No matter what your opinion is about the health care bill, one thing is true -- health care is not a "right." It's not guaranteed by the constitution. It's something that costs everybody money. The president's plan is to take money from one group of people and give it to another group, to pay their health care. It's called redistribution of wealth. It's never worked anywhere in the world before, and it won't work here. But it will lead to a government that will control every aspect of your life, from what you eat, how many children you have, what you do for a living, and when you die. You're going to deny that now, but just wait -- remember my words.

We're like frogs in a pot of hot water. Obama is gradually raising the temperature. We're too dumb to jump out. When it's boiling, and we're close to death, we'll realize what a big mistake we've made.

I don't blame Anna Eshoo. She's a liable person, but just puppet of Pelosi. She doesn't know any better.

"It's never worked anywhere in the world before, and it won't work here."

And what are you referring to exactly? Government playing a role in decent health care? It's never worked before? Now get out a map, cardinal, and point to France, Germany, the Netherlands -- by the way, do you know where Scandanavia is?

Seems like you just don't want the government playing a role in health care, which is fine, but the majority of your fellow citizens disagree with you. Keep arguing on the merits of your "government out of health care" position, but please, stop twisting reality about how government sponsored health care works in other parts of the world. It works far better than this terribly broken, inhumane system we have in this country.

By the way, are you on Medicare? If you're too young, are your parents, your grandparents, aunts and uncles?

I think Cardinal is referring to the redistribution of wealth, not health care. And, no, I can't think of an example of how it worked either. Unless you consider Robert Mugabe or Fidel Castro to be success stories.

Cardinal -
You write: "The president's plan is to take money from one group of people and give it to another group, to pay their health care."
It sounds to me like this is simply an example of a progressive tax system whereby the well-off pay a higher rate to cover the costs for those not able to pay. We've had a progressive tax system for most of the past century, as do most countries. It's one way to offset the inherent inequity of a system where the richest 1% own 38% of the country's wealth. Most consider it an equitable system. I don't know how you make the leap to "government that will control every aspect of your life, from what you eat, how many children you have, what you do for a living, and when you die".
We've had a similar system - Medicare - in place for the past 40 years and these horrible things have not come to pass. All this health care reform attempts to do is to extend the same rights to health care that the elderly enjoy to the rest of the society.

Unfortunately, those programs that everyone points to, like Medicare and Medicaid, are going broke fast. Of course, our senior citizens love them - they pay very little and get great benefits. (Ask someone who gets free food at a restaurant if they like their "benefits.")

Even Massachusetts and Tennessee - which were the models for the national legislation that was just enacted - are choking on the incredibly increased costs. If you think our national healthcare costs are out of control, these two states are at the head of the pack. In fact, Massachusetts now has the highest insurance premiums in the country.

We should have reduced costs before we loaded another 31 million people onto our leaky healthcare ship. Here's an idea, let's add another 12 million undocumented workers onto the Good Ship Healthcare USA, too. That's coming next with immigration reform.

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?