world

Obama denounces media emphasis on health care protests

34 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2009 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

34 Comments
Login to comment

I have to agree with the RNCC, the american public just simply isn't buying his plan.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"let's work with the existing system" ---> sound good to me, but will the socialists buy it?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Funny the difference a year makes. This time last year, at every turn on TV you would see some sort of anti-war demonstration at every event that a Republican was hosting. News cameras and the press would cover them, but they would be shown in a postive right. I even remember reports of when people on the right said that they were "un-American" fr protesting how the media pundits on the left were up in arms against such comments because hey were only exercising their freedoms under the Constitution.

Now, since many on the right and left are not really buying this "Obamacare" and are making noises about it, they are seen as mobs and "Nazi's." Talk about a media bias.

Look, it is probably known on the board that I am no huge fan of Obama, but I respect the man and his opinion. All I want him to do is jus to come out up front, and tell me what exactly will happen with his plan. I assume my taxes are going to go up. But if he at least said so, but said in addition to the plan that there will be provisions so that lawsuits against malpractice will be limited (which is not in the provision) then I would consider it.

But right now, no way would I agree with the plan, and I don't think that people protesting are far right loons. One thing I did notice, at every anti "Obamacare" rally, they normally showed whites in opposition to his plan. But, I have seen blacks and other races in the backgrounds protesting against his plan, but it is only the whites they show.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sounds like Obama is putting together a really good package here. Let's hope Americans get a better deal on their health care in future.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

One came from Randy Rathie, who called himself “a proud NRA member,” referring to the National Rifle Association, and said he got most of his news from cable TV.

I wonder if "proud NRA members" like Mr. Rathie are concerned about how much gun wounds (accidental or otherwise) add to escalating costs of health care in America. Presumably it would be a concern, are they doing anything about it?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

NHK's World News this morning had ABC News (I think it was) starting by reporting on Americans trashing the UK NHS (which is much cheaper, much fairer and covers the whole population) with claims that what they have is better - and finishing by showing people in LA queuing up for hours to get free medical and dental treatment from charity workers - those few lucky enough to receive treatment before the charity moved on were shedding tears of relief at finally getting a bit of medical care.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

cleo it boggles the mind at to how some equate world class health care to some magically transform into a benefit to the 10s of millions not insured or the millions more who are underinsured.

To say nothing of those stuck in jobs only because they would risk losing all health coverage if they changed jobs as the insurance companies pick through their medical histories for "pre-existing conditions". If this defines world class, then world class is not good enough.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I honestly believe it's the people and not the guns causing these crimes and injury, but the criminals get great health care at zero cost = they don't care if they are injured in a crime.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

In Montana the population is very low compared to Chicago so of course gun crime would be low. But anyway I was taking about gun wounds, not gun crime.

Moderator: Readers, stay on topic please. This story is not about gun control.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Americans trashing the UK NHS (which is much cheaper, much fairer and covers the whole population)

One thing that is missing from Obamacare is the provision to limit the lawsuits that can be levied against doctors for malpractice like they do in Europe. Why, because the Trial Lawyers Association has paid large sums of money to Democratic politicians and nowhere is that in the provision. So he wants a Euorpean style healthcare system for America, but with not all of the "bells and whistles" that go with it.

My own humble suggestion is, limit (like the state of CA does in allowing the maximum of $250,000 in damages doctors are responsible for paying in malpractice suits) the amount of malpractice, therby decreasing the costs of malpractice insurance. Institute better controls over insurance agencies so that they stop gouging people who pay them and then deny them their benifits; make illegals pay. If for some reason those illegals that come to America can afford to send back over 25 billion a year in money back to their home countries, surely they can at least pay some portion of their health care costs rather than draining the U.S. taxpayer.

Make changes to the system, that will really have an impact and I think you can improve the U.S. system.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I saw obama's TH meeting. I though he was good. While I don't like what plans are being made, I think he is listening and which is one of the reasons why we don't have concrete bill yet. I was also impressed that he was quite profession to the NRA member. He didn't diss him at all.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

cleo: starting by reporting on Americans trashing the UK NHS

Why Americans? The British trash their own system well enough without our help.

Alphaape: My own humble suggestion is, limit (like the state of CA does in allowing the maximum of $250,000 in damages doctors are responsible for paying in malpractice suits) the amount of malpractice, therby decreasing the costs of malpractice insurance. Institute better controls over insurance agencies so that they stop gouging people who pay them and then deny them their benifits; make illegals pay. If for some reason those illegals that come to America can afford to send back over 25 billion a year in money back to their home countries, surely they can at least pay some portion of their health care costs rather than draining the U.S. taxpayer.

I agree with all of that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It really would be nice if the people presenting facts got as much coverage as the nut jobs screaming "communist, death panels, and euthanasia" with little understanding of what any of those things actually mean.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Why Americans? The British trash their own system well enough without our help.

