Mr. Stewart,

I broke my neck in an auto accident which stole 14 years of my life. I became a victime of the biggest cotteg inductry in America- Healthcare. After spending over $300,000.00 I found a cure to my problem for $1800.00 by connecting the cief of Neurosurgery at Hpkins with the fromer head of diagnostics@ Tulane who also founded the American Spine Society.

So you know, my son is a PhD student in the History of Science, Technology (and medicine) at Stanford. he organized this past year’s medical summit in Arizona under his advisor, Robert Proctor-renowned for expert testimoney against tobacco. He now sits as one of two students on a faculty board, and campaned for President Obama. My daughter went to yale, majored in Pol. Sci, then worked in The US Senate for years. They persuaded me to vote for your boss-which I did.

I spent 12 years writing a paper after interviewing 36 of the best neuroand diagnostic docs in the us, and another 6 top docs in canada, The neatherlands, Israel, Austrailia, and China. I graduated with high distiction from Bowdoin in economics (even though I was rejected 3 times prior to finally getting in) and working working with that department, my son and his world renwown department, as well as my daughter, I can prove that 3 simple measures effect an outward shift in the supply curve of healthcare so remarkable it can save each American $1162.00, or 17 billion/year.

NO one in your administration has looked at supply side economics, yet the fix resides there. Further, you will not find one doctor anywhere that will contest the fact that medicine is a cottage industry and by definition that means” highly disorganized, fragmented.

Now, EMR will put all data in transfurable form, but what have you done to insent doctors to transfure their hospitals trade secrets through this great new system?
You are correct, they can not do so under currant law without stealing money promised to pay for the medical modalities they would share.

Therefore, I ask you to please honor President Obama’s promise that”his door is always open” and let me have just one half hour with HIM, and I would love you also there, and I will plot the supply curve and promise it will be so understandable, a child would get it.

I leave you with this quote from the head of diagnostics at Duke: “Medicine is the biggest cottege industry in America…we can’t share our brain medicine because we must have the patients come here so we can recover what it costs to find the science.”

Please let me come. my cel# is 207-776-0477. I have wasted 2 years trying to get to you with a paper that I distilled from over 200 to 7 pages, one gragh. Just look up The Flexner Reports-1905. he was not a doctor, or politician, yet, like me, he authored a paper that resulted in the most sweeping reforms in medical history, closing down all but 66 of 188 med school!

such as security, Police, famers, shooters party for sports ect ect, then you need to be regestered.

This would solve this problems

Yours

John

Creating jobs for infrastructure, teachers, firefighters and public employees is rhetoric, as this is not where majority of job losses came from, nor do these jobs produce economic growth.

Assistance must be given to companies of ALL SIZES, including hiring incentives, growth incentives, limiting outsourcing etc.

i do not beleive he will be weakened untill well behind bars in the US or some other western country, put on war crimes trials for crimes against humanity and his followers are shown that he is only a terrorist and terroriwst supporter and see the end results of murders and thugs like this man

John Christopher Sunol
0403 143 877

Excuse me if I seem a little cynical but, the President is going to get a bill on his desk.
The bill has been largely crafted by the insurance and health care industry to meet their needs.
From my perspective what is best for the public was considered secondary during the crafting
of the bill. Now you want me to contribute to an industry sponsored / written give away? I don’t
think so. Maybe you should be asking Aetna or United HealthCare or BlueCross for money now
that they are going to get mandated coverage for every American. Now I can appreciate that
the president wants to have something better than what we have today and that he thinks the
only way to do that is to give industry what it wants and hence their agreement. That his thinking
that’s fine. It may be that what is passed is better for the public than what we have now. I’m not
so sure. Time will tell. I would hope that this turns out better than I expect for the President, the
public and the future of the Democratic party. I have and will continue to contribute to progressive
liberal candidates that show an interest in representing the public and this great nation.

Regards,
Randy Taylor
Saratoga, CA

I would suggest to you that Mr. Root could also be accused of engaging in a “…emotion based, ad hominem style attack…” As far as his so-called FACTS, let me assemble some for you that “prove” that Obama is a NEO-CON!

