Crowds at Perlmutter Health Care Event, More Ugliness From Protesters

Rep. Ed Perlmutter (D-CO), a first-term Congressman I like very much, held a townhall meeting on health care today outside a King Soopers grocery store in Brighton, CO, which is about 1/2 hour northeast of Denver.

Some of the signs these protesters carry are just nuts. Like, "Jesus is My Single Payer" and "Seniors, Get Your Death Pill here" (photos from Complete Colorado, whose coverage of the event is here.)

To his credit, Rep. Perlmutter actually sat down and listened to folks discuss health care.

Mike Ditto (Progress Now, former online communications director for Mark Udall and many others and former TalkLeft webmaster) had his car vandalized . His twitter feed of the event is here. You Tube video of damage here -- they got almost every panel of the car. Photo's below:

What rock did these people crawl out from under? It's really time for them to go back to their sad lives. I think I'm going to stop writing about them. They don't deserve as much attention as people are paying to them.

Update: Rather than start yet another health care thread, I'll update here: Susie Madrak at Crooks and Liars on "10 Things Obama Did Wrong on Health Care."

Update: I posted in comments to an earlier thread what I think the Dems are doing wrong. Maybe I'm asking too much, or maybe this has been answered over and over, but I have to think that if I'm not getting it, either are lots of other folks. Rather than speak in shorthand about public options and single payer and reduced costs, I want to know that under the proposed legislation:

1. Reigning in costs will not result in a reduction of health care benefits to seniors.

2. It will not result in the Government deciding what diagnostic tests or treatment procedures a person can have. It will not prevent someone from getting a second or third opinion.

3. Providing health insurance to everyone and eliminating the ability of health insurance companies to deny coverage or overcharge those with pre-existing conditions will not result in higher premiums or reduced benefits for the healthy.

4. Health insurance companies will not be allowed to revise or eliminate plans after the law passes with the result that people end up with less coverage for the same amount of premiums they are paying now.

If the proposed reform bill does not mean the above four things are true, our legislators need to admit it and explain why it's still an improvement to what we have now.

< Bill Clinton to Attend Netroots Nation | Sunday Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    (I kind of like Jesus is my Single Payer) (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by jerry on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 07:18:25 PM EST

    Perhaps it's alluding to "Jesus (none / 0) (#107)
    by Roz on Mon Aug 10, 2009 at 04:59:11 PM EST
    was a community orgnaizer."

    Or (none / 0) (#108)
    by squeaky on Mon Aug 10, 2009 at 05:03:21 PM EST
    A bad speller.

    Single Prayer


    I think you're being unfair to these posters (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by jerry on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 07:27:44 PM EST
    I think the posters are better than average, somewhat funny actually, and speak to a real flaw in how the plan has been addressed.

    As I mentioned in an earlier thread, the "cost benefit analysis and triage" problem should have been expected, and concern over it is quite relevant with no nefarious intent.  

    People asking questions about these issues and demanding answers and even making pointed commentary about them are actually participating in a democratic and political process.  So good on them, and we actually need to thank them, because as any lawyer should presumably know, we need many eyes, we need conflicting views, we even need a hegelian dialogue.

    Purposefully spreading disinformation is wrong, but holding up a poster saying "Get your death pill here" is reasonable political speech, an apt concern, and a nice reference to many pieces of popular speculative fiction.

    Oh please (5.00 / 3) (#13)
    by TheRealFrank on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 09:06:10 PM EST
    "Get your death pill here" is not in any way reasonable political speech, simply because it is so over the top. It is not an "apt concern". Concern for what? Concern for something that has never even been discussed? It is, in fact, spreading disinformation.

    Shouting and trying to drown people out, is also not reasonable. Because you are preventing dialogue, not promoting it.

    Making ridiculous claims, and then shouting, over and over, "LIAR" at the congressperson, is also not reasonable.

    Heckling isn't good, period. I hate it when Code Pink does it. I hate it when teabaggers do it.


    I said nothing about heckling (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by jerry on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 10:02:06 PM EST
    You have no evidence that the people with the posters were heckling.

    Get your death pill here is the logical extreme of what a cost benefit analysis triage system could amount to.  And it's short, pithy, and a great image.  It's fantastic political speech and we should applaud whoever came up with that one.  Go see Jeralyn's updated update to see that it's a reasonable concern.


    they didn't just heckle (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 11:03:02 PM EST
    they booed Perlmutter as he arrived. I just saw and heard them on the 10 pm news.

    Did they throw shoes, too? (none / 0) (#110)
    by Roz on Mon Aug 10, 2009 at 05:09:03 PM EST
    Shouting at political meetings? (2.00 / 0) (#54)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 07:39:23 AM EST
    Gosh, what will the do next? Demand to be included rather than locked out?

    I do love (none / 0) (#15)
    by Spamlet on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 09:17:55 PM EST
    that these thugs have become known as "teabaggers."

    See my point above (none / 0) (#26)
    by Upstart Crow on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 10:31:13 PM EST
    I guess you're saying (none / 0) (#50)
    by Spamlet on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 03:54:52 AM EST
    you're offended by the name "teabaggers"?


