Impeach Bush & Cheney!
"Google" your Voter Registration
Register to Vote
Visit the Democratic Party
An alternative to war: Life
By MATT LEINGANG, Associated Press Writer Sun Jul 10, 5:58 AM ET
COLUMBUS, Ohio - A push for universal health coverage is being rekindled in some states by the soaring cost of health care and the lack of political support in Washington for federal changes.
Advocates of a single-payer system — where the government would collect taxes and cover everyone, similar to programs in Canada and across Europe — have introduced bills in at least 18 state legislatures. Some are symbolic gestures, but heated debate is taking place in California and Vermont.
In Ohio, doctors, union officials and religious leaders are gathering signatures to get a single-payer health system placed on a ballot next year.
"The level of misery with private insurers is rising, and that's why we're seeing this increased activity," said Larry Levitt, vice president of the California-based Kaiser Family Foundation, which analyzes health care issues. "But whether one state can succeed, I don't know." read more...
_________________________________________
This is what I talking about. Healthcare and Education, not Warfare and Occupation! This is an issue that is relevant to the people. This is an issue that will improve our way of life. Forget terror, and strive for hope!
- Login or register to post comments
Printer-friendly version- Send to friend
Join us & contribute
Proud members of the Democratic Party
Copyright 2006 Democrats.com. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy
Justin, I hope this can become a reality.
Clinton tried to enstate this.
We are the only first world country I know of that
doesn't have a universal healthcare system.
Kerry is trying to get health insurance for millions of uninsured
children in the US. It is long overdue!!
Exactly.
THIS is what a culture of life would be like. Not war and terror. As a working person, I already pay through the teeth for health insurance that SUCKS! I would gladly divert those funds to a single payer (i.e. government run health system). The problem is, you have all these people who don't mind draining the national coffers to go to war, but when you ask them to pay for it through taxes, they ask for tax cuts. Why is it that this ccountry is so afraid of paying taxes? Perhaps we're all a bunch of freeloading cheapskates!!!
And then you read stories
And then you read stories like this:
What a waste of money. The entire program until this point has been a comp[lete failure. All it is is a throwback to cold war foreign policies. Who is going to send a nuke over here? No one.
STOP WASTING OUR MONEY you sons a beeps!!!
The neo-cons
The neocons and their forerunners have been in love with this "Star Wars" project since before Reagan, they have been in bed with the military industrial contractors for a very long time. This "great notion" of a bullet hitting a bullet has made war contractors very very rich and the republicans get hundreds of millions of dollars from those very same corporations in campaign moneys. It is one of the biggest boondoggles in American history, financially.
The war corps are taking advantage of the republican fear of the rest of the world. The neocons are planning a missile shield as a cover of protection over the US. It all makes one wonder what the neocon warmongers are planning that they will need to secure "Fortress America" from incoming missiles? And we, the working public, are paying for them to get filthy rich on the deal.
IMO, what the republican voters don't see is that they, as we, are in danger from the neocon greed and world take over mentality and from the total lack of diplomacy or even desire to work out differences with other countries. We are playing the part of world dictator, threatening anyone who doesn't give us their total acquiescence. Who knows how blatant this policy will become. If we ever do get a reliable missile shield, while the neocons are in power, I shudder to think what adventures our shadow government has in store.
In the mean time they play and we pay and the voters worry about gays getting married and any other diversion the players throw at them. What a kool game, huh?
Proud member of the reality based community.
My wife and I were just
My wife and I were just talking about that game you mentioned. We were disccussing how ironic it is that Bush uses our first ammendment rights to stiffle the opposition. In other words, you and I are screaming at the top of our lungs 'No war! No this, no that!" and Bush comes out and says 'This is what makes our democracy so free.' Then he completely ignores us and just goes and does whatever he wants. This is an even greater evil genius than say Hitlers germany. It's harder, and bloodier, to keep a ghestopo to silence opposition than it is to completly nullify opposition by categorizing it as a constitutional right.
