Issues of Fact, (9/25/2009 5:28:32 AM)

Very well done.

droopy, wagoner (9/25/2009 6:24:41 AM)

You tell it like it is Mr. Essley.

Alan Shore, (9/25/2009 6:25:36 AM)

Yep, I'd feel much better if Obama spent half his time clearin' brush on a fake ranch...

Michael Phillips, Tulsa (9/25/2009 6:41:51 AM)

Philip, she missed the obvious race card. If a "Typical white person" speaks critically of a black president, that is racism.

Willard_Roker, (9/25/2009 7:30:24 AM)

Lets see ... "Iraq has weapons of mass destruction", " Reagan proved deficits don't matter", "Obama's healthcare will cover illegal aliens" "Obama's not a US citizen", "Obama is a muslim" "Our founding fathers wanted a Christian nation"

Yep, the right-winger really tell it like it is.

peelumba, (9/25/2009 7:37:49 AM)

nice one willard! you can always believe the right wingers because they can't tell a lie and they are legends (in their own minds).

Bison3, Tulsa (9/25/2009 8:04:23 AM)

I have to agree with Alan Shore, Willard Roker and peelumba on this one! Even that business of "you lie" was a lie!!! Every bird needs a left and right wing but this Eagle's right wing is badly broken and it needs to heal!!

true2form, Grand Lake (9/25/2009 8:28:15 AM)

Mr. Essley,
For a few facts read the bookmarks on my profile page.

Angry Citizen!, Bluejacket (9/25/2009 8:54:03 AM)

Hollywood Stalin's supporters can only regurgitate short slogans like "change", "greedy rich" and "tea baggers". If they think somebody is gonna give them something for free, they line up and bark like seals. In Jackson's tirade, all of the sound byte slogans were there, devoid of thought or critical thinking-

Companion, Sperry (9/25/2009 9:11:38 AM)

Mr. Essley, don't you "EVER" watch the "NEWS"? I get my facts there and on the internet. As well as newspapers. Of course, some blogs aren't reliable especially with a right slant. Ms. Jackson, I'm assuming gets hers from network news. Fox has more viewers that funnels the conservatives and "IS" the "ONLY" conservative network. While ABC,CBS,NBC as well as MSNBC,PBS have viewers that out-number Fox viewers. If you are a Fox viewer, then you will like Hannity, Beck, and Savage Nation as well as Rush Limbaugh, the slanted right news and "FEARMONGERING". I watch Fox news myself, but only for humor.

Carl, Henryetta (9/25/2009 9:33:26 AM)

Mr Essley - I agree, FACTS are always nice. Please give me the source for a supposed "fact" in your letter:.
.
.
"He has been on television more in nine months than any president has ever been in eight years."

Companion, Sperry (9/25/2009 9:50:47 AM)

Carl, did you watch PBS last night? Some of it was about ERs and the shuttting down of them across the nation due to the uninsured. Public Option would take care of this I would think, going by the PBS special on national health care.

Woofenburger, Hominy (9/25/2009 9:52:05 AM)

El Rushbo you just confirmed my assertion that most assassins are conservatives. They seem to see violence as a justifiable means to effect governmental change.

If you can't make a rational arguement please stay out of the debate. Threats of violence don't help.

Companion, Sperry (9/25/2009 10:02:50 AM)

Alan Shore, like your short but accurate comments. I read all of yours everytime I logon.

okieboy1, tulsa (9/25/2009 10:15:22 AM)

. Public Option would take care of this I would think, going by the PBS special on national health care.
---------------------
So now we are to the point where PBS is calling the shots. Wonderful.

Actually, the dumbing down of America started when liberals more or less demanded that every child be able to obtain a college education. Is it really any wonder that our education system is overloaded with students that have to take remedial math and reading courses while enrolled in college? Has any lib ever really stopped to think that maybe "bob", who probably has a difficult time spelling his name shouldn't be in a college setting? But that's what they wanted and that's what they're getting.

Intentional dumbing down of America by the Republican party my.....! Get real.

Karl, Tulsa (9/25/2009 10:22:48 AM)

Mr. Essley, about your comment: "He has been on television more in nine months than any president has ever been in eight years."
First: I bet that you have previously complained that Obama promised an "open" administration and is not being "open". Well, being on TV IS one way of being "OPEN". So now you're crying about that - kind of self-contradictory I would say.
Second: That is certainly true in comparison with the President for the last eight years. But that says more about that previous President than it does about Obama, and is a negative statement about Bush.

Companion, Sperry (9/25/2009 10:24:58 AM)

The Danish have "FREE" college, why can't we. I'll tell you why. While the Danes are encouraging their people to attend college. America is spending money to take over the world instead of our own domestic enhancements.

Karl, Tulsa (9/25/2009 10:25:46 AM)

Well, Mr Essley, here are some of those lies, falsehoods and distortions that have been put forth by your right wing companions: From FactCheck dot Org
Our inbox has been overrun with messages asking us to weigh in on a mammoth list of claims about the House health care bill. The chain e-mail purports to give "a few highlights" from the first half of the bill, but the list of 48 assertions is filled with falsehoods, exaggerations and misinterpretations. We examined each of the e-mail’s claims, finding 26 of them to be false and 18 to be misleading, only partly true or half true. Only four are accurate. A few of our "highlights":
The e-mail claims that page 30 of the bill says that "a government committee will decide what treatments … you get," but that page refers to a "private-public advisory committee" that would "recommend" what minimum benefits would be included in basic, enhanced and premium insurance plans
The e-mail says that "non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services" but points to a provision that prohibits discrimination in health care based on "personal characteristics." A (different) provision explicity forbids "federal payment for undocumented aliens."