1) He retained many of Bush’s people in the Treasury and financial sectors of government and in effect extended the very policies that Bush initiated to bail out Wall Street and eviscerate Main Street;

2) He has also continued the undermining of the Constitution by protecting the concept of “Executive Privilege” which President Cheney initiated in his zealotry to impose Neo-Connery upon the world;

3) He has continued to keep Guantanamo open and active;

4) He has allowed the military to dictate foreign policy and continued the Bush/Cheney empire building by sending 30,000 troops to Afghanistan;

5) He has chosen not to impose any controls on the financial sector despite their proven record of short sightedness and greedy excess;

6) He has abdicated his power to shape health care reform and has allowed the impotent and corrupt Senate to be controlled by the insurance and pharmaceutical companies. (BTW, the lobbyists have become the fourth branch of government);

THEREFORE, HE MUST BE A NEO-CON!

Thus, you can see how so-called FACTS can be selected and manipulated to suit ideological OPINION.

The truth of the matter is that no one is quite sure what he is.

The Republican Party (the party of NO) has from the very beginning had no intention of working for the greater good of the American people by attempting to work with Obama. Their sole objective is to destroy him and get back in power so they can perpetrate the policies that under Bush have lowered America’s standards and standing throughout the world.

The Democratic Party and Obama are a bunch of wimps who have made the serious mistake of trying to be reasonable with their Republican colleagues who have no intention of being reasonable.

So what does this mean for the future of our country? Does this extreme polarization serve us? I suppose if you are trained in the legal profession, the adversarial position makes sense. But it is ultimately destructive and self-defeating.

Obviously we have to re-evaluate the way our system of democracy works or doesn’t work as the case may be.

The history of third party movements is a sorry one. But I would like to see campaign finance reform so that can be more viable choices for the electorate. The Democrats and the Republicans like to advertise their differences, but in practice they actions don’t differ a lot. With the coming Supreme Court decision on campaign contributions, corporations will be able to provide unlimited financing to candidates they choose who will do their bidding.

In effect, it will be an acknowledgement of what is already a reality, that our democracy has become a capitalist plutocracy run by a military – industrial – pharmaceutical – financial – insurance lobbyist complex. (Apologies to a true Republican, Dwight Eisenhower, for this elaboration)

Obviously, you and Mr. Root and I are upset (for different reasons) by the current state of affairs. The people of our country must wake up and become actively engaged in a positive and proactive way in the reform of our political process because we have been heading in the wrong direction for the past 30 years.

If you attack someone’s blog with the typical vague, emotion based, ad hominem style attack of a liberal/socialist , boasting that “you could engage in a rant debate by assembling facts”, while never actually assembling any……………….YOU MIGHT BE A SOCIALIST!

Wake up to the fact that there is a large and growing element of the American populace that shares Mr. Root’s “OPINION”. Guys like you are only fueling the fire.

If you’re offended by “inflammatory rhetoric”, wait until you see what happens at the polling booths next year.

Drop what ever you’re doing and head over to Taylor Bryant’s website and help the man out. There are 20 days left until the special election is held and Taylor needs your help to defeat the three democrats that are running for what most Georgian’s believe to be a “safe” democrat seat. There is no republican in the contest and since it is a special election, turn out will be about 20% of the norm. An excellent opportunity for a Libertarian win and a major defeat for the status quo.

Taylor’s website: http://www.bryantforaugusta.com/

20 days until the election!

Indeed…

I would suggest to Mr.Root that he not only get his FACTS placed in a broader context but also that he engage in discourse that reflects a mature intellect rather than a demagogic Glenn Beck.

Mr. Root’s inflammatory rhetoric is an excellent example of the deliberate attempt by some people to aggrandize their influence by pushing polarization on all fronts. It is a base effort that appeals to the worst instincts.

I could engage in a rant debate by assembling my “FACTS” in a polarized fashion but there is no end to that…ie:”lies, damn lies, and statistics”.

I would respectfully suggest to Mr. Root that he examine his methodology of delivery of his OPINION that he may eventually participate in constructive dialogue that leads to meaningful communication and understanding.

That is not a sign of weakness but rather a prima facie of calm confidence and security.

Dear Ms. Derby:
Thank you for contacting me with your thoughts on health care reform. As your voice in Washington, I appreciate being made aware of your thoughts and concerns.

