Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
SEATTLE -- Chanting, "Health care, health care," protesters shut down Republican Party headquarters here Oct. 5. Following a huge rally against Medicare/Medicaid cuts at Harborview Medical Center, about 100 people moved to the GOP offices two miles away. Several demonstrators noisily entered the office, taking staffers by surprise. When asked to leave, the protesters sat down.
President Clinton said today that he would veto the Republicans' legislative package for Medicare and Medicaid. He said that their proposals for large savings in the Government health plans for the elderly and the poor would have "Draconian consequences" and would "dismantle Medicare as we know it."
AP) Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said Friday that Republican rival John McCain wants to cut $882 billion from Medicare over a decade to finance his health care plan and the result would be more costly drugs, diminished services and lower quality care for seniors.
"It's entirely consistent with Sen. McCain's record during his 26 years in Congress where, time and again, he's opposed Medicare," Obama said. "In fact, Sen. McCain has voted against protecting Medicare 40 times."
"It turns out, Sen. McCain would pay for part of his plan by making drastic cuts in Medicare — $882 billion worth, $882 billion in Medicare cuts to pay for an ill-conceived health care plan, even as Medicare already faces a looming shortfall," Obama said.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- President Barack Obama Saturday proposed an additional $313 billion in cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and other programs to pay for health care reforms expected to cost about $1 trillion over the next decade.
1) In 1995, the GOP proposes to cut Medicare/Medicaid funding in its healthcare reform package. Democratic protesters descend on GOP offices. In 2009, these protesters are disparaged by the Democratic party.
2) Bill Clinton threates to veto such package on the grounds that cutting Medicaid funding is wrong.
3) Barack Obama disparages John McCain for proposing to cut Medicaid/Medicare in order to pay for his proposed health care reforms.
4) Barack Obama proposes to cut Medicare/Medicaid to pay for his proposed health care reforms - the same thing he railed againt McCain for proposing.
The hypocrisy? Calling out protesters after protesting the same issue in 1995. Calling out the GOP for Medicare cuts to pay for health care reform in 1995, while proposing cuts to Medicare to pay for health care reform in 2009.
Personally, i'm undecided about the proposed cuts to Medicare.
However, the over-arching point here is that it should be pointed out that in 1995, Democrats threatend to "shut down" the U.S. Senate if the GOP pressed forward with health care reform that included cuts to Medicare. In 2009, Democrats and Obama all of a sudden favor cuts to Medicare to fund healthcare reform. Whether you agree or disagree with the actual cuts is irrelevant. The fact that your government finds it acceptable to force Washington double-speak on the electorate (on such a far-reaching issue as healthcare reform, nonetheless) should be a cause for concern for all Americans.
Politicians are not out for the good of American's. Politicians are out for the good of themselves as proffered by corporate interests. If it happens to politically popular, then that's icing on the cake. Healthcare reform is hypocrisy at its finest.
Personally, i'm undecided about the proposed cuts to Medicare.
However, the over-arching point here is that it should be pointed out that in 1995, Democrats threatend to "shut down" the U.S. Senate if the GOP pressed forward with health care reform that included cuts to Medicare. In 2009, Democrats and Obama all of a sudden favor cuts to Medicare to fund healthcare reform. Whether you agree or disagree with the actual cuts is irrelevant. The fact that your government finds it acceptable to force Washington double-speak on such a far-reaching issue should be a cause for concern for all Americans.
Only the clear thinking, outside the box, rational independents, libertarians, green partiers etc... will see this. the rest of the neocons and neo libs will keep arguing which party has the bigger balloons at the conventions.
I agree with the corporate interests part, but politicians are going to shift their views no matter. I mean, if you're going to analyze some flip on Medicare to prove your point it's pretty minor, there are much much larger sources of corporate/government/media collusion.
1) In 1995, the GOP proposes to cut Medicare/Medicaid funding in its healthcare reform package. Democratic protesters descend on GOP offices. In 2009, these protesters are disparaged by the Democratic party.
2) Bill Clinton threates to veto such package on the grounds that cutting Medicaid funding is wrong.
3) Barack Obama disparages John McCain for proposing to cut Medicaid/Medicare in order to pay for his proposed health care reforms.
4) Barack Obama proposes to cut Medicare/Medicaid to pay for his proposed health care reforms - the same thing he railed againt McCain for proposing.
The hypocrisy? Calling out protesters after protesting the same issue in 1995. Calling out the GOP for Medicare cuts to pay for health care reform in 1995, while proposing cuts to Medicare to pay for health care reform in 2009.
The hypocrisy is staring you right in the face.
Your #1 is invalid. If you don't understand the difference by now, I don't think you ever will. Town meetings are not rallies. They have different functions. Rallies and marches are perfect venues for protests, town meetings are not.
Your #2 is also invalid. Clinton wasn't just objecting to cuts in Medicare/Medicaid funding, he was objecting to curtailing care to the elderly because of funding cuts. The shortcomings in care weren't going to addressed by other legislation, and it would have seriously hurt American retirees.
Your #3/#4 (same point, no need for two numbers), I think is valid. Obama clearly has discovered that the ideals and promises he espouses on the campaign trail were idealistic and unrealistic. I'm glad he's taking some of his ideas now from his Republican opponent. I still have plenty of problems with the healthcare package he's put together, but his inputting some Republican ideas in it isn't one of my problems. I would like more Republican input, but that's not going to happen until we see this debate become more constructive and less adversarial.
Your #1 is invalid. If you don't understand the difference by now, I don't think you ever will. Town meetings are not rallies. They have different functions. Rallies and marches are perfect venues for protests, town meetings are not.
Your #2 is also invalid. Clinton wasn't just objecting to cuts in Medicare/Medicaid funding, he was objecting to curtailing care to the elderly because of funding cuts. The shortcomings in care weren't going to addressed by other legislation, and it would have seriously hurt American retirees.
Your #3/#4 (same point, no need for two numbers), I think is valid. Obama clearly has discovered that the ideals and promises he espouses on the campaign trail were idealistic and unrealistic. I'm glad he's taking some of his ideas now from his Republican opponent. I still have plenty of problems with the healthcare package he's put together, but his inputting some Republican ideas in it isn't one of my problems. I would like more Republican input, but that's not going to happen until we see this debate become more constructive and less adversarial.
1) I guess you've not heard about the "rallies" that have been held across this country? Townhalls are in the news right now. Rallies, for and against, have been going on for months. Look it up. Outright dismissing protest, on any level, townhall or not, is walking on thin ice.
2) I'm not sure you can debunk Clinton's objection when you're not clear exactly to the extent that the Obama Medicare cuts will have on elderly care. I would caution against even trying to defend Obama's cuts, because not you or anyone else know the scope and scale of those cuts, and what it will utlimately mean to our elderly citizens.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