We were also talking about how many times Bush has changed the reasons for going to Iraq:
#1 - WMD
#2 - To end the riegn of a Tyrant
#3 - Free the Iraqi people
#4 - Bring democracy to the middle east and to 'terror prone arabs'
#5 - Fight the terrorists abroad so we do not have to face them at home
I think #5 and the unspoken 'oil factor' are closer to the truth. But the bottom line is, all of these reasons have proven fataly wrong. $340 billion dollars, 1700+ dead troops, and 15,000+ dead iraqis later and we still have bombs going off in madrid and london, despite the significant sacrifice. When will America wake up and smell the napalm?
colors
You might want to revise those figures of the dead American soldiers, sadly they have been lying about those too. The real figures are closer to 7,000 U.S. troops dead and who knows how many Iraqi civilians killed, only the IRC has reasonable figures on that.
http://www.democrats.com/node/5180#comment-32794
Proud member of the reality based community.
Fear? Meet the boogeyman
How convenient is it that North Korea was not only allowed to ramp up their nuclear program AND their long range missle program SIMULTANEOUSLY?
And by "allowed", I mean the endless cycle of convincing them to come to multi-lateral talks, only to sabotage it with some asshole (like Rice, Cheney or Bush) shooting their mouth off by calling Kim Jung Il a tyrant or other names. It's almost like they don't want diplomacy to succeed.
Is it just me?
Axis Of Evil, and the
Axis Of Evil, and the evil-doers who run them. Black and white. If you're not with me, you're with them. Bring 'em on.
I have nukular weapons and you don't. Neener, neener, neener...
Bill I would like to add the
Bill I would like to add the now infamous: 'The war against terror rages on, neener, neener.' (Bush's response to the London bombing)
Andy Card: Umm. Mr.
Andy Card: Umm. Mr. President, they have nukular weapons too.
Dubya: I knew that Andy, gawdangit! Now run on off and get me some of them Spaghettios, with the little meatballs in em' and the cartoon macaroni.
We can also add: 'Ooh ooh
We can also add: 'Ooh ooh ooh AHHH AHHH!'
Can I be an elitist for a
Can I be an elitist for a second? Why is a C student president of the United States?
(…and don’t counter with: Well why is an actor the Governor of the fifth largest economy on the plane.)
You see Jim, Daddy promised
You see Jim, Daddy promised him that he would be president.
Don't ask me how planet
Don't ask me how planet became plane, maybe that will be revealed when I dream this nightmare again tomorrow night.
Well, nobody can complain that debt and death this time around were anything but a self inflicted wound. (Well half the country can complain.)
BTW
Democrats urge Bush to fire Rove in leak scandal
Rep. Henry Waxman (news, bio, voting record), a California Democrat and the ranking minority member of the House Government Reform Committee, called for a congressional hearing to hear testimony from Rove, who is widely seen as the architect of Bush's election victories.
"The recent disclosures about Mr. Rove's actions have such serious implications that we can no longer responsibly ignore them. The intentional disclosure of a covert CIA agent's identity would be an act of treason," Waxman said.
As I told Bill a few days
ago, Henry Waxman rocks.
He would make a great Senator.
http://www.henrywaxman.house.gov/
Because daddy had enough
Because daddy had enough connections to get his grades padded up from an F.
(...and if a wrestler can be the Gov. of Minnesota, why not flabby, no-talent ex-actor, former Nazi? And I don't mean Reagan)
No it is not just you
No it is not just you GM.
Actually I will go a bit further and suggest that the neocons might very well think, 'if we were to finagle N. Korea into an attack on the U.S. we could kick their butts and scare the Chinese'. It would be a very very dangerous thing to do, but we have seen the faulty reasoning of those who pull the strings of the BA.
I will go out on a limb and say that China will eventually be the ecomomic and military world leader. Probably not in my life time, but not that far in the future.
While we are spending our grandchildren's future in moneys and freedoms and real safety the Chinese are buying up chunks of our economy and lending us huge amounts of cash to run this war and heaven knows what else we are spending those loans on. They have stollen important technologies from the U.S. with no real resistance from our leaders. And they have gotten U.S. companies to invest in their economy at the risk of our own people. What will happen if they attack Taiwan, will we have to just look away? The neocon believers in the fantasy of their own power and godlikeness have put us in a no win situation, I fear. It is just a matter of time unless someone can stop this runaway train soon.
Proud member of the reality based community.
P.S.
