He believes it's all about Him.

   

• SeanRenaud said on Aug 27, 2008....

  1.  SMB we already have Universal Health Care in this country.  Nobody is denied care, people don't die in the streets with bullet wounds, they aren't thrown out into the streets with heart attacks, they aren't left untreated when they have pnemonia.  So we already have UHC and we are already paying for it.  We pay for it both in higher taxes AND in higher premiums for those who can afford HC.  So effectively UHC would just shift where we send our money not how much (in theory)
   
  What's more is that UHC if properly done could keep people healthy.  If you want to spend less money we need to catch that guy with the sniffles and prevent it from becoming pnemonia, you want to catch cancer when it's a little patch of cells that we can cut out, instead of waiting until it has metasised throughout the body. 
   
  It's like car upkeep and I won't lie, I would rather pay for an oil change for a complete stranger three times a year, than rebuild his engine every third year.  Which is pretty much the system we have now.
   
  There are other changes that I would like to have in our Health Care system as a whole amongst them doctors need to be better protected against lawsuits. 
   
  I'm also not saying that Universal Health Care should remove private health care practices.  There is room enough for both and our current way or doing it (Medicare, Medicaid) obviously isn't working the way it was intended and should either be reworked or scrapped entirely.
   
  The faults of UHC if done improperly are obvious as it messes with the Supply and Demand cycle dangerously (particularly if it eliminates the private sector) you have eliminated cost and thusly made "supply" unlimited which drives up demand and leads to the waits we all hear about from the UK and Canada (both of which have lower populations than us and thus likely smaller problems than we would have with the same situation.
   
  2.  I would argue that our schools don't work well.  I would go as far as to argue that part of the issue is the relative lack of capitalism in the system.  That teachers simply aren't motivated to do better.  Even if it is something you love to do it's hard to stay motivated when the rewards aren't there. 
   
  There are of course other problems plaguing our schools.  In southern California non-english speaking students and illiterate students are a significant hurdle.  My reasoning for pointing this out is that while I challenge the notion that our public school system is adequate I'm also aware of the fact that part of the advantage that private schools have is they can screen and only take high caliber students. 
   
  Private schools also get to set their own ciriculum.  For the moment I'm not going to really discuss the evoluton vs ID vs Creationism.  I'm going to state a fact which is that a private school has the option of teaching any, all or none of these.  They can also teach if they like the 'controversy' of the holocaust or any other wacky idea that appeals to the faculty.
   
  3.  Finally while I don't think our school system is as good as it could be using it as an example for UHC still stands, everybody receives a bare minimum and by receiving that bare minimum they are less likely to cause problems for all of us.  There is a direct inverse ratio between education/income and criminal activity.  (I would imagine without even glancing that there is a similar correlation on drug use, alcoholism and abortion) the dumber and more desperate you are the more things you do to survive.
   
  It's ultimately why I support welfare even if I despise the notion of something for nothing.  We saw in Russia what happens when you get too many people too poor for too long.  They get pissed off then rob and kill the rich.

• Obama said on Aug 27, 2008....

  Hillary was wanted by the cons to be "THE MAN" , but Biden will be better all the way around! (abony & ivory)

• ALIENated said on Aug 27, 2008....