    I think it's funny. These people, with their "tea parties," brought the ridicule on themselves, and the fact that "teabaggers" has such a comical sexual connotation makes it all the funnier, at least to my mind.


    As a tea drinker, hard to take. (none / 0) (#81)
    by oculus on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 03:48:21 PM EST
    Is the "teabagger" label (none / 0) (#109)
    by Roz on Mon Aug 10, 2009 at 05:05:15 PM EST
    reasonable political speech?

    Susie Madrak is 100% right.... (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by jerry on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 07:33:16 PM EST

    "To his credit, Rep. Perlmutter actually sat down and listened to folks discuss health care."

    This is NOT to his credit.  It is in fact:
    a) his job to speak with constituents
    b) good politics to speak with constituents who disagree and listen to them, and have a dialogue with him.

    It's not to his credit that he is doing his job.  It shouldn't even be surprising.  It's his job.

    he's missing the point (5.00 / 3) (#28)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 10:34:41 PM EST
    and close to blogclogging...the credit referred not to the fact he's holding a public meeting, but that with all the nonsense going on around him, he managed to still sit down and hold discussions with groups of five at a time...he didn't let the protesters disrupt his plan.

    Good snark (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by Cream City on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 12:13:33 AM EST
    and there are few laffs to be had these days.  Thanks.

    Now THAT! (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by Kitt on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 01:46:42 PM EST
    Is worth coming out of lurkdom. Too clever.

    I am sorry you feel that way.... (none / 0) (#31)
    by jerry on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 10:43:01 PM EST
    I am truly sorry you feel that way that I am close to blogclogging, as actually try to restrain from responding to every response to a post, and as I wouldn't want you to think of me in that light.

    I sadly live in a very red part of a very red state and we have no townhalls to go to and they are frankly just never held.  Why would a R representative here ever bother to do that job and listen to constituents who disagree with him.  I get chain letters from time to time thanking me for my input and letters, but there is no actual representation.  So no, I don't give a congressman credit for holding a public meeting, and back to your point, since the congressman have been asked during this period to hold these meetings to fight for healthcare, I especially don't give them credit for doing so.  It's their job, they are rewarded for it.

    (But I think if you look at my comment history, your charge of blogclogging doesn't actually hold.)


    Weird (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by sj on Mon Aug 10, 2009 at 11:44:18 AM EST
    Your "world":

    and we have no townhalls to go to and they are frankly just never held.

    And yet:

    So no, I don't give a congressman credit for holding a public meeting

    It seems that you, of all people, should give credit for a job well done, when you appear to represented by someone whose job is poorly done.

    My current workplace is managed by someone who does NOT give credit where credit is due.  Predictably, no one goes out of their way to excel at their job.


    sorry then (none / 0) (#34)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 10:53:17 PM EST
    it seemed that way to me but perhaps I was too harsh. My apologies.

    Jeralyn (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 07:47:21 PM EST
    you're right about writing about them. Giving them attention doesnt do anything for either side and in lots of ways it might be helping the GOP on this issue.

    Health Insurers Have Already Won (5.00 / 3) (#9)
    by MO Blue on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 08:19:21 PM EST
    title of Business Week article.

    As the health reform fight shifts this month from a vacationing Washington to congressional districts and local airwaves around the country, much more of the battle than most people realize is already over. The likely victors are insurance giants such as UnitedHealth Group (UNH), Aetna (AET), and WellPoint (WLP). The carriers have succeeded in redefining the terms of the reform debate to such a degree that no matter what specifics emerge in the voluminous bill Congress may send to President Obama this fall, the insurance industry will emerge more profitable. Health reform could come with a $1 trillion price tag over the next decade, and it may complicate matters for some large employers. But insurance CEOs ought to be smiling.  

    What's really ironic is that we should (5.00 / 6) (#11)
    by Anne on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 08:22:54 PM EST
    all be at these town halls expressing our concerns with how reform is being shaped, and demanding some answers.

    As a companion to Susie's post, here's BAR's Bruce Dixon on (Bruce goes into more detail in each item):

    Top Ten Ways To Tell Your President & His Party Aren't Fighting For Health Care For Everybody:

    Barack Obama and Democratic majorities in the House and Senate were swept into office on a promise they would deliver affordable and accessible health care for all Americans. But the corporate media journalism limits the national health care conversation to what insurance companies, drug companies, for-profit health care professionals, their executives, lobbyists and politicians of both parties and other hirelings have to say. So it isn't as easy as it ought to be to tell what the politicians are doing about accomplishing health care for everybody. Hence we offer these ten points. This is how you can tell whether your president and his party are fighting for the health care you deserve.

    1. Their plan doesn't cover the uninsured till at least 2013.

    2. Their "public option" isn't Medicare, won't bring costs down and will only cover about 10 million people.

    3. The president and his party have already caved in to the drug companies on reimporting Canadian drugs, on negotiating drug prices downward and on generics.

    4. The president and his party have received more money from private insurers and the for-profit health care industry than even Republicans, with the president alone taking $19 million in the 2008 election cycle alone, more than all his Repubican, Democratic and independent rivals combined.

