The good news is that this bill will not pass despite all the socialist lies and deception.

The better news is that this "administration" will not be a repeat offender.

WP, we all know who the professional poster are. Maybe someday they'll get a real job and MoveOn.

You can argue that we would benefit from a federal insurance system or not, but let's not make stuff up out of thin air and call it scary truth.

I couldn't agree more. Let's start with the lie about death panels. Then the lie about government takeovers. Then the lie about taking away benefits from old people. Then the lie that it'll bankrupt the country. Then the lie that wait times will go up. Then the lie that innovation will stop. The lie that you'll have a "government bureaucrat between you and your doctor". The lie that the proposed plans will kill small businesses.

In a related note, fear mongering about the H1N1 vaccine should stop too.

But back to your pet peeve on display here about "obscene profit" -- if you think the main, central argument Democrats have been using is for reform is that we need to punish insurance companies for the crime of having made a profit, you haven't been listening to Democrats. You've been listening to the talk radio/Fox News caricatures of Democratic positions instead.

I think it's pretty safe to say that what makes the profits "obscene" is not their size, but that they're coming amongst a backdrop of worsening service, and shrinking coverage base. As MoveOn put it, "Health insurance companies are willing to let the bodies pile up as long as their profits are safe." That's not a comment on the size of profits, it's a comment on how those profits were achieved.

I think Moveon was inspired by this.

>> ^siftbot:
Tags for this video have been changed from 'Will Ferrell, Jon Hamm, Olivia Wilde, Thomas Lennon, Robert Ben, Garant Masi' to 'Will Ferrell, Jon Hamm, Olivia Wilde, Thomas Lennon, moveon, health care, obama' - edited by nibiyabi


see..it wasn't so hard to edit the tags

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Will Ferrell, Jon Hamm, Olivia Wilde, Thomas Lennon, Robert Ben, Garant Masi' to 'Will Ferrell, Jon Hamm, Olivia Wilde, Thomas Lennon, moveon, health care, obama' - edited by nibiyabi

how can "health care" or "moveon" not be in the tags?

Thanks bud!

In reply to this comment by JiggaJonson:
*doublepromote

About the money issue, I've read a lot that sugguests americans would actually SAVE money with a public option because of the intense regulatory bodies overseeing a market that has currently run rampant.

Share this video with people you know!

My job offered me health insurance that was $550 a month and that only covered 80% (roughly i dont remember exactly but it wasnt ALL of the costs, lets say somewhere between 80-90% to be fair). But...I only made about $1,800 fucking dollars a month, that was close to half of my income. Thank goodness my wife has us covered through her insurance which is much better, it's about the same amount of coverage for only around $275 a month. I live in Indiana.

If I wasn't married..what choice would I have?

In reply to this comment by nanrod:
The numbers these people were showing on their signs shocked me. As a Canadian I've always been aware that US private health care premiums were higher than what I pay but I had no idea they were as high as some of these people were indicating. So can someone tell me what does a typical single person pay for a policy that covers everything, with no deductibles, no maximums and no denials of coverage for pre-existing conditions. Currently I'm paying $672 per year which amounts to about 2.25% of my after tax income. Of course that's going to change ... it looks like our latest budget is going to jack that up by about 12% or around $750 per year. Just curious.

>> ^Stormsinger:
Emotionally exploitive agenda? Not really...it's about as accurate an explanation of why we -must- fix this ripoff we call health insurance as you could find. It's not the commercial or the agenda that's exploitative, it's the health insurance industry itself that is exploiting all of us.


Storm - I am wary of any collages which involve music and one side of the issue, but nonetheless with the unfocused and uninformed vitriol that has been expressed at town halls, I can hardly chastise MoveOn for its representation of actual facts, even if it seems bent on just bringing tears to my eyes. So emotionally exploitive? Yes. Wrong? I couldn't think so.

QM - Clearly there needs to be reform that goes into altering fee for service - the reason the industry is so messed up is because it, like lots of "rights" we have in this country, all come down to a profit margin. A plan that would focus on better quality service and preventative care will in the long run decrease costs.