If our government allows China to buy Unical, and it is the Chinese government who will have complete control of it as they do with all their countries assets, no matter what they say, our goose will be cooked.
Proud member of the reality based community.
Souls not for sale any longer
Our goose is cooked thanks to all the Bush's. George's Uncle sold our soul to China. George's father sold our soul to Saudi Arabia.
"They want the federal government controlling Social Security
like it's some kind of federal program."
- George W. Bush in a debate in St. Charles, Mo., Nov. 2, 2000
A matter of time?
IMHO, China already is the big dog on the block. They just haven't realized it yet. Once they figure it out, we're screwed because there is not a damn thing we can do about it.
They have nukes, ICBMs, submarines, and a virtual limitless fighting force of over a billion people who can be forced to fight. We can't seem to muster up more than a couple hundred thousand to fight the bullshit war we have been dragged into now. We can develop all the missile defense crap that we want, but it won't mean a thing against an army that large, rich and nuclear armed.
And that is if it comes down to war. If they want to challenge us economically, we are like a one-legged man in an ass kicking contest. The smallest peep sends Wall Street bonkers. Imagine what would happen if China decides that they don't want anymore dollars?
Sleep tight kids.
"There is a sleeping giant.
"There is a sleeping giant. Let him sleep! If he wakes, he will shake the world."
-Napoleon
It might have taken 200
It might have taken 200 years, but Nepolean will still be proven right about China. And sadly it didn't need to happen. Even Nixon knew that, or at least seemed to know it.
Proud member of the reality based community.
Maybe I am just a nutty
Maybe I am just a nutty liberal GM, but I really believe that if we had serious diplomacy and a heart to do it we could end war and lead the planet into peaceful cooperation.
If only we were brave enough to believe in it and to fight full out for it. The legacy that our generation could have left to our children. Talk about 'changing the world' that would be a change to revel in, but ...............
Proud member of the reality based community.
You are a nutty liberal
and we love you for it, but you're spot on. Everytime I see those "Freedom isn't free" bumper stickers, it pisses me off. Because of Bush's stewardship of this war, freedom is ridiculously expensive. Peace on the otherhand is virtually free. It just takes effort, not deaths and misery.
Does it take effort?
Does it take effort?
It's a labor of love
IMHO, it does. It's a lot like parenting. You can pour money on your kids, but without parental effort in the end all you'll get is a spoiled brat. On the otherhand, love, compassion, listening and leading by example nurtures a child into an independent, self-respecting and kind-hearted adult.
True. I guess I was thinking
True. I guess I was thinking that mostly what you have to do is not kill someone.
Of course there is quite a bit one has to do to ensure the world does not get to the point that a fight breaks out. I thought we were quite a ways towards that in 2000. Even after Sept. 11th, I thought America would counter strike against the Taliban and then return rapidly to peace and prosperity. It isn't very nice to say, but I'm waiting for the look on everyone's face when it strikes them that the path chosen by the BA has COSTS.
Costs?
It isn't going to cost me a dime! But unfortuately my nieces and nephew will get to pay for it.
"They want the federal government controlling Social Security
like it's some kind of federal program."
- George W. Bush in a debate in St. Charles, Mo., Nov. 2, 2000
Amen, GM. This is very well
Amen, GM. This is very well stated.
Don't forget the time honored setting of boundaries and rules. At the risk of sounding like a rule Nazi,( yeah, I'm real strict, ha ;-) )all kids actually want limits and boundaries, especially those with special needs. It clearly spells out what they can and can't do. Of course, those boundaries will be crossed from time to time. But establishing them provides a sense of security and guidelines for behavior, whether interacting with peers, parents, other adults or authority figures. I've seen the results of a no rules, no limits family
on a young person. They are unhappy, insecure and ill equipt to handle much life will throw at them.
Now, did I follow all the rules( all the time) my parents set down for me? Are you kidding? Did I take the consequences for not doing so ? Yep! Am I glad they had those"stupid rules"? You bet!
Computer game
Submarine USS Wahoo ss238
Kind of reminds you of the computer game Civilization huh?
I was thinking more like
I was thinking more like Grand Theft Auto - Baghdad.
Indeed, and
Indeed, and has anyone wondered at the way the Bush Administration is running up the debt (to the direct benefit of the wealthy by way of not having to pay for anything) to beyond alarming levels without a care in the world?
