The actual George Will article says nothing of the sort.

Once again it’s gillie-gobbels, trying to repeat a lie often enough that it becomes truth.

*yawn*

Source for that accusation? You’ve been able to follow the money that accurately? if your detective skills are that good then certainly you can get a hold of those sealed documents from the Annanberg foundation, or follow the kickbacks to Michelle Obama after her husband got elected.

Or maybe you can explain why the CBO says it won’t work.

*yawn*

Forgot Bernie Maddoff’s $65 billion beats the snot out of $1.7 billion anyday.

*YAWN*

Any suggestion that Chairman Obama “and crew” give a damn about cutting costs must be laughed at derisively.

This has not happened in Australia even with the encouragement of using generic brands for scripts. The difference is usually minimal anyway. The method used to reduce the costs of the pharma scheme is to take drugs off the free list and force patients to pay very high prices or to refuse to put the drugs on the free list forcing patients to pay a high price. I am talking 100s of dollars here, not just a dollar here or there.

Got any more lies, gillie and Tano? After all, your black thug made it clear that he’s a complete liar today with his blabbing that he has never supported single-payer and that the AARP endorses his “plan”.

Why does the black thug have to lie so much, Tano? Why can’t he just be honest and state publicly that he wants single-payer and that the AARP doesn’t endorse him?

Part D was basically written by the insurance companies and have done nothing to control the insane cost of prescriptions

Why not? After all, it did exactly what Barack Obama wants to do, which is to extend coverage to more people.

Do you mean that extending the number of people covered increases costs and does not produce savings? What a surprise! That’s exactly the opposite of what your Barack Obama has been pushing. Why the sudden change, racist gillie?

LOL…and of course, gillie’s racism comes out, as expected.

MA plans — private health plan options that provide coverage to 8.3 million Medicare beneficiaries — disproportionately provide coverage to low-income and racial and ethnic minority beneficiaries. Specifically, 40 percent of African Americans without Medicaid or employer coverage rely on comprehensive health insurance coverage provided by MA plans. By providing more comprehensive benefits and lower cost-sharing than traditional Medicare, MA plans help racial and ethnic minority populations gain access to health care services that are critical to their long-term health and well-being.

Reduced funding for the MA program would have a negative impact on the health and health care of millions of Medicare beneficiaries — particularly for low-income and minority beneficiaries. A study by Emory University’s Kenneth Thorpe, Ph.D., found that without MA, 2 million Medicare beneficiaries would lose all supplemental coverage. Racial and ethnic minorities would be especially hard hit, with the number of African-Americans without supplemental coverage rising to 59 percent.

Why do Gillie and Barack Obama hate minority senior citizens?

Philosophically, I don’t like it. But this is not me saying it won’t work, it’s the non-partisan CBO. Why would I call and support something Congress itself doesn’t even believe in? Is it that surprising that the day the CBO numbers went public support for this plan dropped like a stone?

If you like Single Payer, feel free to make the case for it. I might be persuaded that “security” has some nebulous quality that’s worth the hefty price tag. But cost savings is unquestionably the worst thing this plan has going for it.

Let me say that I appreciate your comments though. Nite Nite.

Best wishes,
-MFS

Are you suggesting we write our congressperson and tell them to support Obama’s reforms?
If so I agree!
If not, please explain further.

Really sounds like Robin Hood!!

What’s to stop them from setting up another nefarious “Part D” plan like you describe?

Best wishes,
-MFS

Alas, Orzag’s non-response on why his voodoo won’t work within existing government programs is out there like a dead dog on the table with nary a defender.

But, maybe you’ve read something I haven’t.

Best wishes,
-MFS

Part of it medicare part C & D. Part C allows private groups to insure and the fees that have been incurring are no good.
Part D was basically written by the insurance companies and have done nothing to control the insane cost of prescriptions
Another aspect was tax cuts that cut off revenue to those programs. Unfortantly those tax cuts did not generate enough economic stimulous to compensate for that lost revenue

think about that for two seconds

My heart soars! You are the first supporter I’ve met that wants to talk about the merits.

You say that a government program will be cheaper because it doesn’t have to turn a profit or pay for marketing and the like.

Outstanding! The natural question then is: Why is Medicare broke then?

The next question is (thanks Virginia Postrel!): If Orzag and Dingell have a brilliant idea on how to manage costs without effecting quality, why don’t they try it out with Medicare *first?*

Think of it: the critics would be silenced! Countless tax dollars would be saved! A vertiable heaven on Earth!

Yet, they won’t… is anyone curious why?

Best wishes,
-MFS

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/06/george-f-will-admits-public-option-will.html

Nate silver has a fantastic examination about how the public option will cut costs.
Be careful, there is a small bit of math!

If we assume that, how is the current proposed legistlation superior? His original point was on the rhetorical and logical weakness of the anti-voter jeramiad.

Much as I disagree with them, Obama and his team deserve a better class of defenders.

Best wishes,
-MFS