    5. The president's plan, and those of Republicans and Democratic blue dogs too, will require families to purchase health insurance policies from private insurers.

    6. The president's plan, and those of Republicans and Democratic blue dogs too, could force you to buy junk insurance.

    7. The president's plan, as well as those of Democratic "blue dogs" and Republicans, are to be funded in part with cuts in Medicare and Medicaid.

    8. The president, with the cooperation of corporate media and the Republicans is trying to make the argument about himself instead of a discussion on the merits of his policy.

    9. The president and his party, and the corporate media have spent more time and energy silencing and excluded the advocates of single payer health care, mostly the president's own supporters, than they have fighting blue dogs and Republicans.

    But no matter how diligently the spokespeople for single payer are excluded from media coverage and invitations to Obama's policy forums and round tables, no matter how many times the White House cuts their questions from transcripts and video of public events, the calls, emails and letters keep pouring into Congress and the White House demanding the creation of a publicly funded, everybody-in-nobody-out system, a Medicare-for-All kind of single payer health care plan.

    10. Despite the president's own admission that only a single payer health care system will deliver what Americans want, he and the leaders of his party insist that Medicare For All, HR 676, us utterly off the table.

    The sad thing is that while the protesters are being classified as right-wing astro-turfing loons, their actions may be having the effect of getting millions of people to ignore the very serious problems with what is being offered to the American people.

    Kip Sullivan, in a new post at PNHP.org, answers back to those who think we have no choice but to go along with the Obama/Congress offfering.  It's long, but well worth reading.

    I love Susie, she is always cutting edge (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 09:27:20 PM EST
    And Obama left out of his address the Medicare cuts.  And he is going to get his lunch eaten on that.  He is messing with the wrong voting block.  I wish my voting block had the same chutzpah.

    Thanks for the link. So this is reform? (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by allimom99 on Mon Aug 10, 2009 at 09:06:02 AM EST
    No thank you.

    We have a few years of (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 08:45:08 PM EST
    encouraged intolerance of each other with all the wedge politics that have been selecting our leaders of past years.  It's sad but it isn't the first time I've seen such actions from such a mentality.  People are very scared and paranoid right now.  I wish that I were shocked but how can anyone feel stable with all the lies everyone was fed for 8 years.  And if you were okay with all the lies I'm not sure what that says about your grasp on reality.  I digress, here's to our future and building trust again in each other as human beings.

    CHURCH (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by wilco on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 09:09:27 PM EST
    Its ok in black churches or progressive churches when they speak on political action or civil rights.  And they do so regularly.  Churches played a large part in the 60s civil rights successes - thank God for them.  However, when our opponents discuss political issues in conservative churches to motivate them....?  Uhhh, its called democracy.  

    My conservative friend told me the other day "your side is just mad because we are using radical left methods at these town meetings and being successful".  I dont completely agree with him, but its somewhat true.  Damn, I love democracy.  Twist it, stretch it, test it, push the boundaries.  Demagogues on both sides be damned.

    your friend... (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by Dadler on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 12:31:03 AM EST
    ...needs to be challenged more.  ask him what his working definition of socialism is.  ask him if he thinks a company making a profit off his healthcare is more likely or less likely to give him good care if it costs the company more.  

    please, these folks are SO unchallenged precisely because they ARE being thugs in this town halls.  they aren't protesting, they are simply obstructing.  protesting would require them to have rational and logical positions on the issues, which they do not have.

    but reality is an ugly thing, always is and always will be, which means no one, on any side of any issue, should expect their opinions to be automatically respected -- only their rational opinions should be.  and if they can't tell the difference between the rational and the irrational, then they are beyond help and, yes, they should be more than ignored they should be held up for ridicule, scorn and shame, since they are staining the freedom we have to actually educate ourselves.  they are not using freedom to educate themselves, they are ABusing freedom to deny that education to others.


    Smashy Car Pics (5.00 / 2) (#21)
    by MikeDitto on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 09:56:44 PM EST
    Hey Jeralyn my Facebook profile is probably not visible to most people, so here's a better link for pics:


    Teabagging minutemen....great (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 10:11:41 PM EST
    Sorry about your car.

    thanks, Mike (5.00 / 2) (#27)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 10:31:16 PM EST
    And I'm really sorry this happened to you.

    Thanks J (none / 0) (#40)
    by MikeDitto on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 11:48:03 PM EST
    It's not the first time I've had property vandalized, I'm sure it won't be the last time. Inconvenient, yes, but it doesn't help their cause. In fact it will very likely set it back.

    Who vandalized? (none / 0) (#111)
    by Roz on Mon Aug 10, 2009 at 05:30:22 PM EST
    Mike, how do you know who vandalized your car? Did your car have a sign on it that identified you as a health reform supporter? Was your car mistaken for that of a health reform protester? Do you know?

    -- I've clicked over to your flickr and see you've highlighted that flyer and so apparently did indeed have some sign of your position in the car. Is that all of your evidence? Do you suppose these "teabaggers" went up to each car shading their eyes and peering into the windows for targets? I'd give that a 50-50 probability. Maybe Kenneth Gladney wheeled up and keyed your car. Maybe an SEIU "thug" did.

