See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

1. #1
   On July 29th, 2009 at 2:00 pm, b-cat said:

   I’m glad to see a bit of fight is left in the GOP. It’s about time.

2. #2
   On July 29th, 2009 at 2:04 pm, d1carter said:

   OT:
   MM, I just have to know. What was the small talk like after your interview with Matt Lauer this morning? At the end, he did not look as if he was pleased…

3. #3
   On July 29th, 2009 at 2:05 pm, Paul Revere said:

   I’d bet the members have enough $$$ to mail it themselves. Do it!

4. #4
   On July 29th, 2009 at 2:07 pm, b-cat said:

   This is the first time I recall that Democrats weren’t eager to spend taxpayers’ dollars.

5. #5
   On July 29th, 2009 at 2:07 pm, letget said:

   Is it wrong for me to detest d’s? Sorry, but I just can’t help myself. Thank goodness some R’s still are trying in dc to inform and try to save our Republic.
   L

6. #6
   On July 29th, 2009 at 2:17 pm, beenthere said:

   Oh, please. This is weak on so many levels. Guys, just do it. Stop asking for your mother’s permission.

   Or maybe get the blue dogs (snort, snort, giggle, giggle!) to sign on.

   I’d be bald by now if I really did pull my hair every time the Republicans made one of these “Oh pretty please, let’s be fair” appeals. This is not how you fight political war.

7. #7
   On July 29th, 2009 at 2:19 pm, ajmontana said:

   d1carter said:
   OT:
   MM, I just have to know. What was the small talk like….

   Good ole Matt had to run to the Odopey Kool-Aid machine and guzzle 3 gallons, he should be back to his old self in no time.

8. #8
   On July 29th, 2009 at 2:22 pm, Pasadena Phil said:

   Yeah, pretty lame. Always in high dudgeon over small issues but can’t seem to muster up anything on the big issues. The post-partisanship and all that.

9. #9
   On July 29th, 2009 at 2:23 pm, onefed said:

   Oh, please. This is weak on so many levels. Guys, just do it. Stop asking for your mother’s permission.

   Second this motion. What I wouldn’t give to see Boehner call an impromptu press conference in front of the Congressional Post Office with a box of these charts he wants to send to his constituents, take a hard copy of the gag rules, throw them on the ground, take a nice long coffee-pi$$ on it, and promptly step into the post office to do his mailing.

10. #10
    On July 29th, 2009 at 2:27 pm, mchristian said:

    Democrats maintain that sending out the chart as official mail would violate House rules because the information is misleading.

    Does that mean that my Dem senators and rep can no longer send out mail saying they are working for my state and district? Because pretty much all they have done since Barry got in there is dump on the only industry that actually makes money in NM, energy production.

11. #11
    On July 29th, 2009 at 2:27 pm, Last Massachusetts Conservative said:

    onefed,

    I am with you, except the public urination. Better he spit on it

12. #12
    On July 29th, 2009 at 2:36 pm, Ragspierre said:

    throw them on the ground, take a nice long coffee-pi$$ on it, and promptly step into the post office to do his mailing.

    Great visual…I’d bet it would make the broadcast news!!!!

13. #13
    On July 29th, 2009 at 2:38 pm, prendad said:

    On July 29th, 2009 at 2:04 pm, d1carter said:
    OT:
    MM, I just have to know. What was the small talk like after your interview with Matt Lauer this morning? At the end, he did not look as if he was pleased…

    Matt probably had to rush to a pro-lib counseling session to try and cope with the negative Obama vibes. This guy is one of the most feminine, metro-kittens I have ever seen on tv. Anyone who waxes eloquent about his first encounter with a moon pie during one of his trips to the Deep South has got to have something loose or missing upstairs.

14. #14
    On July 29th, 2009 at 2:41 pm, zyzzyg said:

    The ‘franking’ request is being reviewed, but has not yet been denied. This can not be defined as censorhip.

    Yep, the ‘franking’ commission is playing games, possibly abusing the rules, but they are not censoring anyone.

    I did not know there was such a thing as a ‘franking’ commission to begin with, but I suppose it is a good idea. I am familiar with one ‘franking’ rule and that is ‘no ‘franking’ around election time’.

    Congress has allowed itself the privelege of spending tax payer money to send us blue ink mail about what interests them. Hey, Congress! How about thinking outside the box and not use tax payer money for once?