  
  I have said it once and I will say it again. Insurance is not the solution. Insurance 
  is the problem. Like any giveaway program (the company you work for gives a lot
  into your insurance and so do you these days), insurance eventually causes more
  problems and higher prices. Mainly because doctors and hospitals start charging
  higher and higher prices to cover the deadbeats that do not work and cannot 
  afford insurance. I now copay more than I should be paying even if that was all 
  they were charging, not to mention the hundreds paid and negotiated down by
  my insurance company. Insurance is something slick businessmen learned from 
  the mob. It is little more than a racket. The big difference is, we all need health
  care from time to time and we cannot just be tough and opt out of the system 
  like we might stand up to the pimps sent out by the mob. Who you gonna take 
  a bat to? They have us by the short hairs. Instead of falling for Democrat lies, 
  we should be mounting a revolt against insurance, make doctors and hospitals 
  charge a reasonable rate like everyone else. I just got some lab work back on my
  child. You cannot tell me it takes $50 to $100 per test to put a drop of blood 
  under a microscope or something? That is just total bullcrap. Stop the insurance
  and kick deadbeats out of the emergency room. If they cannot get free services
  they will have to get a job and pay for it like everyone else. Eventually it will go 
  down to a point they can pay anyway. This is one of those problems that people
  approach like trying to put out a fire by throwing gasoline on it. We have high 
  health care costs so we need more insurance. Do away with the insurance and
  watch the costs go down. Same deal on car insurance. We now have to pay 
  monkey mechanics more to fix a car than the damn thing is worth because 
  insurance foots the bill ... with the money we all paid them 10 times over. 
  Insurance is like traveling with an expense account. How much do you spend 
  for dinner if you are paying? How much do you spend if it is on the company?
  Republicans believe we should all work hard and pay our own way. Democrats 
  want to enslave us to the system so they can keep buying our votes with our 
  own money. Sweet. Al Capone would have been proud of the Democrat party 
  today.
  
  

• stopmediabias said on Aug 28, 2008....

  Sean-the UHC you see as we all ready have is a dubious notion.  Having laws that say hospitals must take everyone regardless of anything is far different from government run health care paid for in taxes.
   
  Read about Canada's health care system.  It is illegal for a Canadian citizen to carry private insurance.  Canadian's health care system is a disaster, it is something like an 18 week average wait for a procedure.
   
  Our health care system is the best because people have to be held accountable.  Lazy people know if they go to the emergency room for a hang-nail that eventually they are going to have to pay for that.  Versus UHC where it doesn't matter, anybody can go for any reason at anytime without the spector of having to pay for it the future, hence the massive lines and waits. 
   
  Preventative health care should be taught in schools at a young age. 
   
  Corrupt insurance and hopitals is the major problem and can be fixed.  I was given a Tylanol (just one) in the emergency room years ago, on my bill it said that cost $30.  This crap needs to end.  If we go to UHC now the way the Dems are proposing there is no turning back.
   
   

• SeanRenaud said on Aug 28, 2008....

  1.  I pretty much disagree with everything you just said ALIEN.  I don't see any reason to believe that less or no insurance would cause prices to increase or decrease.  If it did then we should see lower repair fees in things like computers and other electronics *where anybody who knows anything about them can usually tell you that it's a simple five minute two dollar fix most often.* should have very low repair fees since most people don't insure them.  That simply isn't the case.  Likewise we should see lower (somewhat, enough to increase their business volume) prices at medical and mechanics that don't accept insurance.  Again we see neither trend.  So I gotta pull the BS card.
   
  2. SMB when an illegal immigrant (which you so vehemently defended a few days ago) breaks a leg because he fell off a ladder keeping our apple prices down who do you think pays?  It isn't him.  He and all seven of his brothers are living in a two room apartment they can barely afford the rent on.  He's never going to pay.  Who do you think pays when he gets pnemonia?  Who do you think pays when he get cancer?  We are already paying for these people or do you think that the money comes from magic?
   
  I already covered Canada's plan and pointed out that they did it wrong.  Have you read that the man who started UHC wants them to have private practices again?  That he wants private insurance back?  Having one doesn't by necessity get rid of the other.  We have both public and private schools and whiel there are problems the system seems to work pretty well.
   
  Yes preventative health care should be taught in schools along with other things.  That still wouldn't open up the available tools that would be needed for early diagnosis which could and would still save loads of money.
   
  Your point about corruption is a comment on corruption and there is no logical reason based on history to assume that no UHC would change anything.  It's not like when you have a heart attack that you're going to shop around so your idea is absurd on the surface.
   
  I'm not the strongest proponent of UHC I think that our current system is deeply flawed and that there are ways to improve it.