    I guess it's all a matter of what lens you see things through. I'd take my 50-50 chance and go with the thugs. But that's just me. Were any other cars vandalized?


    Sorry about your car (2.00 / 0) (#51)
    by Wile ECoyote on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 04:29:32 AM EST
    Do you have proof it was a "teabagger"?  Not some lout walking by, etc.  Hate for the wrong person to be convicted even here.

    These folks are all class (none / 0) (#41)
    by andgarden on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 11:48:50 PM EST
    Sorry Mike.

    So my district's town hall (5.00 / 4) (#24)
    by Cream City on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 10:28:26 PM EST
    is coming up this week.  I don't need this nonsense, but spouse thinks we ought to go.  If so, I doubt we will be heard above the din.  So we need signs!  Give us ideas on what to say.

    Apparently, from the signs I'm seeing in photos, we ought to invoke the Lord.  "Jeebus Told Me He Wants Single Payer"?  "And Jeebus Said, 'There Shalt Be Public Option'"? :-)

    Jesus Would Give Everyone Free Healthcare (5.00 / 4) (#30)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 10:42:43 PM EST
    you asked ;)

    uhm (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by Jen M on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 08:40:54 AM EST
    he did  what with all that touching and healing and raising from the dead.

    Not much of a veterinarian though. Poor pigs.


    Now, there's a thought. . . . (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by Cream City on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 08:48:40 AM EST
    How about "We Need a Miracle, Jeebus, to Win Real Health Care Reform"?

    ain't that the truth nt (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by Jen M on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 10:44:44 AM EST
    bear in mind, (none / 0) (#74)
    by cpinva on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 02:05:57 PM EST
    Not much of a veterinarian though. Poor pigs.

    jesus was an orthodox jew, i doubt pigs (cloven hoofed) would have had much to fear from him.


    They did if (none / 0) (#76)
    by Jen M on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 02:29:37 PM EST
    he was driving out evil spirits from people!

    You heathen (none / 0) (#82)
    by Cream City on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 04:30:08 PM EST
    Hie thee to your Bible for Mark 5:13.

    Yeah (none / 0) (#66)
    by squeaky on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 12:05:12 PM EST
    But there would be extremely looooong lines..  Many deaths while waiting to be healed, no doubt.

    Think loaves and fishes. (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by oculus on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 12:42:20 AM EST
    Sounds like a fish fry (none / 0) (#57)
    by Cream City on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 08:31:12 AM EST
    if talking about this district. . . .

    We ought to go to bolster the side of sanity, if this district is going to get hit, too.  It's the most Dem district around.  On the other hand, the town hall will be in a very AA part of the district, so that may terrify the lily-whiters away.

    And I really dread dealing with the fundie crazies again, after years of defending PP clinics that meant I ended up needing health care!  Defending clinics, I actually got thumped by a Bible wielded by one of the crazies, resulting in a really bad concussion.  The cops, of course, just watched for too long.  That's what happens with a Catholic DA.


    Real Bible thumping.... (5.00 / 1) (#95)
    by MKS on Mon Aug 10, 2009 at 09:29:02 AM EST
    And to live to tell the tale....

    If you go, hope you will tell us what (none / 0) (#67)
    by oculus on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 12:07:41 PM EST
    you see and hear.  Maybe don't take your car!

    Yes, I was thinking of the vandalism (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by Cream City on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 12:28:30 PM EST
    and about not taking our car -- our good car.  But then I remembered our beater, garaged nearby for the occasional rare use by the kids.  So rare that we're talking about getting rid of it.  Maybe it's just the car to take, have it get vandalized, and get a bit of insurance payback on it before it goes.

    And then we can say thank you to the Jeebus people whom He would be using in mysterious ways. :-)


    Will it ever end? (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by Radiowalla on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 10:43:49 PM EST

    Why was I so naive?  I actually thought that this time, for once, we would find the strength to move into the community of civilized nations and establish a health care delivery system that would serve everyone.

    At the rate this is going, I don't think I will live long enough to see it.

    Your (5.00 / 2) (#46)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 12:37:58 AM EST
    naievity doesnt bother me nearly as much as Obama's cluelessness about the GOP.

    I'm sorry you feel blue about this (none / 0) (#33)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 10:46:28 PM EST
    hang in there.  

    I'm trying, pal, I'm trying (none / 0) (#38)
    by Radiowalla on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 11:27:28 PM EST
    if the "protesters" (5.00 / 2) (#35)
    by cpinva on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 10:57:17 PM EST
    were actually seeking intelligent discourse on the subject, i might agree that they're practicing democracy. that's not their intent, it isn't what they've actually done in practice, so they aren't.

    what we have here is a junior version(s) of the infamous bier hall putsch, to be followed by a new kristalnacht against the "others". i suppose at some point, we can expect a right-wing night of the long knives as well.

    i realize this sounds a tad over-the-top, but just look at the actions of the german fascists, as they took control of the country (a purported democracy), and the parallels are rather disconcerting.

    this has nothing to do with reforming health care delivery, and everything to do with gaining power. the claims made by such as beck and limbaugh are easily disproven, they're merely a facade to provoke the low-info masses.