    Just because you can do something, doesn’t mean you should.

15. #15
    On July 29th, 2009 at 2:46 pm, lgm said:

    Of course, you could mention that

    sending out the chart as official mail would violate House rules because the information is misleading. Rules for franked mail bar Members from using taxpayer-funded mail for newsletters that use “partisan, politicized or personalized” comments to criticize legislation or policy.

    Translation: it’s against the law to send misleading partisan BS disguised as official government business.

16. #16
    On July 29th, 2009 at 2:50 pm, tiredofit08 said:

    all they need is for their constituents to ask for the information! Each and every member of congress was elected by the people of their state and they work for them not some magical dimwit coalition or dimwit leadership trying to hide what is really going on! Make a request to your elected official who works for you that you be mailed a copy of it and then let them mail it!!!!

17. #17
    On July 29th, 2009 at 2:56 pm, AlohaGuy said:

    Republicans are pressing to use taxpayer dollars to mail the chart to constituents, but their request continues to be reviewed by the franking commission.

    The House Post Office is for cashing bad checks, not mailing letters.

18. #18
    On July 29th, 2009 at 2:56 pm, ajmontana said:

    lol, lgm the ever faithful sheeple to Odopey is in a very very small group who’s for this BS Odopeycare fiasco. figures.

19. #19
    On July 29th, 2009 at 2:58 pm, AlohaGuy said:

    Translation: it’s against the law to send misleading partisan BS disguised as official government business.

    Partisan BS is all they send…

20. #20
    On July 29th, 2009 at 2:58 pm, committed said:

    On July 29th, 2009 at 2:46 pm, lgm said: Translation: it’s against the law to send misleading partisan BS disguised as official government business.

    Like the kind the White House sends out via email, etc.?? That kind?

21. #21
    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:04 pm, Last Massachusetts Conservative said:

    Like the kind the White House sends out via email, etc.?? That kind?

    And like the type in the the almost daily scripted “news” conferences and “town hall” infomercials.

22. #22
    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:06 pm, Salt said:

    On July 29th, 2009 at 2:46 pm, lgm said:

    Translation: it’s against the law to send misleading partisan BS disguised as official government business.

    …and the partisans will be happy to stamp anything that disagrees with them as “misleading partisan BS”. All in the spirit of transparency, right?

    This is all procedural gaming to prevent any dissent on what is looking to be a very unpopular bill.

    Are you going to tell us that the whole chart is incorrect? I know you’d like that to be true given your political ideals, but you’re not being realistic if that’s the case. By holding this up in the Franking committee rather than request or challenge details for correction, they’re adding more credibility to the damaging effect of this chart. It’s a poor play on the Democrat side as it gives all of the requesting Republicans the opportunity to talk about the chart the “Democrats don’t want you to see”. Even you should be hesitant about that.

    “Hiding the truth about wildly unpopular policies is a Democrat specialty,” said one GOP aide. “I’d like to see the flow chart on how Speaker [Nancy] Pelosi plans on implementing the open and transparent government she keeps promising everyone.”

    “We have initiated discussions with the minority to try and resolve current differences and are operating in good faith to achieve that goal,” said Kyle Anderson, a spokesman for House Administration Chairman Robert Brady (D-Pa.). The committee has oversight of the commission.

    Rep. Dan Lungren (R-Calif.), ranking member of the committee and a member of the franking commission, said through a spokeswoman that he is also aware of the situation and is working with the members of the franking commission to resolve the differences, but he added that he believed Democrats on the commission were overreaching.

    “He strongly believes that the franking commission does not have the authority to deny Member communications based on partisan differences of pending legislation,” said Salley Collins, a spokeswoman for Lungren.

23. #23
    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:06 pm, J S Ragman said:

    #19 Aloha

    Exactly. If the franking commission would really follow the letter of the law, there would be no mail sent out. But only the most dimwitted partisan hacks see this unjustified Republican whining.

24. #24
    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:08 pm, 24Klady said:

    Since I’ve already received about a dozen e-mails of the chart, I’m guessing it’s not a huge surprise to their constituents. If only they’d be as estute at standing up to the Dems on the big issue of: How are we going to pay for this monster, besides killing babies and old people, and rationing the rest of the population?

25. #25
    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:10 pm, J S Ragman said:

    Correction:

    But only the most dimwitted partisan hacks see this as unjustified Republican whining.

