Federal Gestapo Services ask good citizens to report any emails about health insurance reform that seem "fishy" to flag@whitehouse.gov

[GaryC 7]

Do you really identify that closely with Republican politicians Gary? I don't identify with any one group at all - on an individual basis perhaps - although even then...

Not any more. I have changed my affiliation to Independent. But since there is no viable alternative party I have no choice but to support individual reps that haven't sold out yet. For example, our congressman was LaHood before. He was in many ways the definition of a RINO. He is now Obama's transportation secretary. We now have a freshman named Arron Shock (sp?). Time will tell if he lives up to his promises. If the Libertarians ever make inroads into politics then that would be the party I would identify with.

[mawilson 2,133]

Then by all means... get the Pony Express back in business.

Or invest in PFC delivery through UPS/FedEx/DHL/Etc so as to create a larger market.

You're kidding, right?

You didn't know that the USPS had a statutory monopoly on letter delivery? That it's ILLEGAL

in the US for anyone other than the employees and agents of the USPS to deliver mail

to letterboxes marked "US Mail"?

See 453 US 114 United States Postal Service v. Council of Greenburgh Civic Associations

Also, it's not a level playing field - the USPS 1) is mostly tax-exempt, 2) uses some of the

most expensive real estate in the country rent-free, 3) has a low-cost credit line into the

US Treasury.

Come on, man - no private business could compete with that.

[GaryC 7]

Someone yell fire inside a movie theater and claim free speech too. This is simply insane trying to rationalize those that would rather lie and misinform than stick to what is factual.

I think the point here is this is being forced through without a full airing. The lack of understanding by everyone fuels speculation. Fear is a natural outcome. The points that the right are bringing up are a direct result of this. We are unwilling to just accept that we just trust washington to do the right thing. We take inconsistencies and take them to the worst possible outcome and the other side is taking those inconsistencies and saying there is nothing to worry about. Just take the time to get it right and remove the vague language so neither side has the ability to misunderstand.

We are allowing politicians to mislead and flat-out lie to us regarding this legislation. If more time were spent actually going through the bill (with full questioning when issues arise) instead of contributing to sour-graped lie campaigns... an honest debate could develop in less time and we'd likely have this bill already signed-

with private insurers insuring their customers all the same.

If you are including both sides in this observation then we are in agreement. Misinformation is rampant on both sides.

It is, generally. Such has always been the game historically... unless we pay attention to the facts and then it all comes down to how people want to pay attention to them. In THIS particular issue... the writing can't be clearer. Republicans (mostly) are being obstructive and the uninsured/underinsured/insured with carriers that can screw them over are going to continue getting shafted.

We are being obstructive because we don't like what we see. What do you want, we just back off and let them do whatever they want? The right is being shut out of any input in Washington. Every amendment or change to the bill is met with an instant slapdown. In effect the only thing we can do is oppose the whole thing. Short of rolling over we are doing the only thing we can do.

Slapdown?

Gary... that is how the legislative procedure works. Constituents vote for their representation. The members of Congress draft bills... they are debated and voted on.

Instead of making weird talking points that are NOT realistic and NOT covered in the legislation... many Republicans have adopted a strategy of misinformation. If they wanted to discuss about actual points in the bill that actually EXISTED in the bill, then there'd be a valid forum to debate them.

There are not.

Well I for one like things the way things are so total opposition is the right path to take. I support any and all ways to kill this bill. I would be willing to tweak the system to make it better but I want no part of a federal take over of health care.

[mawilson 2,133]

Do you really identify that closely with Republican politicians Gary? I don't identify with any one group at all - on an individual basis perhaps - although even then...

Not any more. I have changed my affiliation to Independent. But since there is no viable alternative party I have no choice but to support individual reps that haven't sold out yet. For example, our congressman was LaHood before. He was in many ways the definition of a RINO. He is now Obama's transportation secretary. We now have a freshman named Arron Shock (sp?). Time will tell if he lives up to his promises. If the Libertarians ever make inroads into politics then that would be the party I would identify with.

