[sickoflibs]

RE :(from link)”“They ARE wrong,” Coakley practically shouts—it’s her most passionate moment in the interview. She then suggests the issue is too “complicated” for the voters to grasp. She also shows she has no idea how health care works, erroneously claiming (among other things) that more medical screenings will save money. As everyone who has covered this issue knows, more screenings mean MORE money and higher costs (it’s that crazy “supply and demand” thing, Martha). Don’t believe me? Here’s what the CBO had to say about it: “Researchers who have examined the effects of preventive care generally find that the added costs of widespread use of preventive services tend to exceed the savings from averted illness.” (from link)

This is the democrat party death throes.

Democrats seem still believe that expanding a health care entitlement will reduce costs. At least they claim it with a straight face. One lib here told me giving free health care to illegals would save money, used the emergency room argument. I explained that an illegal given free access to his (the lib's) own primary doctor and specialists but charged to him (as the taxpayer) would NOT be cheaper than the illegal waiting till it's too late.

The problem is the libs believe it's a moral argument and that the fiscal argument is immoral, but the polls say the voters are worried about the spending and deficit and taxes so they have to spin this crap.

[MrB]

We all know what the real goal of government healthcare is - control over all aspects of Americans’ lives.

The sheeplibs, though, still try to make that “moral, we care more than you” argument, and completely dismiss all examples of government control and rationing that have occurred in all other countries where this has been tried.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

She then suggests the issue is too “complicated” for the voters to grasp.

And who made these health care bills complicated? What % have Republicans written?