26. #26
    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:10 pm, single stack said:

    I wish the Rs would grow a pair.
    The congressweasels and the Republican party have enough money among them to do this mailing.
    Quit acting like Demoncrats.

27. #27
    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:12 pm, J S Ragman said:

    I guess I shouldn’t have had that third martini with lunch.

28. #28
    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:13 pm, lgm said:

    Salt said:

    Are you going to tell us that the whole chart is incorrect?

    Do you have a link for the chart? The one Republicans were using last week was comical. It was just a bunch of buzz words in various scary fonts and colors distributed around a page.

29. #29
    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:21 pm, Last Massachusetts Conservative said:

    lgm said… just a bunch of buzz words… distributed around a page….

    So, you are saying that the Republicans stole your posting style?

30. #30
    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:21 pm, rlwo2008 said:

    Where’s Steele and the RNC? They can afford to mail it.

31. #31
    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:22 pm, Hangfire said:

    Wow. I knew the testicles would finally descend on the Republicans.

    Next up ~ a sprig of hair….

32. #32
    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:22 pm, zyzzyg said:

    This should help, the rules -

    http://cha.house.gov/franking.aspx

33. #33
    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:24 pm, sonofdy said:

    Translation: it’s against the law to send misleading partisan BS disguised as official government business.

    That never stoped democrats. I have yet to see the chart actualy proven wrong.

34. #34
    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:29 pm, abstractmind said:

    It’s been echoed multiple times, but I find it bears repeating…

    On July 29th, 2009 at 2:46 pm, lgm said: Translation: it’s against the law to send misleading partisan BS disguised as official government business.

    So, by that reasoning…basically, everything the democrats have thrown at us…ever…should be thrown under that bus as well?

    What’s good for thee is not good for me, eh?

35. #35
    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:29 pm, Last Massachusetts Conservative said:

    I have yet to see the chart actualy proven wrong.

    lgm said so. Isn’t that enough proof for you?

36. #36
    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:35 pm, MarcoPolo said:

    I’m glad to see a bit of fight is left in the GOP. It’s about time.

    This isn’t fighting. It’s whining.

    Privatize the post office, let each state pay for each legislators mailings, and let each state decide what can be mailed to whom.

37. #37
    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:35 pm, bradley said:

    I hope, when the time comes, and it will come, when the Republicans take control of Congress again, that they remember all this horsesh*t “bipartisanship” and stick it in the Democrat’s ear forever. NO MORE “reaching across the aisle”. To hell with them.

38. #38
    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:37 pm, bradley said:

    lgm is obviously lost, he’s normally on HuffingtonPost isn’t he? I thought so.

39. #39
    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:40 pm, Hangfire said:

    The Dems always scream bipartisanship when the Republicans have the majority.

    Bipartisanship is the first thing to go away when they win the house and senate.

    The bipartisanship disappears faster than the Clinton “budget surplus.”

    By the time BVSH II drove from the swearing in to the White House, the Dems were already screaming “Deficit” and “Recession.”

40. #40
    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:47 pm, zorro said:

    Great, another campaign issue to pound on the heads of the mangy democraps.

41. #41
    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:47 pm, garydt said:

    You guys are making progress, you actually make LGM answer and this is progress. Ususally leftists have no answers and they love gov’t media, and all gov’t control in all aspects of their lives so when they see alternatives they think its all evil.

42. #42
    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:52 pm, Salt said:

    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:13 pm, lgm said:

    Do you have a link for the chart?

    You couldn’t find it?

    link

    It was just a bunch of buzz words in various scary fonts and colors distributed around a page.

    Buzz words = agencies involved, right?

    Which font is the scary one? We’ll leave a nightlight on for you.

    (…just kidding, no offense intended. I just thought that calling them scary was a bit funny. )

43. #43
    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:55 pm, Salt said:

    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:35 pm, MarcoPolo said:

    Privatize the post office, let each state pay for each legislators mailings, and let each state decide what can be mailed to whom.

    A good idea… I’d add a point that the mail should be kept in-state.

44. #44
    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:58 pm, graysonret said:

    Just like a totalitarian government…forbid any dissent. The democrats are moving so fast against our liberty and freedoms that they don’t even stop to read what they’re passing as laws.

