and the link?

The last thing that most U.S. citizens should want is their government near their health care.  We'll get health care that is far worse than we have now, in hospitals that make the worst of the current VA hospitals look like the best hospitals in the world.

And even worse still would be having Hillary managing it all for us.

Thanks but no thanks.

Clinton: I believe that one of the ways we can get health care for everyone is to open up the federal plan that's available to members of Congress … to everybody. That would be one way that we could say to you that you have the same right as anybody in Congress

Tiffany Sumuel, via e-mail: One of the most common arguments against nationalized health care is that the quality of care and research will be negatively impacted. If health care is nationalized, what will be done to ensure and/or improve the quality of care?



Clinton: Well, I want to make clear that there is a difference between having a health-care system that provides quality affordable health care to every American and having a national health system where there's only one source of care.

There's a lot of misinformation and, frankly, a lot of scare tactics about what universal health care would mean. … That's why I started by saying that we have to reduce costs and improve quality no matter what we do.

No, it's not "scare tactics" to say it is the start of a totalitarian regime. Why? Because universal health care means everyone is covered. The ONLY way to cause that to happen would be to make it ILLEGAL for people to refuse coverage. Otherwise it will never be universal. And making it illegal means making consequences for disobedience, which is the absolute antithesis of liberty. That's not scare tactics, that's FACT.

not necessarily. that's a pretty scrict and self serving interpretatioon, imho. when people talk about universal health care in my mind they talk about it being available to everyone. i'm sure some people, esp. at the top end of the scale, would prefer to opt out in favor of a more "executive plan." i don't see anyone arresting trump because he won't get the government plan.

Name one example of the government ever accomplishing that. As I said earlier, right now, all we have is opinions. But opinions based upon historical and present day precedent. So if you can name one instance where that occurred, you may have an argument. Otherwise it is simply a pipe dream and an empty promise on the part of another lying politician (both well represented in historical fact).

You have not read the Mass. plan I take it.

what they do in mass. is their plan. go argue with mitt about that. you and dog are contending that hillary is endorsing a one payer system, which she clearly is not. i am still waiting on some verification on her quotes that he put up there as you artfully try to change the subject and tangent off int o something ya might "get me" on...puhleeeassseee...get a new tactic.

Actually it is to the point and relevant to the response in 22, which you so obviously want to ignore. Again, show me. Show me where I am wrong. Then you can say I am trying to change the subject. I am not, however, you are trying to deny reality.

The problem is you can't get a straight answer from Hillary, and you can't trust the media to ask her any questions that she might actually have to answer.

Clinton: And the reason I haven't sent out a plan and said, ‘Well here's exactly what I think we should do,’ is because during this campaign I want the ideas that people have. I want to hear from you who have different perspectives about what you think will work.

and do ya think she's gonna roll it out almost 2 years out just to have the punditry spin it backwards and sideways and distort it and do everything else they like to do? at least credit the woman for not being that dumb, regardless of which side you are on. this posturing is nonsense. fact is that she simply doesn't have to cater to the right wing pundits. they and their flock aren't voting for her anyway, lol

and as far as reply #22 goes, i'm sorry, i'm not gonna fall for that tangent of talking about he entire history of every government spending allocation for over 2 centuries. and broad charts on annual spending won't accurately reflect individual spending measures and their impact on efficiency and productivity. but if it's an example you need, here...my wife lived thru this and can tell you 1st hand about having less of a budget and getting more done as was proposed...
WWW Link


now if dog would send me a link for his quotes above of senator clinton, we get back to the subject, ok? lol

I said one - not every. Not up to the challenge?

did you notice the link?

And that was done by the private sector when? I did not say when government could reduce its own expenses (an anathema, but happens in States and locals), but where the Government took over AND reduced costs from the private sector. Trimming finger nails in the Federal offices is not going private to public and saving money.