I am dedicated to providing quality health care for my fellow Oklahomans and all Americans and desire to see everyone receive the best possible health care with the most choices. The recent Reid proposal, currently being debated in the Senate, includes a public option, otherwise known as a government run option. I voted against moving this bill to debate because the legislative ideas presented to us thus far will not improve our health care system or bring down costs. I am working to ensure a Washington bureaucrat does not get between you and your doctor, denying you the medical care you need. I am committed to a balanced, common sense approach to health care that provides assistance to those who truly need it and keeps healthcare patient-centered rather than government-centered.

I believe the Federal government has no place in our personal health care decisions, choices, and treatments. Even with our increasing health care costs and concern for the uninsured, we still have the best health care system in the world, and I do not want to jeopardize the quality of care that already exists in our country. Socialized, government-run health care, touted by many as the only solution, is not the answer. This is made evident by the state of health care in other nations that use this model, like Canada or Great Britain.

The Reid bill, which some estimates say could cost up to $2.5 trillion after full implementation, represents an unprecedented expansion of the government’s control over health care. Oklahoma physicians shared with me in a July 23, 2009, letter that they are concerned that a public plan option will unfairly compete with the private market and ultimately crowd it out.

Under this bill, the government will tell people what type of coverage they can and cannot have, mandate that every American have health care or pay a tax, mandate that employers provide a certain level of benefits or pay a fine, introduce a government run plan designed to destroy the private market, include new policies designed to control what drugs and procedures Americans can receive, and require a historic expansion of Medicaid. According to the Oklahoma Health Care Authority, who administers Oklahoma’s Medicaid program, Soonercare, estimates this type of expansion could cost Oklahoma an additional $128 million each year, resulting in harmful cuts to existing state priorities.

There are many examples that show the failures of this type of system. Of the numerous articles, let me provide examples of a few. The Wall Street Journal featured a story earlier this year of a Canadian citizen, Bill Murray, who waited in pain for more than a year to see a specialist for his arthritic hip. The specialist recommended a state-of-the-art procedure, but government bureaucrats determined that Mr. Murray, who was 57, was “too old.” In the end, he was also denied the opportunity to pay for the procedure himself. The Mayo Clinic’s website features the story of Shona Holmes whose Canadian family doctor discovered a tumor in her brain. Ms. Holmes knew she could not wait the six months it would take for her to get an appointment with a specialist. Instead, she was able to call the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota and got an appointment the same day. The British newspaper, The Press, reported that a British citizen, Ian Dobbin, was informed by the British National Health Service that since it would not pay for his life-saving cancer treatment, he needed to pay ?25,000 (over $40,000) to obtain the treatment in order to survive. He was quoted in the article saying, “I’ve been paying my national insurance all my life and when it comes to the point that I need it to keep me alive, they are not prepared to help.”

These stories and many others illustrate some of the problems that can arise when the government gets involved in health care. Furthermore, statistics show that the United States already has a superior and more effective health system. According to recent publications, the mortality rate in Canada is 25% higher for breast cancer, 18% higher for prostate cancer, and 13% higher for colorectal cancer than in the U.S. Additionally, studies show that only 5% of Americans wait more than 4 months for surgery, compared with 23% of Australians, 26% of New Zealanders, 27% of Canadians, and 36% of British citizens. In fact, nearly 1.8 million people in Great Britain are waiting for hospital or outpatient treatments at any given time. Even more telling, a Canadian doctor now practicing in the United States reported in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons that the average wait time to see a specialist in Canada is 17 weeks. If we give the Federal government more control over health care, I am very concerned that Oklahomans and all Americans will quickly feel the effects of the rationing of health care.

Supporters of a “public plan” or government-run health insurance option claim that a public plan will bring competition to the health insurance market and lower prices. However, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has made it clear that introducing a government-run health plan into the market would have minimal impact on cost reduction. In fact, CBO Director Doug Elmendorf testified to the Senate Budget Committee that “in the legislation that has been reported [they] do not see the sort of fundamental changes that would be necessary to reduce the trajectory of federal health spending by a significant amount. And on the contrary, the legislation significantly expands the federal responsibility for health care costs.” I am concerned that a “public plan” option will run private insurance out of business leaving us, as consumers, without choices and options.