45. #45
    On July 29th, 2009 at 4:03 pm, FirstSkirt said:

    I have seen franked documents from both Repubs and Dems–both of them very often highlight bullet points that are VERY SHAKY on the truth and are definitely partisan in nature. These have been identified as official government business. So, shut up, LGM, as once again you are proven to be an idiot and a putz!!

46. #46
    On July 29th, 2009 at 4:05 pm, abstractmind said:

    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:40 pm, Hangfire said:

    A basic, fundamental point of truth about -most- Democrats (I don’t want to generalize too much) is that “bipartisan” does not mean what you and I believe it to mean.

    Generally speaking, a liberal believes things are bipartisan when they get exactly what they want, and the other side agrees without complaint. Anything else, and they don’t see it as bipartisan anymore. They view it as interference, fearmongering, bloviating…anything other than just what it is…base opposition to their agenda. What I find most ironic is the fact that democrats typically use those 3 actions I listed above with impudence, but get all whiny if they don’t get their way.

    That’s how I see it anyway.

47. #47
    On July 29th, 2009 at 4:06 pm, Ragspierre said:

    Translation: it’s against the law to send misleading partisan BS disguised as official government business.

    What is untrue, lgm. Specifics, please.

    Do you deny that the plan calls for something on the order of 50 new agencies?

48. #48
    On July 29th, 2009 at 4:07 pm, Ragspierre said:

    Also, lgm…

    Is it TRUE that 50 million Americans are without health care?

    Just a yes or no, please.

49. #49
    On July 29th, 2009 at 4:11 pm, Rogue Cheddar said:

    It was just a bunch of buzz words in various scary fonts and colors distributed around a page.

    So lgm, let me see if I have this right (or left, if you prefer), certain fonts scare you, but the breathtaking abuse of power by the current administration and Democrat controlled Congress and Senate, give you no pause?

50. #50
    On July 29th, 2009 at 4:13 pm, Salt said:

    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:47 pm, garydt said:

    You guys are making progress, you actually make LGM answer and this is progress.

    Well, no one makes lgm do anything. I don’t mind him when he has a reasonable comment. When he lets emotion get the better of him and lets the ad hominems start flying, I take issue. The “but Republicans are worse” fallback gets old, too.

    However, occasionally I’ll smile when lgm admits he “didn’t say it was a good policy” or similar with regards to a Democrat proposal, but just took issue with a particular point of rebuttal. It might be the closest we’ll get to him ever admitting he might agree with conservatives on something.

51. #51
    On July 29th, 2009 at 4:19 pm, rfjjulie said:

    Hangfire, Thanks for the laugh at #31. I really needed that today!

52. #52
    On July 29th, 2009 at 4:21 pm, hawkeye54 said:

    it’s against the law to send misleading partisan BS disguised as official government business.

    Man, the president and everyone in CONgress is in real trouble then.

    I have yet to see the chart actualy proven wrong.

    Actually the chart was copied, and tweaked only slightly, from the organizatonal site maps at the VA, Medicare and the Indian Health Services website…or so I’m told.

53. #53
    On July 29th, 2009 at 4:33 pm, ITookTheRedPill said:

    “I think the American people deserve the truth, and that’s why this resolution is important,” Boehner said.

    Indeed.

    And…

    “Those who can’t handle the truth,
    try to silence those who speak it.”

    - Red Pill

54. #54
    On July 29th, 2009 at 4:50 pm, T-Bone said:

    it’s against the law to send misleading partisan BS disguised as official government business.

    Kinda like Acorn taking government money to promote electing Democrats. I’m sure Democrats are against that too. Not!

55. #55
    On July 29th, 2009 at 4:52 pm, fulldroolcup said:

    WTF??? If I’m a democrat congressman and I’m against a GOP bill, or vice versa, and I write to tell my constituents why I’m opposed, is that “partisan”?

    I suppose it is, and…so what? Is a congressman supposed to use franking privileges only when he agrees with the other party?

    What the hell kind of two-party system is that???

    Wanna ‘splain that to us, lgm?

56. #56
    On July 29th, 2009 at 5:25 pm, graysonret said:

    Is it TRUE that 50 million Americans are without health care?

    Everyone in this country has health care. The correct word here is “insurance”. The government wants to take over health insurance and run it themselves. They like to use “health care” as a scare tactic. If you don’t have insurance, you get care anyway. You can’t be turned away. Most of those without insurance are those who don’t want it. In the near future, everyone will be required to have “insurance”..which is simply a tax, especially on those who don’t need or want insurance. Of course, with the tax hikes coming soon, who will have money anyway to pay for health insurance, trying to just survive on what the government lets you keep?

