Brooks: Healthcare reform is important, but not worth bankrupting the country over

[HopeOverFear]

Not my words...his...

Health care reform is important, but it is not worth bankrupting the country over. If this process goes as it has been going — with grand rhetoric and superficial cost containment — then we will be far better off killing this effort and starting over in a few years. Maybe then there will be leaders willing to look at the options staring them in the face.

[donheld]

1. Why post it here?

[valerief]

2. Clowns make clown noises. What else is new?

Hey, is any war worth bankrupting the country over? I guess ALL OF THEM are, judging by congressional funding!

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

3. Why not at least identify the words being those of David Brooks

idiot non pareille?

[TomCADem]

7. False Dichotomy - Doing Nothing Bankrupted The Auto Industry

The unstated assumption is that the current healthcare/medicare system is sustainable. Other countries achieve a better or similar level of care with a lower percentage of GDP. Doing nothing will bankrupt small businesses or lead to a continued erosion of healthcare where only the rich can afford basic services.

[HopeOverFear]

4. I love it when ya'll go there with the "why post that here"?

what do you think? :eyes:

[babylonsister]

5. We know Brooks' agenda. It's tiresome. nt

[TomCADem]

8. I Actually Do Read Brooks, Because He Is Kind Of A Collins/Snowe Conservative

The Republicans would sound less crazy if the followed Brooks, rather than Beck/Limbaugh, and we might actually have more meaningful debates rather than screaming soundbites.

I do think Brooks is wrong, but at least he is trying to discuss the issue, rather than just screaming "SOCIALISM" and insulting the intelligence of his readers.

[donheld]

6. If we wanted to read that crap

we know where to find it. NOT HERE.

[HopeOverFear]

12. Wrong. we find it here all the time

most of the time though it's coming from THE LEFT. lol

[donheld]

14. Yes and most of us are sick and tired of it.

[HopeOverFear]

17. No you're not. If you were sick of it, you wouldn't click on it nm

[donheld]

20. The thread title gave no indication of the content

But don't mind me. I'm just quite sleep deprived and a bit cranky.

[Cant trust em]

10. Sorry. We prefer the echo chamber in here. nt

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

11. I'll read pretty much anything, right left or in-between

but I like to know What and Who I'm reading. I would never tell anyone not to post anything, since even the freepyish things can be valuable just to see what tortured, twisted turns of logic and inanity are being presented and to prepare a rebuttal, assuming you're not just dealing with outright insanity.

I'm not sure that I would even bother rebutting David Brooks, but he is a major columnist in a major paper and unfortunately some people will be paying attention to his drivel. I'm still glad to know about it, but still think an attribution was in order.

[Cha]

9. Well, we can shoot this rw talking point right out

of the sky. There's nothing more important than health care and bush was bankrupting the country to bomb and rebuild Iraq. If the assoles like brooks were in power..the corporatemediawhores would be gearing us up to bomb Iran now.

[Vinca]

13. . . . not worth bankrupting the country unless

it's your loved one who is uninsured and has been diagnosed with a cancer that is curable. The whole notion that people expect something for nothing is baloney. We expect either a raise in taxes, some kind of premium . . . something. It's not as if the health care angel is going to emerge from the sky with a flaming pie loaded with cash and it's going to be a lottery win for everyone. We are willing to pay, but we can no longer afford to be shaken down by big insurance.

[zulchzulu]

15. Fighting wars are important, but not worth bankrupting the country over

So...um... what else...

[HopeOverFear]

18. Exactly!!! See how that works? See how EASY their stupid arguments

can be turned on them? Unbelievable.

[Hansel]

28. Here's one. Low taxes are important, but not worth bankrupting the country over.

Pony up David.

[Ganja Ninja]

16. If you'd bothered to put the name David Brooks in your post I would

have never clicked on the link. He's a waste of oxygen.

[HopeOverFear]

19. Well excuse me but the name David Brooks means nothing to me

Didn't know who he is. I don't follow shit that closely. So whatever.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

21. Thanks for editing the OP!

When I was somewhat new to DU, I posted something from David Brooks and had my ass handed to me my multiple posters who gave me a quick education about what an intellectual lightweight he is. Like you, I didn't really know too much about him, but after time, I think that the conclusion about him being a lightweight is extremely valid.

I STILL think it's good to post his stuff, because, as I said, he has a pretty large audience (God knows why) in the NYT. You will get lots of people who will just snort and say "David BROOKS?!" and others just won't bother to even read the post. He pops up as a "pundit" fairly frequently too and he's just as lame speaking as he is writing. That's my opinion.

[HopeOverFear]

23. A-ha. I understand now.

Thanks for clarifying. :) Sorry for the confusion, folks, it wasn't intentional.

[Uncle Joe]

22. This sentence by Brooks nicely sums up the driving force rationalization

behind the concept of for profit "health" insurance.

"We’ve built an entire health care system (maybe an entire government) on the illusion of something for nothing. Instead of tackling that basic logic, we’ve got a reform process that is trying to evade it."

The return on profit greatly increases; the more nothing the for profit "health" insurance corporations produce. Paying nothing is their prime motivation when claims are submitted. The record breaking for profit health insurance corporations' production of nothing has expanded to include millions of Americans with nothing left after being denied coverage either because of decree or cost, even people with coverage find their insurance being rescinded for nothing other than to facilitate the increased production of nothing; which of course leads to more profit for the "health" insurance corporations, bribed political "leaders;" to represent for profit "health" insurance corporate interests over those of the American People and the corporate media which sell the "health" insurance corporations' commercials.

It seems to me Brooks is making the case whether intentional or not for single payer universal public health coverage, I hope he keeps up the good work.

[Deep13]

24. .

:banghead:

[Political Tiger]

25. But it's okay to bankrupt the country over a war based on lies?

I think this shows just how screwed up cons priorities are.

[Arkana]

26. Brooks is usually shockingly reasonable for a Republican, but he's wrong on this.

Now is our chance to do it the way we want--NOW. Not in two years--in two years there will be a new Congress. Now is our chance. We can make public healthcare the new third rail of American politics--untouchable by ANY candidate who runs for office.

[Hansel]

27. Spoken just like a egocentric fool with full affordable coverage.

I'm f*cking sick of this "let them eat cake" attitude by pundits, politicians and the MSM. "As long as it's not my child, wife, or me, who cares. WE can't afford it. My portfolio might go down. My taxes might go up and I won't be able to afford that yacht or summer home."

They are creeps and it's really despicable. Why aren't they bitching about the amount spent on war? Where is the cry of "we can't afford all of these wars?"

These people have attitudes that are really not much different than the pigs in Iran shooting unarmed people. They are just advocating for killing people at more of a distance and at a slower pace. Because they know damn well that not having health care is an unnecessary or premature death sentence for many many American citizens.

David Brooks needs to quit worrying about his pocketbook and start reporting on ways the richest country in the world can provide health care to anyone and everyone who needs it. Just like it could afford to "free Iraq".