I'm an official write-in candidate for US Senate. (fit in, house insurance)

[Glitch]

Originally Posted by captaincatfish

So your theory is, even though myself and members of my family served our country through the Armed Forces...have married and fathered chidren and grandchildren...have served with distinction in our local police and fire departments, and on our Board Of Education...

If seems rather contradictory and counter-productive that someone who swears an oath to defend and protect the US Constitution against all enemies, both foreign and domestic, would vote for candidates that: 1) never read the document; and 2) consider the Supreme Law of the Land to be an impediment to their socialist agenda.

Originally Posted by captaincatfish

Have never had an anti-American or Communist or even (gasp!) liberal thought in our lives, and our only real transgression may have been voting Democrat in this and several other elections...defended the Constitution of the US while performing said armed service...

Voting to destroy the very document that one is sworn to protect and defend makes absolutely no sense to me.

Originally Posted by captaincatfish

You're going to sit there on your high horse in Wasilla Alaska, and brand myself, my family, and anyone else with a like train of thought as Communists and anti-Americans, simply because we voted differently than you in an election?

I already provided you with my definition of an anti-American. If someone votes for anti-life, anti-liberty, anti-pursuit of happiness, and anti-US Constitution candidates who want a cradle-to-grave nanny state, then they are by definition anti-American communists.

[gobrien]

Sure hope you didn't go to public schools, what a narrow view of democrats you have. But I guess it gives you some entertainment to be so fervant about it.

[starlite9]

Originally Posted by gobrien

Sure hope you didn't go to public schools, what a narrow view of democrats you have. But I guess it gives you some entertainment to be so fervant about it.

His definition of Anti-American is pretty spot on, there are Republicans that fit the bill as well.

The Government has no place in dictating of Health Care, nor has the authority to mandating buying it.

[gobrien]

I don't like that part either, forcing people to get insurance. I do like the rules regarding pre-existing conditions and dropping the insured from their plans due to illness. I think the timing was bad for a huge health care reform law, when people were losing their houses and jobs enmasse. While there are multiple things wrong with how insurance companies do business, they could have just addressed the injustices to paying customers at the very least and then focused on jobs.

[blueflames50]

Originally Posted by starlite9

The Government has no place in dictating of Health Care, nor has the authority to mandating buying it.

well would you please tell them that then??? in MA we didn't have a say and it got instituted and what a freak'n mess it is....no implementation plan....all major insurance co have pulled out of MA...the ones left are for low income people only...middle income people can not get individual insurance but are mandated to have it. then there's the open enrollment dates that no politician considered as they don't have to worry about getting insurance it is handed to them on a silver platter!
they should take a serious look at what has happened in MA beyond what the "entitled, handed too, select ones" are saying...they are not on the "working end" of this mess that need to actually buy health insurance.

[Metlakatla]

I don't agree with mandating that people buy health insurance either but I can see the point.

We mandate that people buy car insurance for a reason.

I recall when car insurance was not mandatory in Alaska and some idjit could bash into your truck, completely total it, and you'd never see a dime. Sure you could sue but you can't collect what isn't there.

By the same token, those without health insurance contribute to the high costs of health care by using services that are never paid for.

Of course the Social Darwinists among us here would say that if a person couldn't afford treatment they needed they'd just have to die. But really...could anyone deny health care to a sick child?

Wait--I'm pretty sure I couldn't stomach the answer to that question.

[gobrien]

Theoretically the more who buy in the lower the cost but we all know insurance companies make huge profits. While I am not against a company making money, it is not right to prey on the sick. On a personal note, my daughter needs constant medical care and medication to stay alive. I work and buy insurance but still have expenses more than I can afford. Supplies and medication for type 1 diabetes are very expensive and costs hundreds per month. One snide commentor on the News Miner said "She's worth it, though" as if that was the point. I think a working professional should be able to take care of their child's medical needs, as well as all the usual expenses of raising a child. I don't want a nanny state, I just think the basics of life should be attainable to those who have done the "right" things in life such as getting an education or working a trade.