57. #57
    On July 29th, 2009 at 5:38 pm, lgm said:

    Ragspierre said (#48):

    Is it TRUE that 50 million Americans are without health care?

    There are dueling estimates and I’m not expert enough to know who is right. A Kaiser report (google “Americans without health insurance”, I can’t copy the link for some reason) put the number in 2004 at about your level. It’s probably gone up since then.

58. #58
    On July 29th, 2009 at 5:38 pm, Ragspierre said:

    graysonret said:

    I know, gray…

    shhh…don’t help lgm with his answers…

59. #59
    On July 29th, 2009 at 5:40 pm, Ragspierre said:

    There are dueling estimates and I’m not expert enough to know who is right. A Kaiser report (google “Americans without health insurance”, I can’t copy the link for some reason) put the number in 2004 at about your level. It’s probably gone up since then.

    WRONG!!!

    Nowhere NEAR that number of AMERICANS without health insurance.

    It is a LIE…A BOGUS CLAIM.

60. #60
    On July 29th, 2009 at 6:02 pm, TimothyJ said:

    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:10 pm, single stack said:
    I wish the Rs would grow a pair.

    I wish they could grow just ONE! That would be 50% better than what we have now. I think the dems make them leave them at the door or something.

61. #61
    On July 29th, 2009 at 6:09 pm, AlohaGuy said:

    google “Americans without health insurance

    Can I Google “Americans who have chosen to spend money on other things such as big screen TVs instead of health insurance”?

62. #62
    On July 29th, 2009 at 6:17 pm, corkie said:

    Which fonts and colors are scary?

63. #63
    On July 29th, 2009 at 6:18 pm, Ragspierre said:

    According to a 2006 Census Bureau report, 19 per cent of the uninsured have household income of over $75,000. Since the last round of government “reform” in the Nineties, wealthy Americans have been fleeing insurance and opting to bring health care back to a normal market transaction. And, if you look at the “uninsured discount” offered by doctors, one can appreciate that, for everything but chronic disability, it’s not an irrational decision to say I’ll get a better deal for my broken leg or my colonoscopy or my heavy cold if I just write a check for it….

    one-fifth aren’t Americans…

    another fifth aren’t uninsured but are covered by Medicare; another two-fifths are the young and mobile (they don’t have health insurance, but they don’t have life insurance or home insurance, either

64. #64
    On July 29th, 2009 at 6:32 pm, infidel4life said:

    On July 29th, 2009 at 2:46 pm, lgm said:

    ….misleading partisan BS disguised as official government business.

    Classic case of projection, it’s what your heroes in D.C. have been doing for 6 months.

65. #65
    On July 29th, 2009 at 6:39 pm, infidel4life said:

    On July 29th, 2009 at 3:06 pm, Salt said:

    “Hiding the truth about wildly unpopular policies is a Democrat specialty,” said one GOP aide.

    Hiding the truth about just about everything is standard operating procedure for Democrats.

66. #66
    On July 29th, 2009 at 6:42 pm, graysonret said:

    Sorry, Rags. Not directed to you, but lgm. I just get sick (pun intended) of the libs, in their quest for total power, using words that are incorrect, in order to deceive. If people don’t want to buy insurance, let it be. I know, once, I was in a transition period from one company to other, not too long ago. During the 3 month wait, would you believe I needed emergency surgery. No question about not getting care. Had a nice bill to pay, though. If people want that route, it’s okay with me. I guess if you are in your 20s and very active (like I was once), insurance is something that was an optional expense. Now the government scares everyone, with the sole purpose to seize more power. I’m 60 now and had only 2 hospital trips my whole adult life.

67. #67
    On July 29th, 2009 at 6:45 pm, T-Bone said:

    I love the health insurance vs health care debate. Note how Dems interchange the terms to suit their needs fool the people and sway them to their side.

    They want to control the insurance industry. It’s not about helping the little guy. It’s about power. They want to control everything. It gives them more power and makes it harder to remove them from that power. Power is powerful stuff.