That's just the beginning, more to follow.

Companion, Sperry (9/25/2009 10:27:37 AM)

Well stated Karl!

Karl, Tulsa (9/25/2009 10:27:44 AM)

more from FactCheck:
We can trace the origins of this collection of claims to a conservative blogger who issued his instant and mostly mistaken analyses as brief "tweets" sent via Twitter as he was paging through the 1,017-page bill. The claims have been embraced as true and posted on hundreds of Web sites, and forwarded in the form of chain e-mails countless times. But there’s hardly any truth in them. We’ll go through each of the claims in this message:

Claim: Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!
False: This section says nothing whatsoever about “rationing” or anything of the sort. Actually, it’s favorable to families and individuals, placing an annual cap on what they could pay out of pocket if covered by a basic, “essential benefits package.” The limits would be $5,000 for an individual, $10,000 for a family.

Claim: Page 42: The “Health Choices Commissioner” will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None.
False: The new Health Choices Commissioner will oversee a variety of choices to be offered through new insurance exchanges. The bill itself specifies the “minimum services to be covered” in a basic plan, including prescription drugs, mental health services, maternity and well-baby care and certain vaccines and preventive services (pages 27-28). We find nothing in the bill that prevents insurance companies from offering benefits that exceed the minimums. In fact, the legislation allows (page 84) any company that offers an approved basic plan to offer also an “enhanced” plan, a “premium” plan and even a “premium plus” plan that could include vision and dental benefits.

Karl, Tulsa (9/25/2009 10:30:50 AM)

and still more:

Claim: Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcard.

False. There is no mention of any “National ID Healthcard” anywhere in the bill. Page 58 says that government standards for electronic medical transactions "may include utilization of a machine-readable health plan beneficiary identification card,” to show eligibility for services. Insurance companies typically issue such cards already, but if such a standard were issued the cards would need to be in a standard form readable by computers. The word “may” is used to permit such a standard, but it does not require one.

And, how about this one that deals with the "Death Panels" claim -

Claim: Page 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia? Claim: Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in estate taxes ahead of time. Claim: Page 425: Government provides approved list of end-of-life resources, guiding you in death Claim: Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment; government dictates how your life ends. Claim: Page 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate treatment as patient’s health deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the GOVERNMENT. Claim: Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have at end-of-life.

All False. These six claims are a twisted interpretation of a provision in the bill that says Medicare will cover voluntary counseling sessions between seniors and their doctors to discuss end-of-life care. Medicare doesn’t pay for such sessions now; it would under the bill. End-of-life care discussions include talking about a living will, hospice care, designating a health care proxy and making decisions on what care you want to receive at the end of your life. Doctors do the consulting, not the "government" or a "bureaucracy." The e-mail author’s assertion that the bill calls for "an ORDER from the GOVERNMENT" for end-of-life plans rests on language about a patient drawing up such an order stipulating their wishes, and having that order signed by a physician. There’s nothing about "an order from the government." The bill defines an order for life-sustaining treatment as a document that "is signed and dated by a physician …[and] effectively communicates the individual’s preferences regarding life sustaining treatment."

Carl, Henryetta (9/25/2009 10:46:58 AM)

Can ANYONE provide a source for the allegation that Obama has more TV appearances than "any president" in 8 years? Or is that just SPECULATION that sounds true? I'm very interested to see if Mr Essley checked ALL of his "facts" before writing.

Karl, Tulsa (9/25/2009 10:49:26 AM)

More lies, distortions, falsehoods.
On Dennis Miller’s radio show, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) attacked the bill, claiming that it plainly stated that Americans would be forced out of their current health care plans “within five years”:
BACHMANN: "Well, what does that mean? That means that politicians are going to substitute their choice for your doctor’s choice for you. That’s exactly what this bill does. Here’s the other thing about that bill. It’s a monstrosity. I have the bill printed out on my desk, it’s over 1,000 pages long. On the 16th page, it says whatever health care you have now, it’s going to be gone within five years. So your current health care plan, you’re not going to have in five years. What you’re going to have is a government plan and a federal bureau is going to decide what you get or if you get anything at all."
Bachmann either misread the bill or is willfully misrepresenting it. In fact, page 16 is the beginning of the section on “Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage.” The section that refers to five years is on page 17, but it’s not about pushing Americans off their current health plans. As the summary on Rep. Pete Stark’s (D-CA) website notes, it simply “provides for a five year grace period for current group health plans to meet specified standards.”
In fact, as the Wonk Room’s Igor Volsky points out, the CBO’s coverage tables “undermine the conservative claim that a public option would eliminate private insurance and erode employer-sponsored coverage”:
The House bill actually increases the number of people who receive coverage through their employer by 2 million (in 2019) and shifts most of the uninsured into private coverage. By 2019, 30 million individuals would also purchase coverage from the Exchange, but only 9-10 million Americans (or approximately 1/3) would enroll in the public option, the rest would enroll in private coverage.
So, in Bachmann’s world, increased private insurance is a government takeover of health care.

Faith, (9/25/2009 10:59:36 AM)

Are you blind sir.

Faith, (9/25/2009 11:02:42 AM)

Companion hit this on the nailhead.