[RedJacket]

Originally Posted by blueflames50

well would you please tell them that then??? in MA we didn't have a say and it got instituted and what a freak'n mess it is....no implementation plan....all major insurance co have pulled out of MA...the ones left are for low income people only...middle income people can not get individual insurance but are mandated to have it. then there's the open enrollment dates that no politician considered as they don't have to worry about getting insurance it is handed to them on a silver platter!
they should take a serious look at what has happened in MA beyond what the "entitled, handed too, select ones" are saying...they are not on the "working end" of this mess that need to actually buy health insurance.

By mandating everyone have coverage, that accomplished nothing more than giving the insurance companies another 40 million customers. It's the insurance industry that's the major problem, and sadly, they have far more say in DC than us. You can bet they sat down and wrote some of the rules in the health care bill.

If you're not going to take the insurance companies out of the equation, then you need to open things up to other competitors. In my state and others, one or two dominant and you can't go shopping over state lines. You need to allow competition to seep in at every level.

Like everything else, it all boils down to the influence all these companies have over both parties. The Republicans had plenty of opportunities and they did absolutely nothing. They want to repel Obama's but they have no other solutions.

We're the only country that allows drug companies to peddle their drugs on TV, and we have no choice but to pay a high premium to get them.

Insurance companies, drug companies, hospitals, & doctors are all out-of-control.

It could be fixed, but it won't because we have a very corrupt government. We might be getting some new dogs in Washington, but it won't be long before they're infested with the same fleas their predecessors were.

The democrats at times rely too heavily on the government to solve problems. The Republicans prefer the average person fend for themselves and do all they can to help enrich the already rich.

Funny thing, the voters want the two sides to stop being so divisive and work together, but then turn right around and vote for the most divisive candidate out there. If someone from one side attempts to work with someone from the other side, it's considered treason by some voters.

No damn wonder nothing gets down, and no damn wonder we have the kind of government we do.

[starlite9]

Originally Posted by Metlakatla

I don't agree with mandating that people buy health insurance either but I can see the point.

We mandate that people buy car insurance for a reason.

I recall when car insurance was not mandatory in Alaska and some idjit could bash into your truck, completely total it, and you'd never see a dime. Sure you could sue but you can't collect what isn't there.

By the same token, those without health insurance contribute to the high costs of health care by using services that are never paid for.

Of course the Social Darwinists among us here would say that if a person couldn't afford treatment they needed they'd just have to die. But really...could anyone deny health care to a sick child?

Wait--I'm pretty sure I couldn't stomach the answer to that question.

You are correct about having car insurance and that is the left's excuse for it on Health care. If you want to drive, you need the insurance, to be an American Citizen, the Constitution gives you the right not to buy a car, you don't have that luxury with health care, which is why the entire bill will be thrown out in the legal system because it is illegal, they simply don't have the authority to mandate such a Law.

They needed to address Tort Reform and a lot of the real issues that made health care so expensive for the average person, they didn't. Instead, they did all the things that are going to bring the quality down and make politicians big money in kickbacks and insurance companies.

[starlite9]

Originally Posted by blueflames50

well would you please tell them that then??? in MA we didn't have a say and it got instituted and what a freak'n mess it is....no implementation plan....all major insurance co have pulled out of MA...the ones left are for low income people only...middle income people can not get individual insurance but are mandated to have it. then there's the open enrollment dates that no politician considered as they don't have to worry about getting insurance it is handed to them on a silver platter!
they should take a serious look at what has happened in MA beyond what the "entitled, handed too, select ones" are saying...they are not on the "working end" of this mess that need to actually buy health insurance.

State's have different "Rules of Engagement", but the Federal Government only has the authority to deal with interstate commerce, not mandate what American "Have" to buy. If your state mandates it, that is something entirely different than the Federal Government and has different ground rules (but still should be illegal to mandate). You can move to another State if you don't like the rules there and still be an American.

There is no guarantee that you are going to make it out of here alive, the Government isn't going to change that either, they just think they can.