FIRST!

You do have a point, give people food and they want to eat it, give people an education and they start to think. So naturally it stands to reason if you give people medical coverage they are going to start to show up to a doctors office. I think I understand the opposition now, thanks for clearing that up.

It would be funny but I believe I've heard your same argument before and it was given in earnest by some rightwing nutjob. Jon Stewart had to defend the US Postal Service. Actually it is very funny because it's true and it's what has the *grown-ups* so hopping mad.

The taxpayers pay for health care now - for indigents who go to the ER and to the insurance companies, who add nothing to the system, but take money out for themselves. That money that goes to the insurance companies should be used for health care.

Legislators who deny to the public what they enjoy by way of health insurance have no conscience.

I'm sick of you people throwing around serious terms like "private sector." Once, I worked in the private sector and everytime someone brings up that phrase it feels just as dirty and painful. Thanks, assholes.

a machine or a robot designed only to rape...this definitely sounds like a political invention: maybe it was product tested by goldman sachs?

I really think you should stick with RAPO. It's easy to remember!

I consider you a low-level terrorist. We'll be watching you. For the greater corporate good.

I have a daughter who has good, cost effective, work health insurance available to her. She just refuses to pay for it.

So why would we want the taxpayer to pay for something she refuses to pay for?

This is the first Mortimer that did not not make front page, so I was expecting it to either be really bad or too controvertial for Salon to display. But it ended up being a very funny and extremely relevant comment on an important topic. What gives? Anyway, ever since I heard your Lieberman impersonation now Whenever I really hear him talk, I can only hear how badly the guy needs to go to the bathroom.

i can't tell who or what you are politically but I like the polyglot amorphous cut of of your rainbow jib, sir.

Damn funny, whatever this is, and most importantly, well-written. my many hats are off to you.

There is no reason that private insurance companies have to exist. Plenty of other services are provided such as fire and police protection without an intervening agency. In fact, the original Blue Cross and Blue Shield was non-profit.

Actually, I suspect that private insurance companies will rapidly adjust to the presence of a public plan and do just fine.

In your title, the correct English usage would be "Joe and I."

Your political errors are too numerous to mention.

A public health insurance option is needed to create the widest set of options, and the only reason not to have one is to limit the available choices. Limiting choices isn't free markets, they are free markets except for the choice that 75% of the people say they want.

Joe L doesn't want to support the private option because he he gets money from companies like Purdue Pharma, the developers of Oxycontin and Aetna insurance, one of the largest insurance companies.

These pure ideologically driven rants against government are getting to be embarrassing to listen to, especially after the most extreme disciples admitted they were wrong in front of congress.

Health Care, parts of the financial industry, (like health insurance and school loans and Education), like the military, aren't best accomplished through free markets. In fact the food industry has become a fake market where we are sold increasingly inferior products to increase share holder value.

Share holder value should be recognized when wealth is created, not when a ponzi scam or government regulations tilt the playing field.

The biggest argument in favor of "the public option" is that the private sector--where I worked for 11 years--is so damnabley inefficient. If Republicans really care about conserving resources--like money--they will be in favor of the public option. But because they care more about the APPEARANCE of conserving resources than they do about actually doing so, they oppose it.

The issues of public responsibility to maintain a decent standard of care for all Americans, the appalling rankings for the USA in maternal infant mortality and longevity just reinforce that. But, of course, the Republican Party has become the party of "I got mine, Jack, go get your own," and responsibility and longevity for anyone other than themselves is irrelevant to them.

Say it ain't so, Joe...

"With regards to the idea of a public option..."

I expect better grammar from a U. S. Senator, even this one. Perhaps it was just the transcript human.

Great update. Dan D. is a freak for typing it all out. Bummer about the name. I have word for you re: all those surplus coffee mugs: Ebay!

Penrose is right: "the correct English usage would be "Joe and I."

Unfortunately, that doesn't rhyme like "Me & Joe say NO", and I felt that "Joe & I say AYE to NOT having a Public Option" was too confusing. Plus, I find that in a Free America, "correct English usage" is in the eye of the beholder.