    So... (3.50 / 2) (#37)
    by jarober on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 11:18:05 PM EST
    So let me get this straight: having paid for activists show up to drive by the homes of AIG executives: good

    protesting a health care plan you disagree with: bad

    I guess what matters here is whose ox is being gored.  

    2001 - 2009: Dissent was patriotism

    now: Dissent is "crawling out from under a rock"

    I'm sure that makes sense somehow.

    no, vandalizing a car (5.00 / 0) (#39)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 11:32:46 PM EST
    of a supporter of health care reform is not dissent. Mike had the flier inside his vehicle. See the you tube video, I added the link to the post.

    Vandalism (none / 0) (#45)
    by jarober on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 12:33:05 AM EST
    Vandalism is unacceptable, no matter what the issue.  I'll completely agree with that.  What I won't agree with is smearing the entire set of protesters based on that.

    I didn't do that either (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 03:13:14 AM EST
    I said, "Some of the signs these protesters carry are just nuts. Like, "Jesus is My Single Payer" and "Seniors, Get Your Death Pill here." I called the signs nutty, not the protesters. Of course they have the right to say whatever they want, but when their statements are so dumb with respect to the issue being debated, as exhibited by their signs, I would hope they soon crawl back under whatever rock they came out of.

    I have not suggested they are being led by professional right wingers -- I haven't had the time to look into that. If they aren't, and these are really their own ideas, it's embarassing to see how stupid they are. They're calling Henny Penny, the Sky is Falling for things that aren't even remotely in the legislation.

    At the Nancy Pelosi event I attended Thursday, the other protesters all had similar signs -- you can view them here. I also conducted a very polite interview of a 16 year old. I asked him to tell me what was wrong with Obama's health care bill and let him go for 40 seconds, I never interrupted him or disagreed with him. You can tell at the end I was very cordial to him, even thanking him for giving me his time.

    They tended to appear unhinged and were  shouters, and disrupters, and possibly being trained by the party activists.

    It's one thing to protest from behind a certain amount of feet wherever the police decide is the divison line. It is not okay for them to stand next to the speaker and try to drown him out. Perlmutter's constituents were invited to tell him what they their concerns were about the proposed health care plan.  That's participatory democracy, and  as good as it gets. These thugs can stand across the street with signs and yell till their hoarse. That's their business. But they can't disrupt the other side's right to express themselves.


    the signs pictured in your link, though made to (none / 0) (#53)
    by DFLer on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 06:49:41 AM EST
    look "homemade" look to me that they were made by the same person....perhaps the young person and the man in the hat were together....

    check out the "G" ..it's the same handwriting style on each,..kind of a unique way to make the "g" with the little hook thingy.



    Signs (none / 0) (#87)
    by prittfumes on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 11:52:38 PM EST
    Jeralyn, I am extremely disappointed by your "nuts" characterization of a "Jesus is My Single Payer" sign. The content of this sign is not "dumb" when the issue being debated is so-called "health care". Not you, but another poster here for whom I have great respect makes "Jeebus" jokes. I'm absolutely certain that it would never be your intention to ridicule another person's sincere religious beliefs.

    Except it's not sincere as it turns out (none / 0) (#89)
    by MikeDitto on Mon Aug 10, 2009 at 02:10:40 AM EST
    It was a social experiment by a couple of local progressive bloggers.

    So PROGRESSIVES made up FAKE signs (1.00 / 1) (#94)
    by allimom99 on Mon Aug 10, 2009 at 09:20:12 AM EST
    to make people they're accusing of astroturfing look bad? This is a good thing HOW?

    "Sincere" Signs (none / 0) (#90)
    by prittfumes on Mon Aug 10, 2009 at 03:20:59 AM EST
    Read it. Thanks.

    Sorry that I offended you (none / 0) (#98)
    by Cream City on Mon Aug 10, 2009 at 10:46:18 AM EST
    as I am a churchgoer -- and that is why, as I see the fundie churches here organizing about this, I am offended.  That's why I use "Jeebus," as the sincere followers of Jesus would not behave as the fundies do here -- now would I actually put His name on a sign for something that will again work against the poor.

    I will refrain from further snark that misses its aim.  Thanks.


    Thank you, Cream. (none / 0) (#102)
    by prittfumes on Mon Aug 10, 2009 at 12:31:20 PM EST
    On reflection, perhaps my comment was somewhat less than ... well-crafted ... ?

    No, your comment was fine (none / 0) (#105)
    by Cream City on Mon Aug 10, 2009 at 03:50:33 PM EST
    in that it was clear, as mine clearly were not in their message between the lines, and you were not discourteous in the least.  You expressed your concern without attacking me.  Thanks!

    Wrong! (5.00 / 0) (#63)
    by ChiTownDenny on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 10:54:52 AM EST
    Protesting is to townhall meeting as apple is to orange.  Context, please.