President Obama has promised the American people on numerous occasions that if you like your current health insurance, you can keep it. However, CBO estimates and has testified that several million Americans will lose the health care coverage currently offered by their employer if current proposals were to become law. Again, we see that this comprehensive health care proposal is leading us down a path that takes choice away from individuals.

As an alternative, I am a cosponsor of S. 1099, the Patients’ Choice Act. This bill strengthens relationships between patients and physicians by using choice and competition rather than rationing and restrictions to contain costs while ensuring that affordable health care is available for all Americans without interference from the Federal government. While promoting healthier lifestyles and disease prevention through incentives for States, S. 1099 also provides a refundable tax credit of $2,300 per individual or $5,700 per family for the purchase of health insurance. To enable individuals to choose a health insurance plan that best meets their needs, the bill creates State Health Insurance Exchanges allowing Americans to compare different health plans and giving Americans the same standard benefits as Members of Congress. Furthermore, this plan makes Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) more accessible and easy to use, and adjusts risk among insurance companies to penalize companies that “cherry pick ” healthy patients and reward those that cover patients with pre-existing conditions.

Thank you again for contacting me. Although we may disagree on the need for a government-run health insurance plan, I hope that we can find common ground in others areas of health care reform. As the healthcare debate further develops and more proposals are introduced, I will work to develop and enact legislation that ensures affordable health care is available to all in a fiscally responsible manner with the most choices available.

Mr. Inhofe,

I do understand the concerns behind your reasons for not supporting government run health care. However, considering that according to a recent report from Reuters, the following countries all outrank the United States on a recent Healthcare Report Card: Japan, Switzerland, Italy, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, Australia, the Netherlands, Austria and Ireland, it doesn’t make sense that all those developed nations have better government health care than the U.S. unless something is seriously wrong with the way we are currently doing business. After all, if government expects us to help pay for new roads(even those of us who have no vehicle) and pay for local school costs (even those of us who have no children), isn’t government already a daily part of our lives? With all due respect, who decides where that line is drawn?

I am in reasonably good health, and working for the State of Oklahoma, I have access to decent health care, but I also believe strongly in preventive care so that I don’t get sick and use the insurance more, thereby increasing premiums for everybody else. Preventive care alone, whether sponsored by employers or public schools, could reduce costs for everyone. To that end, I will be watching as S. 1099 makes its way through the legislative process. It sounds like a step in the right direction. (It is another example, however, of “big government” regulating our lives, for good or for bad, isn’t it?)

But preventive care won’t make the insurance companies wealthy, nor will it put money in doctor’s pockets, so I question whether it will be popular, no matter if one is a Democrat or Republican. I think that a public option is not any worse than what we already have and I work everyday with people who need medical but who do not fall into any of the medical “categories” offered by the State. While replying to you just now, I got a call from a client who suffered from a stroke last week, but who because of age and slightly over the income guidelines, does not qualify for any medical help through us. One client’s wife has a huge lump growing on her chest that the doctors tell her they cannot help her with because she has no insurance and they do not consider it life threatening.Unfortunately, I hear this story many times every week. It seems very timely to me that President Obama is trying to remedy this by advocating health care change, and I appreciate the President’ lofty goals in trying to help bring medical care to all Americans.

Again, thank you for all the hard work you do for the people of our State.

As for those who say that it’s not appropriate to release personal messages that were texted on 911…. People deserve the truth… What is not right [much less appropriate] is the continual lies and slander that has gone on for years.

Karma can be a b!tch. Justice is coming and those who deserve their “just desserts” will be finally getting them.

1. No, the US Government did NOT run the Mustang Ranch into bankruptcy. In fact, they never ran it at all. They seized it for back taxes so they could sell it. And under bankruptcy law, they were REQUIRED to try and operate the business so as to try to recoup some money. However, at the government’s request, a Federal judge issued an order allowing the government NOT to operate the brothel, and close it down instead.

It was closed, padlocked, and sold within a few months.

At no time was the brothel EVER operated by the government, and the bankruptcy occurred after the original owner REPURCHASED it under an assumed name.

God forbid actual facts be used to criticize Obama, let’s just make up some bullshit. Typical pseudo-libertarian cock-jockey.