It was on an American news programme, is why. The huge gap between the first report and the last struck me as being rather amusing - rather like the emperor in his new clothes lecturing the high street jeans shop for lack of style.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Who are these people to criticize President Obama's health care plan?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Sarge:

People exercizing their 1st amendment rights I think.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@techall:

Exactly, exactly!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Funny how we never hear about "free speech zones" now that there's a new president, even after a 400% increase in death threats on the president's life.

And I have to wonder why some people feel they need to exercise their free speech while packing.

If you need to have a gun to support your right to shout nonsense, your argument probably doesn't have much intellectual merit.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Funny how we never hear about "free speech zones" now that there's a new president, even after a 400% increase in death threats on the president's life.

Taka, these same people who were crying "free speech zones" when "W" was in office are now saying that people who oppose Obama can't talk, and that they are just a bunch of "loud mouthed kooks" on the far end of the spectrum. Sounds like the pot calling the kettle black to me.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Alphape,

O.K. the kooks part, yep, I'm onboard with that. When people start holding up signs saying, "Death to Obama" and "Death to Michelle and her two stupid kids," I'm going to call them kooks. When people start calling Pres. Obama a communist, I'm going to ask them for a definition of communism. When they cannot provide one, I'll let them know, they are kooks. When we see a 400% increase in death threats against the president, we're no longer talking about free speech. No one has the right in America to threaten the life of the president, no matter who the president is.

Now back to the free speech thing...no one is denying them their rights to free speech or to be heard whatsoever.

There rights to speech and assembly are not being blocked. What HAS been blocked, is there desire to derail the debate all together and to obstruct any debate whatsoever. That's absolutely not a right. And just for argument's sake, even if it was their right. Having the right to do something doesn't mean doing it is right.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Crap,

I hit the submit button too soon.

That whole pot kettle thing...at this stage in the game, we're all black on that one. Both sides have hypocrisy and selective memories.

I can admit if from my end. How about you?

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The two perfect quotes for all the crap that the Democrats are pulling...

"I say to the president, Mr. President, if you think that our troops in Iraq are there to fight for democracy, do not destroy it at home by cutting off our freedom of speech. . . . "So I thank all of you who have spoken out for your courage, your point of view. All of it. Your advocacy is very American and very important. . . . There's nothing more articulate, or more eloquent, to a member of Congress than the voice of his or her own constituent. . . . I'm a fan of disruptors,"--Nancy Pelosi in 2006

"I think they're AstroTurf. You be the judge. They're carrying swastikas and symbols like that to a town meeting on health care."--Nancy Pelosi in 2009 (when asked about Health Care protests)

What a turnabout!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Taka313 were you calling people who likened Bush and his cronies to Hitler and the Nazis or calls for an assassination of Bush kooks too? They're all extremes used to get attention. It's not like debates on the war were civil by the left either, and it's all perfectly constitutional.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I denounce Obamacare. The only reason Oblama is in Montana is Max Baucus. Max is on of the few dems who has not been a traitor to the second amendment. In a month, we will see if he is a traitor to America and the Montanans who elected him. Raising taxes, destroying Medicare, rationing health care and providing federally funded abortions on demand is not what got Max elected. If he signs on to Obamacare he will go down in flames.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

and to clarify Nancy Pelosi's second quote, she was referring to an old lady who had a swatstika being crossed out (so she was likening Obama to Nazis, no less kooky), so that should not be read as, "Oh no! Neo-Nazis are showing up!"

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It really would be nice if the people presenting facts got as much coverage as the nut jobs screaming "communist, death panels, and euthanasia" with little understanding of what any of those things actually mean.

I'm pretty sure people know what this means. We're looking at a slippery slope as Obama trys to institute socialized medicine. Compare this rhetoric to that used by the Democrats who are calling people who are legitimately worried about their health care, nazis, browncoats, and terrorists. And as daoster said, you too called Bush and his people Nazis, how is the rhetoric from the other side any more inflammatory or derogatory then your own?

The latest move by Obama is to demonize the insurance industry. Apparently they're not supposed to care if their companies all get wiped out or taken over by the government. They're not supposed to care that just like 40 years ago when Medicare was emplaced, that an entire industry was destroyed, as those offering coverage to the over 65 demographic, had their business all taken over by Medicare. No, its definitely the insurance companies at fault for denying coverage for pre-existing conditions, and daring to attempt to remain profitable. Certainly not the lawyers who have done everything they can to prevent tort reform. Something that would have a real and immediate impact on the costs of health care in the US.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It's a fair point that has been raised about the media focusing on the protests rather than the issue, but this is the way it has been for quite some time now. Who wants to really look at the system and its successes and flaws and then improve it when you can just yell "communist" and be done with it. If they want to wallow in a system that is almost third-world standard, then let them. It's all fine as long as you're in the "covered" band of society, but just pray you don't fall below that line or you're on your own. Is Obama's package better? Who knows. I know I haven't read it. If it is, embrace it, if not, shoot it down in flames.

Freedom of speech is a great thing, just make sure you've actually got something to say. The media focusing on the extreme fringes simply takes the focus away from those actually debating the pros and cons and trying to improve the package. When that happens, you end up stagnating as everyone becomes too scared to move forward.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The press loves a story, any story. They'll tell it and retell it as long as there's an audience.

