Look at the protest groups. They are 99.99% white, middle aged or older and for the most part working class. They are witnessing the end of their position of power and influence within America and the natural reaction is to lash out at anything they see contributing to that end. I wouldn’t say they are overt racist but Obama is representative, America is becoming more brown, more yellow, less white.

They are stoked on by the right wing radio broadcasters, folks like Palin and elected officials who have no interest in putting anything forward for the national good but would rather keep those flames of hatred going. Because that means they sell more ad space, more books, get more speaking engagements, get reelected.

Honestly, when you equate health care reform with Dachau you’ve pretty much signaled that you have no interest in serious debate on this topic. Not to mention the irony of claiming this is equivalent to the determined efforts to kill every last Jew in Europe and then go on and say it is also a Rothschild conspiracy shows the level of their conspiracy paranoia and lack of historical knowledge…

And even if you were a Republican who wanted to debate the financial merits I would have a hard time taking you serious unless you could show you were somehow also appalled and combative about the run up of the national debt between 2000-2006. Truthfully, they want nothing to do with this except to obstruct like petulant children…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMdlcnK_MI4&feature=player_embedded

…and that being the case they should no longer have any say in the matter.

Basically, screw them, the country is moving, they can cling to their guns and religion and die out in the political wilderness. Perhaps within a few years, as the GOP as gone way of the Whigs a more mature and responsible group will take up the conservative mantle, for we need a balance of left and right in our government and those who govern, but the current format of conservatism gives us nothing.

Andrew Weill, M.D. supports it, the Cleveland
Clinic’s Steven Nissen, M.D. supports it, virtually all Nursing Associations support it, virtually all Public Health Associations support it, Isadore Rosenfeld, M.D. passionately supported it on his Fox News/Health TV segment, etc.

Only 4 companies, 5 counting Humana, dominate the market. The thousands of plans are mostly theirs, the whole idea behind the multitude being adverse selection: when their computers indicate any particular plans are the next likeliest to fail meeting their medical service ratio goals, they send letters to the participants indicating they’re welcome to stay but their policies are frozen. That letter means they’re in a premium price spiral.

Changing plans means exclusions, including for anything yet to be discovered by the nurse who comes to check those not presenting known pre-existing conditions.

The state-by-state rules are a constitutional
piece of b.s. It only facilitates the same process–slicing and dicing so as to send persons who might need medical service packing.

That’s a shell game, as conservative President Ronald Reagan’s Surgeon General, Everett Koop, M.D., once said.

Is it actually a fraud? How long will it be until class action firms see the forest through the trees (NOT ADVICE–SEEK YOUR OWN LEGAL SERVICES.)

Yet, the insurers enjoy an exemption to the anti-trust laws.

The free market system is fine, but apparently the opponents of reform can’t distinguish that from a simple scam. A meaningful public option is aimed at providing choice, keeping the insurance companies honest.

The health insurance system in the U.S. today is a shell game with no recourse allowed.

What’s the difference between that and Vito Corleone making offers people can’t refuse?

Medicare is National Health Insurance for those 65 and older, precisely because the insurance companies don’t want to cover them

They get sick.

Paul Hochfeld, M.D.
http://www.madashelldoctors.com/
The industry is having built into the public option a design-to-
fail system (deliberate adverse selection) so they can say “look, the government can’t run a
health system.”

“California’s Real Death Panels: Insurers Deny 21% of Claims ”

“PacifiCare’s Denials 40%, Cigna’s 33% in First Half of 2009″

http://www.calnurses.org/media-center/press-releases/2009/september/california-s-real-death-panels-insurers-deny-21-of-claims.html

Nearly 45,000 people die in the United States each year — one every 12 minutes — in large part because they lack health insurance and can not get good care, Harvard Medical School researchers found.

http://sites.google.com/site/evernewecon

All of which leads me to believe that the vast majority of Americans making this argument have literally no idea what Marxism is, save for a few choice factoids they got from Limbaugh or Palin or whoever (“Marxism = a bad thing”). Worse: they seem proud of their ignorance; to actually know anything about this hated political philosophy is to be an enemy of democracy (another word they use without knowing its meaning). I wish we could at least have a common vocabulary here; it would at least clarify what people are talking about. But our media seems unwilling to take that step back and ask what’s actually being discussed, so instead we get NPR’s wretched “on the road with the tea parties” series, and other bits of inane infotainment. And that’s not helping anyone.

@misterb – I would say at this point, #4 rings the most true. I don’t think any of them truly care about what’s going on outside their own little worlds.

1) Logical arguments against health care falter against the clear and convincing evidence that every other industrialized nation in the world has offered its citizens universal health care, and they’ve all kept it.

2) The anti-health care people are actually the anti-rationality people – being against health-care is just a symptom. Certainly, many extremists (right or left) view rationality as the enemy because rational thought exposes their insanity.

3) They have a terrain map in their heads that shows exactly where the slippery slope trends towards totalitarianism. If this is the case, I wish they would share it, because I can’t picture it.

4) They just want the “liberals” to lose and they don’t care how much it costs the country to secure victory.