I worked at a company where one of the things I ended up having to do a lot was to mediate between health care insurance companies and their customers, and it always boiled down to money. When you are telling an old lady who devoted decades of her life to a company, calling from a phone at the Walgreen's pharmacy, that she can't get her heart medication because her bank messed up her direct deposit and her insurance isn't willing to talk to her until they see money, then the system is flawed.

Winstonfield, you have a point, but I doubt it's much comfort to people like the ones in this video who fall through the cracks.

Gotta love the irony with Dick Armey saying MoveOn.org made an Ad comparing Bush to Hitler, then going on to speak about how things are misattributed to certain organizations because these other groups aren't doing their diligence with proper research... yet the only Ad he could be talking about is something that was submitted for a contest that MoveOn.org ran but was never used by them.

http://ww
w.examiner.com/x-5738-Political-Buzz-Examiner~y2009m8d16-Video--Did-MoveOnorg-ever-compare-President-George-W-Bush-to-Hitler

However, if videosift is an aggregate for the american population, i'd say there is a gathering feeling towards the 'british' way of thinking

It's not... with the exception of QM and the occasional other conservative, videosift is about as secular-progressive as the DailyKOS or Moveon.org.

Whether torture achives information cannot justify it. At least not to a civilized nation.

I gave a framework of acceptable pressure. Everyone else mouths platitudes. ANYTHING is torture if you are doing it to an unwilling subject - including puppy lickings, and force-feeding doughnuts. The cop-out of 'no torture wah!' is a dodge to avoid being specific, and I reject it because no alternative is being offered.

DEFINE what you consider to be an acceptable level of pressure to apply to captured subjects who have intel and are non-cooperative. Until one of you can supply an alternative to 'torture' then you have no case. Specifically, and clearly state what you would do. Then explain why your choice ISN'T torture. If you can't do this, then I dismiss your objections as emotive reactionism.

I said "we created 'this' problem",

Your lack antecedents is poor communication, not my lack of comprehension. I was supposed to deduce from one word (this) that you were talking about Afghanistan circa 1980s? :eyeroll:

Regardless, your selective history seems to be little more than talking points from MoveOn.stupid. "Islamofascism" existed long before the 1980s. America's very first venture into international affairs was a result of radical islamic attacks on private citizens. Please detail what foreign policy offenses the United States had committed in the late 1700s which caused our citizens to be the targets of islamofacists in the First Barbary War...

You do not have my depth of historical perspective perhaps, which makes your opinion amusing and quaint. Your assertion that radical Islamic terrorism 'began' as a result of the lack of follow through in Afghanistan is almost cute in its ignorance.

I would put it to you that you have failed in step 1 of developing a proper understanding of a subject. You started with a conclusion (America created terrorism!) and then you opted to cherry-pick isolated historical examples from baised sources which tangentally appear to support your conclusion. This is a common failure of simple, abecedarian thinkers. I am pleased to open the wider world of proper critical thinking to your inexperienced view.

In the not too distant past we have had it within our power to improve the quality of life for millions of people in third world nations.

You speak as if we stopped having that power. America remains the single largest charitable donor to 3rd world nations. We improve the quality of life for millions. Don't be so blind to the many good things America does. You don't like 'the Bush war' or other policy mess-ups? Fine. But to say America's power to help people is 'in the past' is a stupid thing to say and shows incredible ignorance or incredible bias (pick one).

You know, I could have sworn that the Republicans DID have a blowout defeat.

And just for the record, his timeline is a little off. If Moveon.org started during the Clinton impeachment, that's nowhere near 15 years ago.

It's almost a given that any politician who can inspire a grassroots movement is more likely to win. If the Republicans aren't inspiring these movements outside of mega-churches, maybe they should take a step back and ask themselves why.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'moveon, psa, voting, john mccain, barack obama' to 'moveon, psa, voting, john mccain, barack obama, gossip girl' - edited by blahpook