You raise $750,000 in campaign contributions.

So much for the $203,000.

Doug, you say you never saw anyone interrupting President Bush, or disrespecting him during a speech. How about this bit during his State of the Union Speech?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mqSXsNJzRM&feature=player_embedded

That was you Democrat party members, jeering and interrupting a President you say should be respected. What did you say at the time?

Sorry Doug, but your indignation is too one-sided.

There is nothing wrong with spending money on the military because what you don’t realize is that the military spends a lot of money on R&D for sciences in general. Digital computing, mathematical cryptography, meteorology, rocket science, geo-science and astrophysics. Don’t forget the whole space program was a byproduct of military funding. Plus, medicine itself benefits from military war. The Iraqi-Afghan war have made leaps and bounds in artificial limbs technology (not that its a necessary good thing but it will benefit those whose lose limbs outside of war).

Now if we can use those funds and direct them towards the space program which I believe can bring the same results as in R&D and such, then I am all ears. Otherwise you can thank the military research dept for that cell phone you carry because they have been working with wireless technology since WW1.

Intervening in other countries is not a bad thing when we are trying to stop crazy people from killing us. Saying “pretty please stop” does not and will not ever work. Only killing them first works. Evil exists. Deal with it or die. When have we ever intervened when it was not for our security and defense? Oh right … Bosnia. But that’s OK, it was a Democrat.

Tom, for reasons I cannot disclose publicly, I can tell you that your theory about GE is not accurate. However, you are spot on about fixing the programs we already have, and are on the brink of collapse. We do not need a ‘public option’ at all. Fix and expand Medicaid, that should take care of the 10 – 15 million truly needy, chronically uninsured, and it would come at a far smaller price and target the people who need it. Medicare is a money pit of waste and inefficiency. Of course, being run by the government, do we really expect anything different? Fix it and apply the savings to Medicaid.

Commercial insurance could use some changes – a safety net for those who are “uninsurable”, greater portability of employer sponsored plans, more options for major medical plans with high deductibles and allow interstate competition between companies.

Funny, the Republican Congress proposed several reforms in recent years that would have addressed some of those issues. Most never made it to the floor for a vote, those that did …. well, what was Obama’s voting record on those?

Heck, let medical insurance be underwritten and sold like auto insurance is … premium savings makes a great carrot to entice people to improve their health, and also to not abuse their coverage by visiting the doctor for every little sniffle or ache. Let’s do away with these tiny little office visit co-pays, make it cost more than dinner out to see the doctor. When people actually pay for something, they take better care of it.

Bottom line … the government does not owe anyone free or cheap medical care. No one has the right to demand they be given free or cheap medical care. I cannot imagine why anyone would want to have the government in charge of such a personal, private and intimate part of their life. People chafe at the idea that the government might know that a telephone call was placed from your home and where it was answered, but would allow the same government to have access to their medical information.

I don’t get it.

Don’t fool yourselves into believing that a “public option” would mean that everyone would have unfettered and free access to an all-you-can-eat buffet of medical care. There will be limitations and restrictions placed upon a government handout, and the decision making process will be skewed toward who will benefit the most, and offer the best return for the medical care given … in other words, the 35 year old, employed, otherwise healthy person will be a more suitable candidate for the investment of government spending than will an elderly retired person with a host of illnesses, or the disabled who will never be self-sustaining or productive, or the very young (can always make more to replace the defective ones, right?).

Obama may not be Bush, but he is far from being any better – he lies, he manipulates and he is apparently not all that bright if he is pushing for even more spending in economic times like this. He has acted in complete disregard for the US Constitution, and his plans threaten the liberty of all Americans. He is not our savior – quite the opposite, in fact. It is well past time to take the rose-colored glasses off and see this man for who he is and where he came from, and what his agenda for this country is.

That is not to say defending our nation is not necessary. I am saying how much we spend is F’n ridiculous. Stop ‘intervening’ all over the world. Most of our foreign problems stem from us thinking we know what is better for another group of people. We are basically a country split 50/50 on everything. Who are we to say that something is right or wrong for someone else when we can’t agree on what is right or wrong for ourselves. When you aren’t pissing the world off, you don’t have to be ready for a fight every corner you turn.

Spend the money on R&D which will remove our dependence on fossil fuels, science in general, education and health care and bring our country back to a state of prosperity instead of building an even bigger board with a bigger nail in it.

But here’s what I don’t get–why aren’t these inefficiencies being eliminated already since it is such an easy solution? Why not eliminate the inefficiencies first, showing that a gov’ment health plan CAN be run efficiently, and THEN try to implement the public option.

It seems like it would be an easier sell, doesn’t it? Seems like a great opportunity to say “I told you so” to the naysayers and win over the people sitting on the fence.

I guess I just don’t understand the strategy of politics.

If the government can’t even fund social security and medicare where are we going to get the money for the public option?

Agreed on GE/Halliburton. This is the first I’m hearing about GE so I just want to confirm it is not another red herring.

When a CEO of a company has unrestricted access to the president’s ear like Jeff Immelt does, it’s dangerous. It provides for a situation where companies are creating policies and taking the reins of this countries instead of elected officials… Plus, it creates unfair advantage for G.E. and the high probability of corruption. Remember when Halliburton kept winning no-bid contracts in Iraq? I am pretty sure Cheney had a hand in that. Don’t forgot the huge amount of corruption that followed Halliburton at every corner when in Iraq.

When the press is controlled by big time corporations (that have a heavy hand in consumer products) we are not free and neither is the press.

G.E. will automatically win on no-bid contracts from the government.

I’m not sure I’m following the logic on the green technology. Are other companies being prevented from making the same investments with the same potential for profit?