    Two big questions (2.00 / 0) (#55)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 08:04:59 AM EST
    1. Reigning in costs will not result in a reduction of health care benefits to seniors.

    2. It will not result in the Government deciding what diagnostic tests or treatment procedures a person can have. It will not prevent someone from getting a second or third opinion.

    The also have Rangel's comment that $400 billion will come out of Medicare.

    I think the truth is that they will have to do the above or else raise taxes across the board. This would become a "watch my lips no new taxes" moment for Obama and the Democrats in general and most likely cause huge losses in 2010 and 2012.

    So the idea was to introduce the bill, yahoo it through Congress and raise taxes after the fact. Notice some of timing in the bill is after 2012.

    Mike Ditto - Sorry about the car (2.00 / 0) (#56)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 08:14:07 AM EST
    Did you exchange words with someone? And can you ID them? Any security cameras around that might show it? If so I hope you can run them down and make'em pay, and go to jail for a while.


    I had a heated debate with a couple of guys (5.00 / 0) (#68)
    by MikeDitto on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 12:12:18 PM EST
    But I don't think they had any way of knowing which car was mine. I got one of the last spots in the lot, and I think those guys were already up at the storefront when I got there.

    And even though they called me a Nazi and an ivy-league elitist (who knew Metro State was ivy league?) I don't think they were mad at me any more than anybody else.


    How soon do the police expect (5.00 / 0) (#69)
    by Inspector Gadget on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 12:25:17 PM EST
    to have the necessary evidence from the surveillance tapes?

    She didn't say (none / 0) (#85)
    by MikeDitto on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 06:30:40 PM EST
    Like all things I imagine it's a priority thing. Probably depends what's on her to-do list already. I know my insurance company has already placed a call though.

    I hope you will come back here and (none / 0) (#104)
    by Inspector Gadget on Mon Aug 10, 2009 at 02:52:34 PM EST
    give us the results of the investigation.

    Fingers need to point in the right direction in order to find a solution to the problem.


    Points to this being more about Power/Religion (none / 0) (#5)
    by of1000Kings on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 08:01:40 PM EST
    than about health care...

    I think I might go to some churches in the area and see if some are preaching politics instead of religion...

    health care shouldn't be on their agenda, but I wouldn't be surprised if it is in some churches..

    IMO health care is an appropriate (5.00 / 3) (#6)
    by oculus on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 08:12:28 PM EST
    topic for a church to address, including from the pulpit.  

    most churches would probably agree... (none / 0) (#8)
    by of1000Kings on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 08:19:00 PM EST
    which is why I don't go to any churches other than an occasional meeting of Society of Friends (which do not have churches, thankfully)...

    I go to church with family, occasionally, but usually only to hear about the evilness of being Muslim...


    Here is a great article... (none / 0) (#10)
    by kevsters on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 08:20:11 PM EST
    Here is a great article debunking the myth of rationed care.


    Thanks for the reference, (5.00 / 0) (#61)
    by KeysDan on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 10:37:59 AM EST
    the arguments, of course, point out the irrationality of so many of the opponents positions.  The article also seems to express frustration with the president and Democratic congress for "losing the health care debate".  Given the incrementalism that seems to be emerging from care to insurance and--rather than Medicare-for all, moving to Assurances for Insurance--for almost all along with, maybe, a non-Medicare public option/co-op/exchange, it is puzzling as to why Medicare "reform" is included at this time. A lot is on the table just in considering the needed expansion.  The introduction of undefined and unexplained "reforms/cuts" to Medicare so as finance the new legislation seems to provide fertile ground for the anarchy and demagoguery .

    TL Comment Policy (none / 0) (#18)
    by daring grace on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 09:30:18 PM EST
    Have you read it?

    New commenters, i.e, those registered for 30 days or less, may not post more than 10 comments in a 24 hour period.

    See you tomorrow.

    Yes, Wilco is over limit (none / 0) (#20)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 09:44:51 PM EST
    and he's already been banned from BTD's threads and put on probation in mine.

    Wilco, read the comment rules and check the other threads.

    No more today.


    Jeralyn (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by MO Blue on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 01:49:07 PM EST
    Here is some information on what is being considered in Congress regarding the allowable premium structure (your question #3) in the current health insurance bills.

    Insurers could not charge more to people in poor health or to women, as they do now. But they still could charge higher premiums due to family size, geographic location and age.

    The House and the Senate health committee bills would limit age-related premiums so that a 64-year-old pays no more than twice as much an 18-year-old. But Senate Finance Committee negotiators are considering allowing as much as a 5-to-1 difference, a big savings for the young but a significantly higher cost for older people who are more likely to have health problems. Link

    Oh well, Seniors don't really need all that money for food and other necessities.


    Seniors?! (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by nycstray on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 03:16:34 PM EST
    Make that anyone over 50

    Insurers no longer could base premiums on a person's medical history, although they still could charge more to 50-year-olds than to people in their 20s.