• TinSoldier said on Aug 28, 2008....

  Sean: You own your own business, right? Do you have any employees? If so, are you able to give them health insurance as part of their benefits package?
  
  
  

• SeanRenaud said on Aug 28, 2008....

  Yes I'm self employed,
  No I don't have employees.
  Honestly that bridge is far enough away that I'm not even gathering gasoline for it yet.
   
   

• TinSoldier said on Aug 28, 2008....

  Heh, just wondering. What about health insurance for yourself?

• TinSoldier said on Aug 28, 2008....

  BTW, check this out:
  http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/bus/stories/DN-Uninsured_27bus.ART.State.Edition2.4dce428.html
  
  
  McCain adviser

  But the numbers are misleading, said John Goodman, president of the National Center for Policy Analysis, a right-leaning Dallas-based think tank. Mr. Goodman, who helped craft Sen. John McCain's health care policy, said anyone with access to an emergency room effectively has insurance, albeit the government acts as the payer of last resort. (Hospital emergency rooms by law cannot turn away a patient in need of immediate care.)

  "So I have a solution. And it will cost not one thin dime," Mr. Goodman said. "The next president of the United States should sign an executive order requiring the Census Bureau to cease and desist from describing any American – even illegal aliens – as uninsured. Instead, the bureau should categorize people according to the likely source of payment should they need care.

  "So, there you have it. Voila! Problem solved."

  I really hope that he was joking.
  

  
  
  

• SeanRenaud said on Aug 28, 2008....

  I'm not certain what the end result of such a policy would be but it's still (IMO) treating a symptom when we should be focusing on disease itself.  I'd rather create a situation where less people get shot than improve how we deal with gunshot wounds.

• ALIENated said on Aug 30, 2008....

  
  ... then we should see lower repair fees in things like computers and other
  electronics.
  
  Insurance, warranties, same thing. I have tossed several computers, TVs,
  and VCRs because it cost almost as much to fix them as it did to buy a 
  new one. Of course the big problem with tech repairs and auto repairs is
  everything has gotten too high tech for the common man to work on it
  himself as was the case in the past. Plus, there are more women working,
  and that have money, and are not willing or able to do it themselves. But
  all this is not the same deal as health insurance. Techie toys are a luxury.
  Health care is a necessity. I do agree that preventive medicine is the best
  way to go, and strangly many insurance companies will not cover preventive
  medicine. Duh. That alone is enough to tell me it is a racket. If we stop 
  getting sick and going to the doctor at the drop of a hat, guess who goes
  out of business because they are not collecting money from us and even
  more money from our employers. That is one area where my family is blessed.
  We are pretty healthy and all the healthcare crap means little to me, especially
  since I usually work for a big company that provides it. Hey, here is a thought
  All those people whining about health care could ... get a job. But seriously,
  when I was a kid healthcare was almost unheard of. A visit to the doctor
  was maybe $10 and you never heard of someone running up thousands in
  hospital costs. Insurance changed all that. Anything (like afirmative
  action) that messes with the natural order of things screws those things
  up as far as I can tell. How many times have you heard that the cure was
  worse than the disease. There is truth to that.
  
  That is the downfall of the Democrat party. They think government can fix
  everything. In my experience, all government can do is screw things up. 
  Anyone that has been in the armed forces is well aware of that. 
  
  All I am saying is anything like health insurance, car insurance, warranties, etc.,
  create an unlevel playing field, especially when doctors and medical services are
  allowed to charge uninsured people more than insured people. I just got some
  routing lab work back on my kid and every test was charged and then discounted
  to a price agreed on with the insurance company. In other words, to get on my
  insurance's OK list, they have to discount what I get. Great for the insured, but
  BS otherwise. We need some rigid regulation so doctors and medical institutions
  cannot charge inflated prices to the uninsured. Not handouts from the government.
  
  

• SeanRenaud said on Aug 30, 2008....