    Also, if I break my arm but have no insurance, I can still get it set in a cast. I just have to pay the doctor. That means I may have to cut back on my Vegas trip. It’s kinda like..hmm self insured. Yeah, thats it. I save the premiums I am not paying, invest them and use them to pay for these incidentals. Whoops, I said dental.

    If I have NO money, I can still get it set by going to the free clinic or the emergency room. Yep, I might be there awhile but I will get it done. Poor people do not get the same everything as rich people. In all fairness, do you think they should? Isn’t that the real debate?

68. #68
    On July 29th, 2009 at 6:46 pm, vickisoup said:

    Resolution~schmesolution. Huffing and puffing on the floor of the House is a whisper on a scream; a veritable raindrop on a river, overshadowed by the news of the House “reaching a deal” today.
    With BHO playing the Bush card, I don’t see much hope for Boehner to get his word out.
    

69. #69
    On July 29th, 2009 at 7:03 pm, Ragspierre said:

    http://www.freeourhealthcarenow.com/

    If you haven’t already, please take a moment and fill this out.

70. #70
    On July 29th, 2009 at 7:25 pm, lgm said:

    Gray and Raghead, you ask me how many uninsured there are. I don’t know so I look it up. A reputable looking private sector source says 45 million. You call me stupid names and suggest that the actual number is lower. Please provide your reputable looking source. And remember the question, which is not how many under 75K/year or how many with children and home insurance.

71. #71
    On July 29th, 2009 at 7:36 pm, Ragspierre said:

    Please provide your reputable looking source.

    See #63. It isn’t a suggestion. It is data.

    Idiot.

72. #72
    On July 29th, 2009 at 7:50 pm, Last Massachusetts Conservative said:

    The question should be “How many people legally in the United States do not have access to adequate medical care?”, not “How many people in the United States are uninsured”

    With all the public and pricate clinics as well as the mandates to hospitals to provide emergency care, I bet that number is quite low. Anyone have that statistic?

73. #73
    On July 29th, 2009 at 7:51 pm, Last Massachusetts Conservative said:

    My prior comment is not an endorsement of government health care. It is just a question that needs to be answered in order to have an intelligent debate about the issue.

74. #74
    On July 29th, 2009 at 7:54 pm, T-Bone said:

    Take out the word adequate and the answer is zero.

    Will I get an MRI if I complain of hearing loss if I have no money? If I have $1,000, I bet they give me one even if I don’t need it.

    Adequate is in the eye of the beholder.

75. #75
    On July 29th, 2009 at 8:23 pm, Bruce said:

    Oh wow. The Republicans are so tough (/sarcasm)

    We are so screwed. Conservatives have no voice in our government. Even worse, there’s no opposition party. All we have is a few whining GOP sissies up there who are completely unwilling to help fight the tyranny.

76. #76
    On July 29th, 2009 at 8:46 pm, lgm said:

    Ragspierre said (#71):

    See #63. It isn’t a suggestion. It is data.

    I didn’t realize the report was so easy to find. From the report (page 21):

    total uninsured in America: 44.815 M(illion)
    non-citizen (unknown number were legal residents): 9.396 M
    number with household income above $75K/year: 7.886 M

    Result: the number of insured US citizens with household income under $75K/year in 2006 was estimated to be 28.5 million. Anyone eligible for government health coverage (military, medicare or medicaid) was counted as insured (page 18).

    As I said, I didn’t know the number. The answer to the original question was indeed about 45 million, as the Kaiser study estimated. Even with your exclusions, 28.5 million are left, and that’s lots of people.

77. #77
    On July 29th, 2009 at 8:58 pm, corkie said:

    lgm, how many Americans don’t have HDTVs?

78. #78
    On July 29th, 2009 at 9:03 pm, vickisoup said:

    lgm, I can’t believe I’m being so nice to you, but here’s the deal: we can all agree that it should be easier to access and maintain affordable healthcare.
    But when 85% of the people have it, that means that 15% of the people don’t. We know by recent surveys that 30% of that 15% could get it, but don’t want it, so that means that approximately 10% of the American people want it but don’t have it and can’t get it.
    So fix that 10% and leave the other of us alone!
    When your car has a flat tire, or needs a new set of spark plugs, you don’t dismantle the whole car and rebuild it. You fix the problem that needs fixing!
    That’s what’s wrong with Congress’ plan: it ruins healthcare and health insurance options by dismantling the whole system.

