Posted on 08/16/2009 9:16:51 AM PDT by RobinMasters
WASHINGTON – Apparently ready to abandon the idea, President Barack Obama's health secretary said Sunday a government alternative to private health insurance is "not the essential element" of the administration's health care overhaul.
The White House indicated it could jettison the contentious public option and settle on insurance cooperatives as an acceptable alternative, a move embraced by some Republicans lawmakers who have strongly opposed the administration's approach so far.
Officials from both political parties reached across the aisle in an effort to find compromises on proposals they left behind when they returned to their districts for an August recess. Obama has been pressing for the government to run a health insurance organization to help cover the nation's almost 50 million uninsured.
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said the White House would be open to co-ops instead of a government-run public option, a sign Democrats want a compromise so they can declare a victory on the must-win showdown.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Don’t believe it.
They’d better kill this think and start all over again.
If at all.
I won’t let up till they drop the whole damned IDEA of nationalizing MY health care!
whoops.
I don’t really think it will be out of the picture until we can get this administration out of office.
Exactly.
Compromise isn't an option. This bill, and the adminstration that spawned it, have to go.
Don’t believe it.
_______________________________
Hell no! Don’t trust them at all.
This thing was over when they couldn’t rush the vote before the summer recess.
Next time they try this they must have silenced Talk Radio and Fox. Believe me...they are working on it.
Exactly someplace in their compromise bill will be a clause or section to allow what they could not legislatively get to be imposed bureaucratically.
Former Alaskan Gov. Sarah Palin has called the session “death panels,” a label that has drawn rebuke from her fellow Republicans as well as Democrats.
Rebuke?
Why did they pull that section of the bill?
This is not about a frivolous question of which provisions are acceptable and which are unacceptable. This is about a power struggle between the principles the founding generation were willing to stake their "lives, property, and sacred honor" for, and those who, throughout the history of civilization have arrogated unto themselves power over other people's lives.
The current "issue" called "health care reform," or its equally obnoxious semantic twin "health insurance reform," is just the invasion of liberty by arrogant elected officials which has finally aroused citizens who, heretofore, ignored the decades-long power grab by those who were supposed to protect "We, the People's" constitutional principles.
Now, citizens are seeing that it is a matter of "principle," not an issue of semantics over wording.
They should not allow their elected representatives to be coopted by "blue dogs" or any other "wolf in sheep's clothing" that would allow what may turn out to be the most important watershed moment in the history of American liberty to be further threatened. Now, Conrad and Sebelius, and others, sensing the voter mood are throwing out "compromise" talk this weekend, all to punt for better position down the road. Seize the moment for the sake of posterity and just say, "no"!
A word from the author of our Declaration of Independence regarding citizens and oppressive government might give some backbone to today's citizens:
"The most effectual means of preventing the perversion of power into tyranny are to illuminate . . . the minds of the people at large, and more especially to give them knowledge of those facts which history exhibits, that they may. . . know ambition under all its shapes, and . . . exert their natural power to defeat its purposes." - Thomas Jefferson
And, for more wisdom from the same source:
" . . . this is a tendency of all human governments. A departure from principle in one instance becomes a precedent for a second, that second for a third, and so on, till the bulk of the society is reduced to be mere automatons of misery, to have no sensibilities left but for sin and suffering. Then begins, indeed, the bellum omnium in omnia, which some philosophers. . . have mistaken it for the natural, instead of the abusive state of man. And the forehorse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follws that, and in its train wretchedness and oppression."- Thomas Jefferson
They’re losing a lot of traction on health care so now they plan to punt and move on to amnesty and card check. They figure the average American has only so much venom in them.
Now, what does this say when Jo-bama only had to get **his own party** to vote for socialized medicine and couldn’t get it done?
Exactly. He has an agenda and he is determined to impose it; he was trying this one at top speed because he knew it would be unpopular and he wanted to get it through before too much opposition could build up. Now that it looks like there's significant opposition and perhaps not even all of the Dems are on board with it, he (or rather, the radical leftists for whom he is the mouthpiece and salesman) will bring it out again more quietly later, perhaps in a piecemeal fashion.
He hates this country and its people and our system, and he will not rest until he has destroyed them.
The insurance issue is BS. What they want is to extend the benefits to more people including non citizens. Regardless of whether or not there is a public plan, the onus will be put on the insurance companies i.e. those with insurance to cover those without. That may include complete underwriting by the government i.e. the taxpayers. Furthermore, there would have to be an onus on employers to offer plans, whether they want to or not. I am sure some form of subsidy would have to come. Now then, where will the money to fund this come from. Mostly from Medicare I fear.
This whole this must go down, period. end of story.
Vince
Why are they going to settle for 95% socialism? Reverse this clunker and drive for freedom.
obama's way-->oppression
other way<--Freedom
Socialism on the installment plan, exactly as advised by Mitt Romney in recent weeks.
Same old story:
The Democrats propose to tear down the Washington Monument, and the Republicans, instead of simply opposing such insanity, counter with their own proposal to do it in three stages.
My spider sense tells me that their internal WH poll numbers are tanking.
but they are not finished. this is not over. This is like game 2 of the World Series. they are bringing in the mop up guy to pitch down 12-0. they will be back pushing more socialism sooner than you think.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.