  Wait you can't call for regulation on an industry or for people to charge less than the public will pay!  You're a republican remember!
   
  All joking aside I don't really agree with your insurance details and I think that the reason why prices have increased as much as they have is because of ability to sue doctors for any little thing that goes wrong.  Someone much wiser than myself once said that medicine is practiced never perfected.  I'm not saying that doctors should be able to get away with being stupid and dangerous practices.  Doctors have high insurance and thus have to charge more money.  It's an important detail for Democrats to take note of.  Bussinesses and bussiness people don't pay taxes.  We do.

• ALIENated said on Aug 30, 2008....

  
  That is exactly what Democrats and the people that fall for their drivel do not
  understand. If they tax the rich and companies, they are not the ones that pay.
  They pass it on to those of us who work and can do nothing about it. Lawyers
  get rich keeping the rich from paying all their money in taxes. They do not get
  rich by giving their money to the IRS. Democrats / liberals are dopes when it 
  comes to understanding taxes. They keep falling for politicians telling them that
  they are going to make the rich and corporations pay the bill. ha ha ha Never
  going to happen. Even Jesus said the poor will always be with us. Democrats
  want to bring everyone down to the lowest levels. Republicans want everyone
  to keep what they work so hard for. When rich people make money, rich people
  spend money. Then the middle class people have jobs and more money, and
  they spend more money. Then they can pay Mexicans to come here and mow
  their yards and paint their houses. Everyone wins. With Democrats, the IRS
  wins ... big.
  
  

• SeanRenaud said on Aug 30, 2008....

  Honestly ALIEN overall I've never debated against the basic idea of trickle down economics (even if historically it doesn't see to work) I figure there must be soem stupid X factor that isn't explainable.  Ultimately Economics and Evolution work under nearly identical terms that make long term exact predictions difficult to impossible because we don't yet understand everything that factors in.  You know the price of car insurance on walmart ice cream is an unknown because of butterfly effect but the effect is there.

• stopmediabias said on Aug 31, 2008....

  Sean-This is what Alien alludes to that I am unclear in your position.  Right now if you look at the census reports about 80% of the people in this country have some type of health insurance.  The other 20% along with the illegals always have access to a doctor in emergency rooms. 
   
  My solution is to educate people, remove the corruption, and let the free market work.  Free market solutions, in other words instead of the government taking our tax dollars they let us keep our money while at the same time providing avenues through education  to direct us.  How many people know there are private insurance carriers that people can get health insurance outside of their employer?  Nearly every socialist healthcare system around the world have problems we don't have, long lines, insufficient care, etc..  And the tiny part of our system that is or could be called UHC, like medicaid, medicare, are both disasters and could be a zillion times better. 
   
  Your solution seems to be government funded (through tax dollars) health care for people that choose while at the same time letting people who want to stick with the old system stay there.  I think this is wrong because anything on a grand scale the government cannot do proficiently and lazy people take advantage of.  I was in a convenience store one time and this obese woman in front of me had in her hand a box of donuts and a chocolate milk.  She paid for the donuts and milk with food stamps, asked for a pack of cigarettes and a scratch-off ticket which she paid for in cash.  Bottom line, mine and your tax dollars a paying for this woman to get fatter.  This is what needs to end and this is what UHC will bring.

• SeanRenaud said on Aug 31, 2008....

  I am adovcating a mixture of systems similar to what is going on with the school system but with a merit based system that would be supported. http://www.soulcast.com/post/show/102169/Presidential-Campain-Sean-Renaud-2016%21%21  It's point number 2 so you don't have to bother with the entire thing.
   
  I understand that any and every government program can and will be abused and we need to do what we can to minimize that.  I'm a big fan of the free market being allowed to function.  My point is that the 80% are already subsidizing that lower 20% (and as you point out illegals) and this is what is costing us a fortune.
   