Why is it that the people who are against the public option are those who have health care themselves. How dare you speak for those who don't.

Listen to what the people are saying. A disproportionate amount of my monthly income goes towards healthcare. What do you know about people having to decide to buy medicine or food. Have you had to make that decision? Well until you do, keep your fat mouth closed about the public option and listen to the people because we want it. You got some, let us get some too.

America is the wealthiest nation in the world and 46 million of us are without healthcare. That's a disgrace.

Are we concerned about the cost, of course we are, but all things being measured it is worth the cost to us and our children.

So sit down, and shut up until you can walk in our shoes. You don't speak for us.

Find the money somewhere. I am sure we can find something else to cut. What could be more important to this nation than the health of its citizens.

Healthcare for ALL Americans now!

Whatever happened to the Spirit Of Compromise?

How about "Health Care For SOME Americans, SOON(-ish)!"

Besides, affordable Health Care is just a gateway. One they get that, people will be expecting affordable housing and a living wage. It's a slippery slope, people!

"Once" they get that. Again, eye of the beholder.

Whatever this leads to needs to be looked at carefully before we just blindly put a public option out there. The Massachusetts model, which a lot of people are floating as a potential national model has been a failure, or at least that's how most people feel about it. In order to offer coverage to everyone, the deductibles are so high that you might as well not even have coverage. So it goes unused in a lot of cases. Read on for some interesting data...
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/states_general/massachusetts/massachusetts_26_consider_state_s_health_care_reform_a_success

Of course, the Massachusetts example can be set aside because it involves Romney. Even I know that Romney is a complete disaster, and is to be avoided at all costs.

Senator Joe Lieberman is almost as smart as Puss Limbaugh, only slimmer.

I want to comment on your post but after reading it I am starting to feel too sick to type. Sorry.

gads, a health care system run like the post office...*shudder*... I mean, what is it, like 42 cents and I can send a letter or check across the country? Talk about high-cost/low-value! And those people attract dogs! The mange rates will sky rocket, and you can bet the poor will get in on that racket. Sheesh.

No more sick people! The rich deserve everything they've worked so little for. I don't see how taking money from our rich people will make American's look gooder in the eyes of the world.

In these time of crisis we need to stand behind our elitist pricks and show the world we're willing to die for the American way.

Deny the public option, remember the insurance companies stand ready to deny you!

If you don't like a public OPTION on healthcare insurance, then DON'T OPT INTO A PUBLIC PLAN, duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. and Joe Lieberman, what a whore....it's good enough for you since WE ARE PAYING FOR IT, but not for anyone else??

Sorry about the tangent, but who's the wise guy liberal socialist pinko who stuck an Air France ad on your blog page?

Oh, GOOD! The White House is willing to cave on the idea of a Public Option!

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124692407982802911.html#mod=rss_Politics_And_Policy

Instead, they might settle for a "trigger mechanism" that would introduce a public plan only if the free market fails to provide sufficient competition on its own.

This warms the cockles of my heart for two reasons: one, as we know, the free market ALWAYS knows best. And two, as a card-carrying member of the NRA, I can't say no to ANY proposal that involves a "trigger mechanism." After all, if they take away our trigger mechanisms, the next thing you hear will be the feds knocking on our doors to take our hunting rifles!!

if you read all this as a convoluted and not over-well constructed joke, it's mildly amusing.

but unfortunately it's reality, usa 2009. then it's not funny at all.

Those who have gilt-edged, no deductible, no co-pay health coverage trying to tell the 60 million poor wretches who have NO coverage at all why a public option is bad for us. Worth less than a bucket of warm spit.

Just found your political satire blog/column. It's very funny! As are your numerous affiliations. Brilliant!

I was very pleased to find this site.I wanted to thank you for this great read!!
flv to wmv converter
This article is very interesting. Thank you very much for sharing . Hulu Downloader
thanks really thanks. youtube to mp4 converter|