What gets me is all these talking heads like Palin, Limbaugh, Hannity and Ingram and their assertions. It's like Limbaugh is now trying to compare some health care emblem looking like the Nazi Swastika.

These talking heads are really really smart though. They know that they can stir up the masses of nut cases and they can get them in a frenzy. Then they send them off to a few town hall meetings to make news for the press. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If we would give up on the wars, Pelosi would forget about her fleet of jets, etc.., we could probably save enough to tackle some of the 15% of the population that is not covered by some health care insurance. But of course that will never happen because this in not about health care, but control of health care. =The Federal Reserve wants to indebt us more and go after more assets (mostly older people who have saved money)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

LOL Badsey. I love the insurance companies lobbiest. Some bought for nothing, just repeated rheteric. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You have a few sides fighting this out:

Dems/Repubs want more Federal Debt. (slaves to the Fed/Bankers) Insurance/Lawyers/Drug companies want the same system or an even better deal (the money makers) Über-rich trying to get into a part of this new Fed-System People paid on the richer parties behalf (union picketers, lobbiests, lawyers, thugs)

I guess it's all good for a stagnant economy. -Bottom line --> they are after the older people's assets and want to tie in the younger generation to a slave health (debt) system.

Some specialists make money on the system, but the general practioners still lose out = that's where the system needs work and maybe better diagnosis and statistical analysis at the GP level.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I can admit if from my end. How about you?

Taka313, people carrying signs with deragatory pictures and statements about the Presidents family are bad. That goes for those who don't like Obama as well as those who did the same thing to "W." No argument there. But now we see that since the Dems are in office, and people may oppose their views now they are seen as "far right radicals."

Tell me, where is Madea Benjamin and the rest of her "code pink ladies" disrupting the President and all of the town hall meetings with their message. It seems that whenever a prominent person from the Republicans was speaking last year and got disrupted and shouted at, it was all on MSNBC and the other channels on how they were exercisig their free speech, and how people were upset when "W" did start the free speach zones. I see that the "loaded questions and picked audience" that are in the Obama "town hall meetings" are no different. People are only there that you picked to make sure that they sing along with your program.

Debate is good. I think that the screams and ruckus would die down if the Dems would actually honestly and openly talk about the issue, rather than just ram it down our throats. After all, it was the Dems and Gore and Pelosi who said the time for debate is over, Global warming is here and we have to act now. Seems that they are wrong on that too.

If the Dems want to end the ruckus crowds, sit down, and let the people speak, and answer the questions. After the first few loud yells, people will settle down and then you can discuss the plan.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What gets me is all these talking heads like Palin, Limbaugh, Hannity and Ingram and their assertions. It's like Limbaugh is now trying to compare some health care emblem looking like the Nazi Swastika.

You said this without actually bothering to find out what Limbaugh said, and the point he was making didn't you. Come on, you can admit it. What he was saying had nothing to do with death camps, genocide or war.

He repeatedly and explicitly qualified that no one was saying Obama was Hitler, that Pelosi was Goebbels, or that the Democrats were engaged in the genocidal barbarity of the Third Reich. The comparison he drew was a substantive one: between the Democrats’ proposal for socialized medicine and the German installation of socialized medicine beginning with Bismarck and reaching its shocking apotheosis with Hitler’s National Socialism.

Whether you agree with that or not (I happen to think it’s undeniable), Rush was also making a larger point that is not only fair argument but essential argument. There is a trajectory of socialism, regardless of the good intentions of many socialists. As he framed it, you take things such as health care, things that are traditionally understood as within the ambit of individual liberty and free choice; you move such things into the ambit of state responsibility as the welfare state emerges and grows, on the theory that it is government’s responsibility to provide for everyone’s needs (by redistributing resources); as more things are moved from private to public control, the state by definition becomes totalitarian; and, inexorably, the totalitarian state gets bad leaders and the society comes to reflect the policy choices of those leaders.

I'm quoting from an article written about the Democrats own comparing of others and themselves to Nazi Germany. By all means, take a look at it and see for yourself what Rush was actually saying. To me, it makes a lot of sense.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YjI0N2E5ZjM0MGU0ZWVkZTdmYTBjNDQ4YTM4YTgzODA=#more

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It all comes down to totalitarian Big Brother control over our lives. Americans are simply saying, "NObama!"

Congress signs spending bills with regularity into law for saving a snails or building a multi million $ library that no one needs without even reading the bills. Then they all go out for lunch and martinis and hold a press conference about how good this spending will be for America, jobs and the economy, which is pure BS.

Have any of them read Obamacare from beginning to end? No, of course not. Lucky enough for Americans, this small fact wont prevent them from shoving it down our throat.

Should we protest this, we are demonized by the Speaker of the House and in the press as un-American for exercising our right of free speech! Such fundamental freedom is what separates liberty from tyranny. Based on this alone, we have much to fear from these socializing fascists whose goal it is to destroy America and our Constitution.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites