Bob, after that stunt, your opinion no longer matters to me....you were deliberately insulting and accusatory and then deliberately erased it after I called you on it. Au revoir....
Sad then that yours matters to me.
I thought your comments I've quoted above just a touch out of line, especially when compared to the actual posting times.
The issue with the straw poll is not your fault. The place where you got your information should have known better to pass it on to you in that form; it exposed you cynically or ignorantly to people who actually understand the difference between the two sorts of polling. Shooting the messenger who points out that you've been mislead doesn't supply you with trustworthy information. It simply means that it helps to broaden your sources to get confirmation about this sort of thing.
If I think I've done something wrong, I have nothing against saying so. It's good for my humility and my perspective. If I don't think I've said something wrong, I see no need to say I did. I acknowledged exactly what I did do, which I feel was acceptable. I changed the text that I disliked so quickly that the fact that I revised it wasn't even noted on the text. The text I substituted hasn't been addressed, and piques no apparent interest on your part. Since that is the text that I wanted to stand, I'm sorry you choose to be blind to it and to focus on something you believe you can fight about.
Should you wish to fight, please don't involve me. I'm more interested in the issues such as I see them.
Some of the things that I see as issues, discussed recently above, would include the suggestion that private insurance would be damaged. The suggestion is so wide as to be meaningless. Some private policies are quite good and should be guarded carefully. Some need to be given a dose of competition and not have their profit margin government protected at 20% and raised to 35% as some companies are lobbying to do.
Companies with that sort of profit margin guaranteed by government should be raising loud screams on the right. You would think that they would believe this was government intervention, you I haven't heard anything about it from the right. Perhaps some of my friends on the right can tell my why this sort of Government intervention seems all right while other sorts of government intervention do not? There would be some exploration, to my mind, on that issue that could be worthy.
The notion of Death Panels also seems to me to be a misrepresentation by the right. All insurance coverage is reviewed even today for suitability by private insurance companies who follow strict guidelines that do not necessarily follow the rules that would otherwise be laid down by the relationships between patient and doctor. The people who make these decisions are often not physicians, and on occasion are not even nurses. Decisions as to what procedures a company will pay for or not pay for, or what proportion of a procedure a company will pay for or not pay for can often make the difference between whether or not a patient can have that procedure or not. It is the same way with which drugs a company will pay for and which it won't and at what level they will demand a co-payment for the drugs they do allow. These are designed to make the patient decide not to take certain drugs that their physician believes will be helpful for them so the insurance company can make additional money.
Such practices amount to pushing some patients toward a premature death. That is the health insurance system that the right wing suggests that we keep. For some of us with very high end insurance, this is a good thing. It is not such a good thing for others.
To suggest that such horrors will only come to pass when the government becomes more involved in the health care system is terribly misleading. This is the case now, and the motive for it is nothing less than profit and the bonuses that insurance executives gather for themselves. Grinch is probably right about the superiority of a national health system over a hybrid system in terms of the longevity of the system and the quality of the care overall. If folks want additional high end care and want to take out a policy to make up for the difference, they should be able to do that as well.
These are issues worth talking about.
Sincerely, Bob Kaven