Comments on: Walz’s response to RNC health care ads targets town hall agitators

By: Ginny

Ginny — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 18:18:10 +0000

Regarding better ways to run “town hall” meetings:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/16/opinion/16fishkin.html

By: Dave Porter

Dave Porter — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 19:43:37 +0000

Back in the days when I had a double major in History and Social Welfare, I learned that this country has a history of providing welfare benefits to “the deserving.” Blind, physically crippled in an obvious way, military veterans, the elderly, mothers of small children.

After WW2, and especially as the hugely successful benefits of the GI Bill’s education and mortgage assistance came rolling in, it became obvious that it really paid to educate our children
and get as many people as possible into affordable homes of their own. So they extended those
benefits through education grants and FHA loans. We had a country full of people who fully expected their work and savings to pay off down the road, and who expected their children to
have a fair chance at making even better lives for themselves.

This was not such a bad deal. But then the rich got greedy, and our own social Neanderthals
somehow got the idea that if the rich were allowed to become obscenely rich, there would lots of
money dropping out of their back pockets. And that those who were the closest to those back pockets would be able to get rich without having to work for it. Thus developed people like
Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Dan Savage, and their ilk, whose noses are perpetually a darker
shade than they were born with.

Bring back the FCC rules of Fair Comment and Equal Time along with the Estate Tax, and perhaps we can get back on the right track again. Fair income taxation would include so-called
capital gains and dividend income. Let the 1980 doubling of our Social Security taxes to 15% (with the entire increase supposedly “loaned” to the general treasury) sunset back to 7.5%, the way it was supposed to in 2000. Forget about using that income to eliminate the National Debt (which it very nearly did, but solely on the backs of the working class).

Oh yeah – and don’t forget to pardon Don Siegelman and indict Karl Rove.

By: Dave

Dave — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 14:38:04 +0000

“I have read the bill and I cant understand why the govt needs access to my bank account (Page 57-59 of the bill) ”

This is only true if you are a health care provider, in which case access to your bank account is required to reimburse the provider for services, just like some insurers already do.

But then, if you were honest, you would already know that.

Joe. I’m sure you think this is acceptable : http://cbs5.com/local/cancer.treatment.denied.2.1007394.html

By: Robert Iverson

Robert Iverson — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:52:35 +0000

Does anyone believe that things are working well the way they are? The current system is a corporatist project aimed at keeping most people on drugs they don’t intrinsically need, and some people off of the expense treatments they really do need. Still I fail to see how a taxpayer funded monopoly will fix all that. Ask Walz if he understands the nuts and bolts of this legislation!!! Ask him if he understands the corporate interests involved in this bill!!!

By: Joe

Joe — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 21:45:50 +0000

Tim again has proved that he just follows the DNC and does not listen to his voters. IF he were to issue a statement like the following prior to his next town hall I bet it would not be conducive to building up the creditability he has lost over the past months: “I understand that there are numerous problems with this bill, and in its current draft will cost seniors, veterans and others a loss of medical care once enacted. Therefore, I will be proposing an amendment that requires that removes the exception that all US Congressmen and Senators currently enjoy under this bill and requires them to use the public health care system as defined in this bill.” If he read the bill he would also understand that the VA clinics that he fought for would be gone if the health care choice act provided comparable care. Tim, please read the bill and then act like a Senior Army NCO and stand up for your troops (voters) and not the party line.

By: Joe

Joe — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:25:14 +0000

Tim will vote for this bill not because he is listening to his voters, but because the DNC is telling to do so. If he really held to his Army NCO roots he would be supporting his troops (voters).
I would like him say “I have read the bill, and I will chose the plan outlined in the bill for my healthcare. I will add an admendment that makes it mandatory for all US Congressmen and Senators to drop thier current plan and use the medical plan outlined in this bill.”
Why shout him down when his own inaction and towing the party line screams lack of real concern for the people of Minnesota….
I have read the bill and I cant understan why the govt needs access to my bank account (Page 57-59 of the bill) and can cancel my VA medical benefits if they “determine it would be covered” (Page 77) under this new plan. The VA is a good medical program, Tim has made it better with new clinics. Why does he want to lose that victory and close them down?