Mike W, Tulsa (12/17/2008 6:21:08 AM)

Stay tuned for a public announcement in the next few days about an Obama Town Hall on Health Care in Tulsa tentatively on Tuesday 30-Dec-08 about 5-7 pm.

Mike W
Tulsa+
Who is helping plan the event

John M, Tulsa (12/17/2008 7:16:54 AM)

Mike, actually we could use some help from Obama on health care. A waiver was filed with the federal government 17 months ago that would expand the Insure Oklahoma program by increasing the gross income limits and number of employees. The federal government has been sitting on this for 17 months. Inhofe/Coburn/Sullivan have been no help on this.

TonyQ, Tulsa (12/17/2008 8:54:27 AM)

righton,

Typical right-wing do-nothingism. Even as more people are being driven into poverty through no fault of their own, it's a matter of faith to conservatives that all poor people are lazy, so they deserve nothing but scorn and blame. And forget about government assistance, even in the midst of a massive recession. The problem with conservatives is they don't believe the government is capable of doing anything, and when they get in power they prove themselves right. In case you hadn't noticed, that's why most of this country voted for change.

Skyhawk, Downtown Tulsa (12/17/2008 9:38:19 AM)

I am convinced that this is a shell and nut game.

Most people are not lazy, as is evident in our low unemployment numbers in the state. The issue is that the jobs these non-lazy people have to hold down. Having health insurance at a job is NOT a right.

Let us suppose that most of these people have a 40 hour week at $10.00 and hour. $20,800 in this economy is tough when you have 3 mouths to feed.
Understand that roughly 35% of that figure goes up ion smoke to taxes.

Could you afford health insurance on $1126 per month? I checked and a decent 1 BR apartment in this town is $450. Car, food, gas, clothes, utilities!

Not so fast my Republican friends… It is not that they are lazy, it is that there are so few good paying jobs and, their lack of quality education.

We will sign these people up and, we will pay. We are foolish to think that they will make the next payment for us the tax payer. They, just simply, can't pay for it.

Shell and Nut- Look at it this way. This is our way of bailing out the Oklahoma Medical Industry. And you just thought it was Wall Street and the Big 3.

Michael Phillips, Tulsa (12/17/2008 9:45:38 AM)

I have found that it is easy to sign up for insurance. It is paying that monthly payment that is tough. I predict this program won't work well because people like me who could use an extra $800 a month are going to try to weasel their way into the "Something for nothing gravy train". Why should I pay when others get health insurance free?

jbo, (12/17/2008 10:01:49 AM)

Well Mr. Darwin, I don't think anyone is suggesting that Wall Street take on health care.

And if you think the ponzi-scheme known as Social Security, billions of waste and fraud in Medicare and Medicaid, and kids graduating w/o the basic skills needed to succeed in this world constitutes a "good job" then I'd like to know what you are smoking and why you aren't sharing it with the rest of us! ;)

As a conservative, I do not believe poor people are lazy. I do believe government welfare programs dis-incentivize recipients from productive work - the very thing which will lift them out of their predicament. And yes, TonyQ, many are there NOT by a fluke of nature, NOR via the lottery of life, as the left would lead you to believe, but by their own series of bad choices. Whether Wall Street or Main Street, the government should not subsidize bad choices, but reward good choices.

Please left-wingers, don't be a hypocrite and whine about corporate subsidies if you are going to praise and call for personal subsidies! How about no government subsidies for anyone? They only pervert and corrupt the government by creating special-interest groups.

As a conservative, I believe the government should get out of people's way and allow them to succeed or fail on their own, not pick winners and losers. The Government should provide physical security, not fiscal security.

Government solutions seldom work because the decisions made are done without personal ramifications and with other people’s money.

So, ye on the left, if you believe the governmental approach to solving problems is best, put your money where your mouth is and give me your checkbook. Let me tell you what you can spend and where you can spend it, because I know what is best for you. And you may not even think of complaining when I decide to spend your money on toupees for all that are bald. I mean, really, what are you, some kind of bald-o-phobe?