79. #79
    On July 29th, 2009 at 10:05 pm, jangar said:

    the Franking Commission

    Uhhh, is this a misspelled word?

80. #80
    On July 29th, 2009 at 10:45 pm, Papa Louie said:

    …but their request continues to be reviewed by the franking commission.

    I’m sure they’ll get right on it — immediately after the bill passes.

81. #81
    On July 29th, 2009 at 11:03 pm, graysonret said:

    Next…Obama and the libs will announce that food is a right and millions of people, in the U.S., are hungry and starving. Therefore, in order to correct this, and provide food for everyone, congress will work on a bill to take over the food industry to provide food for everyone. Of course, the “victims” will cheer and the Pelosi/Reid group will work on a 3K page bill to be passed immediately. Let the bread lines begin….

82. #82
    On July 30th, 2009 at 12:07 am, xblade said:

    Translation: it’s against the law FOR REPUBLICANS to send misleading partisan BS disguised as official government business.

    FIFY

83. #83
    On July 30th, 2009 at 12:26 am, xblade said:

    Even with your exclusions, 28.5 million are left, and that’s lots of people.

    A lot of people who have chosen not to buy health insurance, despite being able to afford it. Why is that a crisis again?

    By the way…you do know insurance isn’t a requirement to pay for health care, don’t you? See, they have this crazy new thing called money, and I haven’t met a health provider yet that won’t accept cash.

84. #84
    On July 30th, 2009 at 1:50 am, lgm said:

    vickisoup said (#78):

    approximately 10% of the American people want it but don’t have it and can’t get it.
    So fix that 10% and leave the other of us alone!

    Great point. I think there are two answers. People with existing health insurance will not notice a huge change in their personal situations. There will be some differences — no threat of losing health care if you switch jobs, no pre-existing condition exclusions. Some taxes will go up.

    The second point is that Medicare is on a trajectory to being broke in ten years*. Uncle Sam cannot afford to meet rising health care costs indefinitely. Americans refuse to accept cuts in medicare, so we have to find a way to deliver it more cheaply. Big parts of the health care reform plans are devoted to delivering services with the same outcomes more cheaply.

    *Back when you know who was trying to “reform” (eliminate) social security, he used to say that “Social Security and Medicare are facing bankruptcy.” Actually, Social Security by itself was relatively healthy. The trouble was with medicare. Why, then, did Bush go after the healthy program and ignore the sick one?

85. #85
    On July 30th, 2009 at 9:33 am, John Deaux said:

    On July 29th, 2009 at 8:46 pm, lgm said:
    I didn’t realize the report was so easy to find. From the report (page 21):

    total uninsured in America: 44.815 M(illion)

    The part they leave out is what they count as an uninsured person. If a person leaves their job and starts another, but has no insurance during a probationary period, then that person is counted as uninsured for the whole year. As I’m sure you can deduce, The actual snapshot figure is significantly lower. Then there’s the issue of how many of those uninsured are eligble for existing programs but choose not to partake.

86. #86
    On July 30th, 2009 at 10:37 am, Salt said:

    On July 30th, 2009 at 9:33 am, John Deaux said:

    The part they leave out is what they count as an uninsured person. If a person leaves their job and starts another, but has no insurance during a probationary period, then that person is counted as uninsured for the whole year. As I’m sure you can deduce, The actual snapshot figure is significantly lower. Then there’s the issue of how many of those uninsured are eligble for existing programs but choose not to partake.

    Both excellent points. I know of several early 20s workers around me that opt out of insurance. I think it’s crazy, but there are those that care more about buying more beer at the bar than health insurance.

    Even so, I cannot think of an occasion in which mandates on individual selection would make things any better. How long will it be before this government decides that the choices we make in our lives are unhealthy, therefore a problem for the nationalized health care program?

    Dessert taxes?
    Salt taxes [ibid]?
    Red meat allowances?

87. #87
    On July 30th, 2009 at 10:48 am, Loren said:

    …And the resolution fails on a party line vote.

    Meet the new boss.

88. #88
    On July 30th, 2009 at 10:49 am, lgm said:

    John Deaux said (#85):

    The part they leave out is what they count as an uninsured person. If a person leaves their job and starts another, but has no insurance during a probationary period, then that person is counted as uninsured for the whole year. As I’m sure you can deduce, The actual snapshot figure is significantly lower.