    And screw the babyboomers in NY and some other states. Family size would be interesting to see (how they plan to structure it, not in reality!). I was just comparing plans this AM. I can get one that is a bit cheaper that excludes maternity/well baby/etc, but it is not that much cheaper and the ones that includes it are generally better over all. I didn't check family plans, but it may well be cheaper not to marry if the kids come under single mom's insurance :P


    I'm sorry (none / 0) (#25)
    by Upstart Crow on Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 10:30:32 PM EST
    There is a lot of knee-jerk liberalism on this site, and a lot of nasty names thrown at people on the other side -- though not, perhaps, as much as on other sites. You really do have to sort through and separate the wheat from the chaff.

    I'm a liberal and proud of it ... (5.00 / 4) (#48)
    by cymro on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 01:34:11 AM EST
    ... and as such I know what I believe to be right and wrong, good and bad. My parents raised me in a home in which to be liberal minded was a virtue, and the opposite of being narrow minded. So if that is what you mean by "knee-jerk" liberalism, I plead guilty as charged. Moreover, I would expect that the majority of posters on a site called TalkLeft would feel similarly -- in fact I would be quite disappointed if they didn't.

    The very phrase "knee-jerk liberalism" is offensive, since it carries with it the implication that "liberal" is a pejorative term. On the contrary, we need more knee-jerk liberalism, especially among our elected representatives, instead of the timidity they exhibit when we need radical solutions to our economic and social problems, problems created by too many years of knee-jerk conservatism.


    Generic "Protesters" in the headline? (none / 0) (#52)
    by lambert on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 06:41:40 AM EST
    Surely not.

    End of life care (none / 0) (#60)
    by MO Blue on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 10:27:54 AM EST
    UnitedHealth's relationship with Democratic Senator Mark R. Warner of Virginia illustrates the industry's subtle role. Elected last fall, Warner, a former governor of his state and a wealthy ex-businessman, received a choice assignment as the Senate Democrats' liaison to business.
    UnitedHealth has periodically served as a valuable extension of Warner's office, providing research and analysis to support his initiatives. Corporations and trade groups play this role in all kinds of contexts, but few do it with the effectiveness of the insurers. In June, Warner introduced legislation expanding government-backed Medicare and Medicaid coverage for hospice stays for the terminally ill and other treatment in life's final stages. The issue isn't a top UnitedHealth priority. But the corporation wanted to help Warner with his argument that in the long run, better hospice coverage would save money. UnitedHealth prepared a report for lawmakers finding that 27% of Medicare's budget is now spent during the last year of older patients' lives, often on questionable hospital tests and procedures. Expanded hospice coverage and other services could save $18 billion over 10 years, UnitedHealth asserted.
    Business Week

    That was certainly true in (none / 0) (#64)
    by Inspector Gadget on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 10:56:55 AM EST
    spent during the last year of older patients' lives, often on questionable hospital tests and procedures.

    my mother's case. When we told the doctor no more questionable hospital tests, the doctor refused to treat a treatable situation and my mother died.


    Fair points, but I can't (none / 0) (#65)
    by KeysDan on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 11:50:57 AM EST
    help putting these costs in perspective.  The Iraq/Afghan wars run about $10 billion a month.

    I have nothing against hospice care. (5.00 / 2) (#71)
    by MO Blue on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 01:06:07 PM EST
    In fact, it is an option I might pursue if I had a terminal illness.

    Just don't trust the insurance industry, legislation written to their specifications or politicians receiving large $$ from the industry. Moving people from active treatment to a non-treatment hospice setting would save money. The question in my mind is who would realize these savings. Somehow, I'm not real confident that the savings will be passed on to consumers.

    Also, there is often a fine line between what is necessary treatment and what is questionable hospital tests and procedures. Want the decision on what is reasonable treatment and hospital vs hospice to be left in the hands of each individual. Totally against the insurance industry (current practice through denying coverage) or the government making these choices for me or my family.


    Seeing as how Medicare (none / 0) (#80)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 03:43:08 PM EST
    doesn't start until a person is 65... why would anyone be surprised that the money is spent in the "last years...." At 65 you are at the front end of your end.

    I have had personal experience with my Mother In Law and my Mother in two separate states 1200 miles apart and I saw no needless tests and no invasive tests. The medical staff was open, helpful and very good at explaining and asking for input.

    Indeed the "test" thing can be a lack of understanding that daily blood tests are needed if the patient is being treated for lung or kidney problems.

    Not that I don't believe that some could be, but anecdotal is as anecdotal does to paraphrase Forest G.



    considering the fact that (none / 0) (#75)
    by cpinva on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 02:18:52 PM EST
    there's no actual bill to be discussed, how on earth do these "protesters" even know what it is they're supposedly "protesting" against? heck, i don't have any idea what's in the bill, and i can actually read, question, do modestly intelligent analysis, more than can be said for those "protesting" who've been interviewed.

    all they seem to know is what beck and limbaugh (who, coincedentally, also have no actual clue what's going to be in the final bill.) tell them, which is clearly bogus. they don't state it as opinion, they state it as fact. 535 senators and representatives are stunned to realize those two gentlemen know what's in the final bill, and they don't.