Good, Gary. Let's vote the Republican and Democrat fascists OUT of office.

[HAL 9000 96]

Then by all means... get the Pony Express back in business.

Or invest in PFC delivery through UPS/FedEx/DHL/Etc so as to create a larger market.

You're kidding, right?

You didn't know that the USPS had a statutory monopoly on letter delivery? That it's ILLEGAL

in the US for anyone other than the employees and agents of the USPS to deliver mail

to letterboxes marked "US Mail"?

See 453 US 114 United States Postal Service v. Council of Greenburgh Civic Associations

Also, it's not a level playing field - the USPS 1) is mostly tax-exempt, 2) uses some of the

most expensive real estate in the country rent-free, 3) has a low-cost credit line into the

US Treasury.

Come on, man - no private business could compete with that.

I wasn't aware that it was illegal to compete with letter delivery.

Maybe you should write your representatives to change that.

After all... laws can be changed.

Someone yell fire inside a movie theater and claim free speech too. This is simply insane trying to rationalize those that would rather lie and misinform than stick to what is factual.

I think the point here is this is being forced through without a full airing. The lack of understanding by everyone fuels speculation. Fear is a natural outcome. The points that the right are bringing up are a direct result of this. We are unwilling to just accept that we just trust washington to do the right thing. We take inconsistencies and take them to the worst possible outcome and the other side is taking those inconsistencies and saying there is nothing to worry about. Just take the time to get it right and remove the vague language so neither side has the ability to misunderstand.

We are allowing politicians to mislead and flat-out lie to us regarding this legislation. If more time were spent actually going through the bill (with full questioning when issues arise) instead of contributing to sour-graped lie campaigns... an honest debate could develop in less time and we'd likely have this bill already signed-

with private insurers insuring their customers all the same.

If you are including both sides in this observation then we are in agreement. Misinformation is rampant on both sides.

It is, generally. Such has always been the game historically... unless we pay attention to the facts and then it all comes down to how people want to pay attention to them. In THIS particular issue... the writing can't be clearer. Republicans (mostly) are being obstructive and the uninsured/underinsured/insured with carriers that can screw them over are going to continue getting shafted.

We are being obstructive because we don't like what we see. What do you want, we just back off and let them do whatever they want? The right is being shut out of any input in Washington. Every amendment or change to the bill is met with an instant slapdown. In effect the only thing we can do is oppose the whole thing. Short of rolling over we are doing the only thing we can do.

Slapdown?

Gary... that is how the legislative procedure works. Constituents vote for their representation. The members of Congress draft bills... they are debated and voted on.

Instead of making weird talking points that are NOT realistic and NOT covered in the legislation... many Republicans have adopted a strategy of misinformation. If they wanted to discuss about actual points in the bill that actually EXISTED in the bill, then there'd be a valid forum to debate them.

There are not.

Well I for one like things the way things are so total opposition is the right path to take. I support any and all ways to kill this bill. I would be willing to tweak the system to make it better but I want no part of a federal take over of health care.

Problem is... nowhere in this bill does it say the government is going to take over health care.

[mawilson 2,133]

There is not enough volume period. The only people that use snail mail regularly are businesses and putting the cost up would make business costs prohibitive - they would find alternatives, which they already have done in parcels for the most part. It is perfectly possible to make a viable postal service but not one that serves all citizens - that is what the US Mail service is charged with.

They would not find any alternatives because it's against the law.

[mawilson 2,133]

I wasn't aware that it was illegal to compete with letter delivery.

Maybe you should write your representatives to change that.

After all... laws can be changed.

Many have tried unsuccessfully in the past, many of whom have a lot more clout with the government than you and I do.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The right is being shut out of any input in Washington. Every amendment or change to the bill is met with an instant slapdown. In effect the only thing we can do is oppose the whole thing. Short of rolling over we are doing the only thing we can do.

