world

Senate, Obama spar over health plan's pet projects

26 Comments

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

© Copyright 2010 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

26 Comments
Login to comment

Talking about pet projects, does anyone know whether Sarah Palin's Bridge To Nowhere has gone the same way she has - out the door?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Just like GM rattling their donation can straight off the jet -everyone expects a "handout" these days. We must try to keep the Libs happy with "stimulus" and "handouts"

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Obama's meddling"

He's not meddling, he's leading!

Sushi, could you leave Sarah Palin out of this? Thanks.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Democratic senators, being senators, beg to differ.

Astute observation.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sushi, could you comment instead on why Democratic senators say Obama is meddling in their business?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge, because he is meddling in their business, dirty as it is.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Oh, the wonderful world of POLITICS! The USA is the ONLY developed country in the world that has no national health insurance nor health coverage. Idiots like Rush Limbaugh are saying BS like they will escape to Costa Rica if this passes. I know Costa Ricans, they are nice and friendly folk, so they may make a little hut in the rain forest for Rush to live out his last days so he can keep blabbing to himself.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Talking about pet projects, does anyone know whether Sarah Palin's Bridge To Nowhere has gone the same way she has - out the door?

How did it become Palins project? Its not like she ever voted for it. Now if you said Stevens bridge to nowhere, ok.

The USA is the ONLY developed country in the world that has no national health insurance nor health coverage.

And thats apparently supposed to be a bad thing. Its so terrible in fact that everyone who can afford it, comes to the US for healthcare. Yes, quite terrible. We should definitely change it so that those people stay in their country and die waiting for treatment. Then we can be a great country too.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sushisake3:"Talking about pet projects, does anyone know whether Sarah Palin's Bridge To Nowhere has gone the same way she has - out the door?"

Bingo!Bang on AGAIN, good buddy. I too have spent the last year or so watching the stupid teabagger partyists and thinking to myself it is all about them defending their hero sarah palin, who as soon as she got a taste of power as mayor of Wasilla, must have FORCED Alaska Senator ted stevens to get the big pork barrel bucks directed that way. Disgusting!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm glad to see Obama trying to cut out these pet state projects. I know congressmen go to Washington go there to help their state, but there's a difference here. Help the country first. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What a corrupt bunch of crap these senators take to the toilet bowl.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Gombei - Another good one.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Get rid of the pet projects.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Get rid of trying to pass this atrocity and start from scratch.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obamacare must be passed by the House exactly as the Senate passed it. That means things like federal funding of abortions will be the law. Now, the pro-life democrats have to decide if that is really what they want to do.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And thats apparently supposed to be a bad thing. Its so terrible in fact that everyone who can afford it, comes to the US for healthcare.

Well said, clean cut observation. Or . . .? I like the part 'everyone who can afford it'. 'Comes to the US'. Yes, I get it. By all means, provide care to those from foreign countries with money in their pockets. Never mind most of the US citizens; they can not be dealt with.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Never mind most of the US citizens; they can not be dealt with.

250 Million Americans, 40 Million without Healthcare... Never been great at math, but 40/250 is less then half. Like a lot less. Hmmm, most Americans have health care. So, for the sake of 10% of the population, you're in favor of destroying the best health care in the world. Go ahead, you do the math.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

o, for the sake of 10% of the population, you're in favor of destroying the best health care in the world. Go ahead, you do the math.

If you get 90% on a test, that is considered excellent and top of the class. But it does not translate in other fields. If 90% of all cars were safe and 10% unsafe, would that be OK? Or how about 90% of what you eat being safe and 10% unsafe? Arguing that because 90% of Americans have some sort of health care does not necessarily mean that you got the best health care system in the world. There are many countries with fewer than 40 million people who have wider coverage.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There are many countries with fewer than 40 million people who have wider coverage.

Wider coverage yes, worse care yes. Increasing coverage, leads to decreasing quality. Why is that so hard to understand. So many people seem to know nothing about economics, and the law of scarcity. Americans would rather focus on quality, then on ensuring every single American have equal access to that coverage. That apparently makes us horrible barbarians who don't care that a very small proportion of the population has insufficient preventive care. As opposed to Emergency care which the entire population has.

That said, I don't think anyone would oppose bringing down costs. This would enable more people to have access to affordable health care, while not really impacting the quality of that care. However since bringing down costs isn't addressed in the health care bill at all, I fail to see how Obamacare is going to do anything positive at all.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Molenir - "you're in favor of destroying the best health care in the world."

ha ha, yet another person spouting the Great American Healthcare Myth. :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Hehehohohaha - good point.

The main reason conservatives like Molenir are terrified of the prospect of universal healthcare is because in the backs of their minds, it's....."S-O-C-I-A-L-I-S-T."

And that's just too overwhelming for them. :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The main reason conservatives like Molenir are terrified of the prospect of universal healthcare is because in the backs of their minds, it's....."S-O-C-I-A-L-I-S-T."

As opposed to the main reason people like Sushi want government healthcare, is government is God. It never makes mistakes. It can certainly manage our health better then we can ourselves. And don't all rights, privileges, and freedoms come from the government?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Molenir, So european health care system which is universal, has really good standards, cost much less than the american system, should be bad? appearently its a myth in the US that universal health care can actually work.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Molenir, So european health care system which is universal, has really good standards, cost much less than the american system, should be bad? appearently its a myth in the US that universal health care can actually work.

And all those horror stories from England and stories about people coming from Canada and all over for health care are just made up right.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The main reason conservatives like Molenir are terrified of the prospect of universal healthcare is because in the backs of their minds, it's....."S-O-C-I-A-L-I-S-T."

Molenir and other Americans rightly conclude the mindless rah-rah support for Obamacare from non-Americans means it is indeed the first and fatal step towards making America socialist and, as someone like SS3 would love to see, a greatly weakened country.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Any plan is going to be loaded down with pet projects, it's a simple reality of Washington.

So european health care system which is universal, has really good standards, cost much less than the american system, should be bad?

Actually the U.S has the highest cancer survival rate, highest surgery survival rate, and is number one in terms of responsive treatment. It is the largest investor in medical research and the largest contributor of medical innovation. Universal health care tends to be better in terms of maintenance issues like routine checkups but falls short when things get complicated.

Plus after seeing how Amtrak, the Post Office, and Medicare are run call me a little skeptical about how efficiently the U.S government can manage costs. I can easily see insurance costing more on a government plan in the long run.

In any case I really don't like the idea of the government mandating that I have health insurance or face a fine. I opted to not have insurance for almost a decade because I didn't feel like paying for it. The plan I eventually settled on only kicks in if I get something serious and/or seriously expensive, so all my checkups and such are paid out of pocket, and I'm fine with that. Heck I know a lot of people who are perfectly capable of buying health insurance but they don't feel like making any monthly payments. It's not necessarily an issue of the healthcare being too expensive, a lot of folks just don't think that you get enough bang for your buck with any health insurance.

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