  I agree with education but education without the tools is pointless.  Knowing how to fix your car is different from having a lift in your garage.  Our current system isn't working, the system that Canada is using sucks, arguably worse.  (Yeah they have horrible waits but they also per capita live longer so if the overall goal of health care is leading longer healthier lives then they suceeded)  Still I would side that our system is better.
   
  The point that I make now and have made before is that we have to take care of the poor, not because of some altruistic bullshit (on a side note somebody FINALLY explained to me why liberals seem to act more Christian than conservatives and it nearly made sense.  More sense than any other explanation.) but out of pure unadultered self interest.  Welfare wasn't put in place because we felt really bad about the poor, it was put in place so they would stop mugging us.  Retirement didn't become mandatory because we felt that after a while you'd put in your time and deserved to be taken care of.  We did it because old people got to the top and there is only so much room at the top and poor people fuck the rest of us.
   
  In addition I believe that giving regular check ups would alleviate many of the costs we are currently getting.

• D6fer said on Aug 31, 2008....

  (Yeah they have horrible waits but they also per capita live longer so if the overall goal of health care is leading longer healthier lives then they suceeded)
  
  Sean......this is one of the most common misconceptions about mortality rates world wide.......Canada, as well as most other countries do not calculate mortality rates the same way that we do in the U.S.....they do not count babies that die within a certain number of hours or days, like we do here.....add that in and you would have a mortality rate similar to our own....if not worse.
  

• SeanRenaud said on Sep 01, 2008....

  They have more people over the age of 100 as well.  No matter how you calculate it we lose.

• TinSoldier said on Sep 01, 2008....

  I would rather have Canadian-style health care (even though it isn't perfect) than what we have now.

• D6fer said on Sep 01, 2008....

  Sean......ok....I will give you that.....but I think you are giving the canadian HC system too much credit for the longer life expectancy.......here is the real reason for the problem on our side.....gangs, prosperity (and the glutony that goes with it)
  
  Why do Canadians live longer. One reason is due to the excess number of accidents and homicides in the U.S. compared to Canada. In fact 50%-85% of the mortality gap between American and Canadian adults in their twenties can be explained by the increased American accident/homicide rates. For people over 50, 30-50% of the difference in age-specific mortality rates can be attributed to the excess number of heart disease patients in the U.S. These heart disease findings are more likely driven by American lifestyle choices rather than the efficacy of the U.S. medical system.   Source
  

• D6fer said on Sep 01, 2008....

  Probably the most surprising discovery of the paper was that Americans partake in more preventive care than Canadians.
  
  Sean......didn't you say prevention was the answer?
  

• SeanRenaud said on Sep 01, 2008....

  I will look further into the more prevention part because while it makes NO sense that preventive care would't work it makes no sense that trickle down economics doesn't work but the facts seem to be that it doesn't.  (which I ultimately blame economics being too complicated a beast for us to accurately project)

  As for Canadians having less crime and accidents maybe we should look into the why on that, it is a different issue but one no less important (assuming that quality of life is the issue that we are interested in)

• stopmediabias said on Sep 01, 2008....

  Sean-While I agree with you on most of your points one thing I see is you say we can manage people who abuse the system, NO WE CAN'T.  We have become so political correct we cannot regulate abhorant behavior if it is not illegal.  The welfare queen I mentioned above is a great example and speaks a lot about welfare. 
   
  How many people have insurance in the country, have easy access to a doctor and don't get preventative check-ups?  A lot, this is why education, especially cancer education should be paramount. 
   
  Liberals don't act more Christian on social issues, liberals come up with ridiculous blanket social programs that pamper people and keep them poor.  The goal is not just helping the poor, the goal is help the poor become not poor.

Comment on "Obama chooses......Biden?????"

Currently tagged	Obama vice President politics presidential race VP john mccain bad choice STRANGE idiot Obama blew this one authenticity Biden Catholics Barack Obama (Click to add tags below)
Tag this post	(Separate tags using commas, for example: New York, dating, vegetarian)
Your comment
	Comment Anonymously