Lastly, Mr. Darwin, one would think that you would recognize devolution towards a socialist -> communist -> totalitarian country flies in the face of the vision the Founding Fathers had – a country that evolved to a new and better model, one based on individual freedom and responsibility and moved away from state-sponsored tyranny from an all-powerful King.

Oh, and by the way, Merry Christmas!

jbo, (12/17/2008 10:07:06 AM)

Skyhawk - I have a family of 4 and have private health insurance through an independant agent for less than $400 per month. You need to shop around.

TonyQ, Tulsa (12/17/2008 10:29:22 AM)

jbo,

I don't believe it's the government's job to make moral judgments about what people do with their lives. However as a liberal I believe in certain social safety nets, and not just because of some moral imperative for cooperative action, but because it boosts the prosperity of all. The New Deal programs in addition to the massive public works program known as World War II lifted the country out of depression and made us the strongest economic power on the planet. This is because when more people are able to enter the middle class, they have greater purchasing power, and everyone, even the oh-so-heroic wealthy, does better. It's no surprise that as Republicans have been dismantling the New Deal programs over time our economy has suffered. Now that we have returned to the Gilded Age in terms of income inequality, the obvious has happened: everyone is suffering, even the rich. Reasonable people can disagree about how much of a social safety net there should be, but nowhere in the world where people are given an informed choice do they elect to have a society in which it's every man for himself, because bowing to free-market ideology is just not as important to most people as having the opportunity to build a decent life. Do you really want a society without social security? Why would that be preferable in any way? Because having more starving old and infirm people checks some ideological box? It's one thing for the already wealthy to argue against having their taxes raised to benefit society (even though that's a short-sighted position, since it's unlikely they can stay wealthy when there's no one who can afford to buy their widgets), but that so many working class Americans subscribe to this bankrupt anarchic free-market ideology only proves the power of propaganda.

Skyhawk, Downtown Tulsa (12/17/2008 10:41:29 AM)

Jbo-
You miss the point. It isn't that I need to shop around, but the single mother making take home of $1100 a month simply can not pay. Bare bones….

Rent - $450
Food for 3 - $250
Gas/Bus $100
Car $100
Cloths - $50
Utilities $150

That’s $1100 right there. Where is she supposed to find the $400 you speak of?

I am willing to pay the extra $17 in tax if needed (51 mil / 3 mil population) to help this young mother. Are you?

Skyhawk, Downtown Tulsa (12/17/2008 10:48:10 AM)

IM Right

$17 will be just a few more windshields to wash. You need to swing over for a shot of Nog! Stick61 is up for a party also!

Maybe we could be small business owners and start a windshield washing company at the BOK!

Skyhawk, Downtown Tulsa (12/17/2008 10:54:23 AM)

You need to swing by the mission and pick up a few coats, gloves, and hats. There are some good people in this town! They keep me warm every winter!

Thanks Tulsa!

elyocp, (12/17/2008 6:11:42 PM)

RIGHT ON TONYQ. GIVE THEM A SHELLACING. AND THE MEEK SHALL INHERIT THE EARTH.

marine2.0, (12/20/2008 11:04:59 PM)

Someone please tell me where in the Constitution it states that I have to pay for others healthcare expenses. I am a 38 year old male that has not gone to the doctor in over 5 years. I choose to live a healthy lifestyle and therefore do not burden the taxpyers or my family with extreme health care expenses. Now with that being said I do believe that things happen that are beyond our control, such as accidents, and the cost our overwhelming. So in that scenario along with children and elderly I do believe that there is some level of universal support needed. But I will be da--ed if tax payers should be burdened by paying for someone's health when the make unhealthy choices and self induce poor health on themselves. Like smokers, the obese, alcoholics and drug addicts to just name a few.