That's factually incorrect, Gary.

Take the advance care planning provision of H.R. 3200, for example. The AARP strongly supports this provision which actually made it into the legislation with Republicans co-sponsoring it. Once this bi-partisan provision makes it into the legislation, the GOP then turns around and blasts the legislation that will lead us down a "treacherous path towards government-encouraged euthanasia if enacted into law". This is about as ill-spirited and dishonest an allegation as one could possibly imagine. Is this the bi-partisanship that the GOP allegedly is looking for? Don't kid yourself and others, Gary.

There's one goal the GOP has on healthcare reform and Sen. Jim DeMint was kind enough to share that goal with the public: To make health care reform Obama's Waterloo. The GOP is interested neither in compromise nor in bi-partisanship. The GOP is interested in maintaining the status quo on health care. The GOP is interested in wasting $700bn per year on a broken system while leaving tens of millions of Americans on the outside looking in on health care.

[SMOKE 1,426]

Problem is... nowhere in this bill does it say the government is going to take over health care.

can you give an example of an industry where the private sector does compete the government? i can't think of one.

[mawilson 2,133]

The GOP is interested in wasting $700bn per year on a broken system while leaving tens of millions of Americans on the outside looking in on health care.

Better $700bn than $700bn + $1 trillion.

[HAL 9000 96]

I wasn't aware that it was illegal to compete with letter delivery.

Maybe you should write your representatives to change that.

After all... laws can be changed.

Many have tried unsuccessfully in the past, many of whom have a lot more clout with the government than you and I do.

Well... too bad then. Or... maybe it means more constituents are OK with the USPS than you... or I.

[HAL 9000 96]

Problem is... nowhere in this bill does it say the government is going to take over health care.

can you give an example of an industry where the private sector does compete the government? i can't think of one.

That is irrelevant to the specifics of this topic.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The right is being shut out of any input in Washington. Every amendment or change to the bill is met with an instant slapdown. In effect the only thing we can do is oppose the whole thing. Short of rolling over we are doing the only thing we can do.

That's factually incorrect, Gary.

Take the advance care planning provision of H.R. 3200, for example. The AARP strongly supports this provision which actually made it into the legislation with Republicans co-sponsoring it. Once this bi-partisan provision makes it into the legislation, the GOP then turns around and blasts the legislation that will lead us down a "treacherous path towards government-encouraged euthanasia if enacted into law". This is about as ill-spirited and dishonest an allegation as one could possibly imagine. Is this the bi-partisanship that the GOP allegedly is looking for? Don't kid yourself and others, Gary.

There's one goal the GOP has on healthcare reform and Sen. Jim DeMint was kind enough to share that goal with the public: To make health care reform Obama's Waterloo. The GOP is interested neither in compromise nor in bi-partisanship. The GOP is interested in maintaining the status quo on health care. The GOP is interested in wasting $700bn per year on a broken system while leaving tens of millions of Americans on the outside looking in on health care.

wow...

[Peikko 1,575]

There is not enough volume period. The only people that use snail mail regularly are businesses and putting the cost up would make business costs prohibitive - they would find alternatives, which they already have done in parcels for the most part. It is perfectly possible to make a viable postal service but not one that serves all citizens - that is what the US Mail service is charged with.

They would not find any alternatives because it's against the law.

You think that business would continue sending mail USPS if it was charged at cost + profit to maintain delivery to every single USC? You are crazier than I thought

[mawilson 2,133]

I wasn't aware that it was illegal to compete with letter delivery.

Maybe you should write your representatives to change that.

After all... laws can be changed.

Many have tried unsuccessfully in the past, many of whom have a lot more clout with the government than you and I do.

Well... too bad then. Or... maybe it means more constituents are OK with the USPS than you... or I.

I'm OK with USPS. I'm happy with their prices and services - just like Medicare recipients are happy with theirs.

Unfortunately, both government-run programs are bankrupt - THAT was my point, I'm not here to pick on USPS.