<p>Van Jones is somewhat radical? The guy’s a self-avowed Communist, for crying out loud! Sunstein is not conservative; this guy wants to ban hunting and give animals rights. Indeed, he is not as damaging to the Obama admin as Van Jones, but there’s still room for alarm.</p>
<p>Oh and thanks for your second paragraph. You prove a great point: it’s not about the American people. It’s about the progressive agenda.</p>
<p>And uhm…death panels? In a way, it’s true. I read a story about this woman with a disease that could have been saved with an experimental drug. The problem? She lived in Oregon, which has state-run healthcare. The drug cost $4000. I guess it’s a life isn’t worth $4000, even. The state said they would pay to EUTHANIZE her, which was $50, instead of saving her life. I like where our healthcare system is going…</p>
Wait, what? Sunstein’s appointment was criticized by some Democrats and lauded by conservatives, because he generally supports corporate deregulation. He supports the right to bear arms and the legality of hunting, but is personally opposed to it. Where are you getting this from?</p>
<p>
Someone who’s very radical throws bombs. Someone who’s slightly radical supports a discredited political system. He was rightly forced out, because of the Truther petition.</p>
<p>
This is just a terrible line of argument for you. The proposed bill would pump money into the currently existing healthcare system. It would increase the numbers of people getting treated. It would also increase the deficit - that’s the only real point opponents of this legislation have, and it’s very important. But somehow your leadership doesn’t seem to care about that, and would prefer to spread wild conspiracy theories.</p>
<p>Sunstein doesn’t support either. He just doesn’t have the power to change them.</p>
<p>Someone who throws bombs is a terrorist. Van Jones is a radical for a series of self-incriminating evidence. Listen to some of his speeches. He talks about “white men poisoning our brothers” and “giving the wealth” to certain racial groups (aka social justice). Being a communist is being radical, whether it’s violent or not. What’s disturbing is that Obama endorsed this guy.</p>
<p>Terrible line? The government would pay for her to die; very simple. The bottom line is that universal healthcare doesn’t work. All that money “pumped” into the system would crap out like every other government initiative. Where does the money come from? TAXPAYERS. I don’t want to pay for some illegal immigrant’s medical bills.</p>
<p>Sane conservatives approve of Sunstein, it’s only the radical Republicans that don’t.</p>
<p>
The money is given as a subsidy for people to buy insurance. There are no government hospitals, government doctors, or anything else of that sort. It’s literally the current system + more money. It will be expensive. I agree. I don’t even support the current bill, but for REAL REASONS, not becuase of bull**** propaganda which you naively absorb and spew.</p>
<p>
Do you realize that insurance companies do this for a living? The three largest health insurance companies systematically rescind the policies of customers who get expensive diseases. The executives of these companies all stated before congress that they would not end this practice. I don’t even know if the story you posted is true. That’s why it is against the rules to link to blogs here.</p>
<p>
Jesus Christ, are you a ■■■■■? The current House bill specifically excludes illegal immigrants from receiving subsidies. It’s right there in the bill. I can link to it if you don’t believe me.</p>
<p>“I don’t want to pay for some illegal immigrant’s medical bills.”
he specifically corrected this false assumption in his most recent speech, if u had bothered to watch it.</p>
<p>I mostly agree with the OP… instead of picking at the specifics/ his wording why don’t you look at the overall message and ideas he’s addressing? The fact is that Obama is a puppet and anyone that thought Obama would result in change has been utterly and completely mislead</p>
<p>It’s government insurance. The result would be that the whole of America would be “supporting” this plan, while private plans would falter and begin to disintegrate. It’s terrible for competition and really won’t work anyhow since it is run by the government.</p>
<p>It’s government insurance. The result would be that the whole of America would be “supporting” this plan, while private plans would falter and begin to disintegrate. It’s terrible for competition and really won’t work anyhow since it is run by the government.</p>