    No actual bill?? (none / 0) (#79)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 03:31:30 PM EST
    Based on Atul Gawande's excellent articles ... (none / 0) (#78)
    by FreakyBeaky on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 03:29:04 PM EST
    ... in the New Yorker, I have little doubt that you can cut Medicare spending over time without reducing care.  To summarize the argument, Medicare costs are much higher in some localities than in others for the same kinds of patients with the same kinds of  problems.  Outcomes are the same or worse where costs are higher.  The main difference seems to be how doctors are paid: doctors that are paid a salary are more cost-efficient because they focus more on what their patients need, while doctors that are paid fee-for-service  focus more on how many procedures they can bill for (which is not to say they are somehow evil or bad doctors - everyone responds to financial incentives, at least to a certain extent).  

    I think the Administration gets this, but it's also clear they aren't getting the message out, which was supposed to be one of their strong points.  On the other hand, it's tough to talk about in ten words or less with  the same emotional resonance as "OMG they're going to let Grandma die!.  

    Excellent articles, yes. (none / 0) (#83)
    by Cream City on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 04:32:27 PM EST
    And I fear that few in Congress or the White House have read them, from what we see in the bills.

    Yeah (none / 0) (#84)
    by squeaky on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 04:46:35 PM EST
    Anti capitalist scum...  Doctors working for a salary, and not driven by good old fashioned greed. Well that is unAmericun and tantamount to communism..

    who decides? (none / 0) (#86)
    by kelsweet on Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 11:45:25 PM EST
    who decides what their salary should be?
     one point no one seems to mention is that the USA cannot afford this crap right now. That is part of what these people are mad about.
    Labeling them as "teabaggers" is one of the most juvenile things I've ever witnessed. They have legitimate concerns and they are being ignored and worse, ridiculed. I find it abhorrent. that the WH of all places has said we will hit back twice as hard with our own "grassroots" HA! effort is completely misguided and shows a bully mentality that is quite frankly, jawdropping. These are fellow citizens after all.

    Who decides? (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by sj on Mon Aug 10, 2009 at 11:44:48 AM EST
    Who decides anybody's salary?  There are market rates, right?

    who decides.. (none / 0) (#112)
    by kelsweet on Tue Aug 11, 2009 at 02:31:59 AM EST
    absolutley... i agree with you. I was refering to squeaky's comment about Drs.

    Self Defined Term (none / 0) (#88)
    by squeaky on Mon Aug 10, 2009 at 12:00:19 AM EST
    abeling them as "teabaggers" is one of the most juvenile things I've ever witnessed.
    Yes I would have to agree, that is the name they chose for themselves. These people are proud to be teabaggers.



    really? (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by kelsweet on Mon Aug 10, 2009 at 07:36:30 AM EST
    i didn't see one single word about the tea partiers referring to themselves as teabaggers in either of your links. ??
    I saw that they were using teabags symbolically to show their displeasure. They were labeled "teabaggers" by the likes of Rachel Maddow because she disagreed with them, she ridiculed and mocked, laughed at them for their ignorance of the term "teabagging".... again juvenile....  Oh and on the first link you provided the last photo simply proves my point.

    verb (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by kelsweet on Mon Aug 10, 2009 at 10:08:15 AM EST
    teabagger is not a verb.... and don't be coy, you know full well that Rachel Maddow was mocking and trying hard not to giggle each time she referenced teabagging.. she didn't know it was possible to "teabag" alone for instance or that Michael Steele wouldn't be able to hear the speaker (would be muffled) because he was being teabagged etc etc...  No matter. I didn't wish to argue semantics. If you were honest you would admit it was a big ol joke for Maddow and it was adolescent.  



    Anyone (none / 0) (#99)
    by jbindc on Mon Aug 10, 2009 at 11:04:28 AM EST
    see a video or hear about Ken Gladney - the black conservative who was passing out "Don't Tread on Me" flags outside a townhall meeting hosted by Rep. Russ Carnahan, who was supposedly attacked by Service Employees International Union (SEIU) members. One called him the n-word?  I know he showed up in a wheelchair at the St. Louis meeting and was supposedly badly injured.

    If this is true, why isn't it being more widely reported, and isn't this something that will just solidify the protestors's arguments - that Obama and the Dems can't be trusted because they will send out their "goons" and beat down any dissent?

    Anyone have any more info on this?

    I did hear that he has no health (none / 0) (#103)
    by Anne on Mon Aug 10, 2009 at 01:48:53 PM EST
    insurance, and his attorney says he is accepting donations to cover the costs.

    Supporters cheered. Brown finished by telling the crowd that Gladney is accepting donations toward his medical expenses. Gladney told reporters he was recently laid off and has no health insurance.



    Uninsured Screamers (none / 0) (#106)
    by bob h on Mon Aug 10, 2009 at 04:57:22 PM EST
    I read on the Washington Monthly website that a Screamer douchebag who was allegedly knocked to the ground by SEIU members at a St. Louis Town Hall had to go to the hospital.  It turns out he is unemployed, has no healthcare, and is taking up a collection for the bills.

    As I said (none / 0) (#113)
    by Rojas on Tue Aug 11, 2009 at 05:17:00 AM EST
    bird's nest on the ground.