    Just to clarify, the number who “were without insurance at some time during the year” is much higher (page 18). I don’t know whether the 45 million all were without insurance for the entire year. But the number without insurance at any given time seems like a good measure of the number uninsured.

89. #89
    On July 30th, 2009 at 10:52 am, Salt said:

    On July 30th, 2009 at 10:49 am, lgm said:

    John Deaux said (#85):

    Might be interesting to see the number of uninsured against the unemployment rate.

90. #90
    On July 30th, 2009 at 11:09 am, Salt said:

    How did we get off the topic of the chart and the Franking commission?

    The only complaint I’ve seen here so far is “scary fonts and colors”. Which part is the partisan BS?

91. #91
    On July 30th, 2009 at 12:09 pm, hawkeye54 said:

    How long will it be before this government decides that the choices we make in our lives are unhealthy, therefore a problem for the nationalized health care program
    

    Potential legislation addressing this is already being discussed from the federal level on down.

    Dessert taxes?
    Salt taxes [ibid]?
    Red meat allowances?

    Oh, if the left has its way, count on all the above, and more.

    Attempting to control eating habits (and everything else) through taxation and rationing is in the progressives’ playbook.

92. #92
    On July 30th, 2009 at 12:27 pm, theporch said:

    Doesn’t everyone realize that the Dems don’t care how they get things passed as long as it helps illegals. They are counting on doing all they can to get the illegals taken care of one way or the other and thereby ensuring that their votes will keep the dems in office forever. If they can do that then the Reps will never again regain control. The dems like dependent voters.

93. #93
    On July 30th, 2009 at 12:30 pm, theporch said:

    This is in the bill to back up my previous statement about illegals.

    Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services.

    • Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community organizer health plans (read: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)

94. #94
    On July 30th, 2009 at 12:30 pm, Ed Mahmoud abu al-Kahoul said:

    Obama told libtard bloggers in a conference call (Hugh Hewitt had the tape) that if he didn’t have 60 Senate votes to invoke cloture, he’d insist Senate leadership pass Marxist Medicine as a ‘reconciliation item’.

    A reconciliation item is something generally approved in the budget, but not specifically authorized, and can’t be filibustered.

    Marxist Medicine may not have been generally approved in the FY 2010 budget, but the Senate parliamentarian is of the majority party, aka, a Demonrat, and his rulings are advisory only, the presiding officer of the Senate can choose to ignore his rulings.

    So Marxist Medicine really all comes down to Dingy Harry Reid

95. #95
    On July 30th, 2009 at 12:33 pm, Salt said:

    On July 30th, 2009 at 12:30 pm, Ed Mahmoud abu al-Kahoul said:

    A reconciliation item is something generally approved in the budget, but not specifically authorized, and can’t be filibustered.

    How is a reconciliation item different than an earmark?

96. #96
    On July 30th, 2009 at 12:35 pm, Ed Mahmoud abu al-Kahoul said:

    Salt- I have no idea. Except I doubt most earmarks are 1000 pages plus long and get marked up in committee.

97. #97
    On July 30th, 2009 at 12:35 pm, theporch said:

    To further my distaste for this obamacare bill:
    Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process)
    Page 203: “The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax.” Yes, it really says that.•
    Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and the poor most affected.”
    Page 425: Goverment provides approved list of end-of-life resources, guiding you in death.
    Much more like this. If this does not make you sick,scared and down right disgusted, then nothiing will.

98. #98
    On July 30th, 2009 at 12:40 pm, theporch said:

    Regarding “How is a reconciliation item different than an earmark?”
    A “reconciliation bill” eliminates most debate and prohibits filibustering. It is an attempt to move a bill through congress faster.

99. #99
    On July 30th, 2009 at 12:41 pm, Salt said:

    On July 30th, 2009 at 12:35 pm, Ed Mahmoud abu al-Kahoul said:

    Salt- I have no idea. Except I doubt most earmarks are 1000 pages plus long and get marked up in committee.

    I suppose that’s the point. They’ll just put the funding for it in the budget and the 1000 pages of details becomes an execution matter and not a legislative one.

    We can only hope that this issue is big enough that such procedural smokescreens would cause an uproar.

100. #100
     On July 30th, 2009 at 12:46 pm, theporch said:

     Rather than beat a dead horse here, maybe a better way to attack the Tax and spend and the Obamacare bills would be the following:

     http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

     http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.shtml