Almost as though they expect the world to come unglued (war?), giving them (us, the U.S.) the opportunity to unilaterally declare all bets off--rather, all debts off?
All it might take is one good world war (perhaps initiated by Korea and, potentially, drawing in China-our biggest creditor and largest threat for the future-before they're ready), which we can "win" with nuclear weapons while sitting "safely" behind a missile defense system (which won't work) and we could declare all debts null and void.... Especially since we are so "all-powerful" (in our leader's minds), nobody could collect from us and any attempt to do so, in any case, would so destabilize the world economy as to result in a global depression)!?!
Indeed, our leadership seems unconcerned at the loss of jobs and the industries behind them... almost as though they expect that all those other countries out there will become irrelevant (as in the industries they've won over will just disappear) such that we will enjoy boom times reestablishing those industries here at home to regain world supremacy?
Much of that presumes the Bushes and their ilk even care whether or not this country (and it's people) will ever again have a decent industrial/manufacturing base--which is a stretch, since they don't need it, they already have sufficient wealth (and foreign investment/investment in U.S. multi-nationals) to be sitting pretty even if we return to an agrarian society.
Still, their cavalier attitudes makes one wonder.
What ever happened to policy
What ever happened to policy for the people? And why don't the people vote for politicians who want policy for the people? Is it just me, or does it seem like americans care more for this war on terror than decent healthcare and education? what's wrong with this picture? I guess the superbowl music accompanying the graphic that reads 'Healthcare for all' on the nightly news doesn't resonate with all those T.V. viewers waiting to be sold on the newest crunchy cerial. Not exciting enough to get us in the mood to consume.
Don't even think about that!
Man, if we go to war with China, the last thing I'd be worried about is whether or not we keep up payments to them. Shit, without imports from China, Wal-Mart would go bankrupt, which would cause total collapse of the Red State economy.
China would kick our ass.
China would kick our ass.
China
Submarine USS Wahoo ss238
They would Shanghai the US....................
Well we have their money
some day they well may come to collect on the loans.
Proud member of the reality based community.
and there would be nothing
and there would be nothing we could do to stop them.
By MICHAEL McDONOUGH,
By MICHAEL McDONOUGH, Associated Press Writer 13 minutes ago
LONDON - A British research group said Tuesday that about 25,000 civilians died in violence in
Iraq in the two years after the start of the U.S.-led invasion.
Iraq Body Count compiled its figures of killings that occurred between March 20, 2003 and March 19, 2005 from reports by the major news agencies, including The Associated Press and British and American newspapers.
The results could not be independently confirmed. U.S. and coalition authorities say they have not kept a count of such deaths and Iraqi accounting has proven to be haphazard.
"There are no wholly reliable figures for civilian deaths," Britain's Foreign Office said. "It is recognized by everybody that statistics are very hard to collect under these circumstances."
The new estimate was much lower than the figure of 98,000 civilian deaths that appeared in a study in medical journal The Lancet in October 2004.
"The ever-mounting Iraqi death toll is the forgotten cost of the decision to go to war in Iraq," said John Sloboda, a psychology professor at Keele University in central England and co-founder of the group.
Iraq Body Count found:
• U.S.-led coalition forces were responsible for 37.3 percent of the total. About three-quarters of those fatalities occurred during the invasion phase up to May 1, 2003.
• "Predominantly criminal killings" linked to the huge crime wave that struck Iraq after the collapse of
Saddam Hussein's government accounted for 35.6 percent.
• Insurgency, or anti-occupation, forces were responsible for 9.5 percent.
• Deaths caused by suicide bombs and other attacks that lacked a clearly identifiable military objective amounted to 11 percent. Iraq Body Count said there would likely be some overlap between this category and the "anti-occupation forces" one.
• U.S.-led troops and anti-occupation forces were involved in a further 2.5 percent.
• Civilian deaths blamed on what the Iraqi Ministry of Health described as "military actions" and "terrorist attacks" amounted to 3.8 percent. It wasn't immediately clear how Iraq Body Count separated these deaths from those it attributed to coalition or anti-occupation forces. A spokesman for the research project wasn't immediately available for comment.