I have never seen a clearer, more moving, selfless articulation --it's not just about insurance--the system is broken. Thanks Kari.

Very nice. A very moving five minute description of the torture a hospital experience can turn into, followed by a cheap and over the top political hack job. Olberman at his most unhinged.

ST. I couldn't disagree more. Politicians of both parties are entering this meeting far more worried about what it will do to their fortunes politically with regard to their re-election than worried about crafting a good bill that will help American families.

Polling has shown the Public Option to be very popular with the voting public yet it's not in the bill. Heaven forbid the Democrats enact any legislation that is popular and that the voters as opposed to the insurance lobby might actually like.

Keith was just trying to shame them into doing the right thing. Logic and self interest hasn't seemed to work. I think maybe that's what needed in this case.

Speaking of cheap, over the top political hack jobs; did you see any of the speeches from CPAC? Those were the Oscar winning performances of hackitude.

Lets increase free market competition, so we could lower cost of medical help, and increase the level of health care.

Give more freedom to the families. Every one wins but the large bureaucracies that are the problem.

I like the video but just because you like the people, we as a society need to make the RIGHT decision for the RIGHT reason.

Wake up the problem is over regulation

Thanks for sharing Kari. I am trying to imagine the courage it took to talk about this on air. What a powerful statement on the need for reform.

There is no doubt a problem, but much of it is created by the government. Lets look at the FDA who says you cannot call something a cure for a disease unless it is a drug. This eliminates most alternative cures that cost less. Surgery is often used in America instead of cheaper more effective methods. Insurance companies offer products that are not in fact insurance but some form of fraud and the Federal Government legislates away competition in that field and there is no market control nor government control of prices and very lax guidelines on what can be called insurance. Most of your polices are not insurance people. Also the Federal government closed the county clinics at the request of large hospitals. The government can fix this by repealing laws, not by passing new ones. They cannot be trusted with anything. Keep in mind when someone uses emotion Glen beck or Olberman, they are normally asking for your freedom or rights. Freedom in based on logic an reason not emotion, it is also based on individual rights not collective rights. To drive the heard into submission you use emotion and from the emotion you derive power and with that power individuals are not cured or healed they are abused. This has always been the case in history when you look in periods of over 100 years.

Thank you Galen

I reject the Olberman=Beck false comparison. There is no comparison between the two. Olberman deals with facts, reality and the real world: Beck lies, distorts and mangles history in order to advance his hateful, racist, anti-American agenda.

But, if Keith Olberman is a little too strong a cup of coffee for you I suggest you watch Rachel Maddow instead. She is very logical and restrained in her presentation.

Thanks but no thanks for the unreasoning paranoia, Galen.

Government in the US is not the enemy, it is us. Yes, we have allowed soulless, money-grubbing corporate henchmen too much power in government, which is the root cause of the ills you cite. You advocate abject surrender.

Your claims that "The government ... cannot be trusted with anything" is a hysterical rejection of your duty as a citizen to make a constructive contribution to the betterment of government and thereby the improved conditions for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It gives the lie to your contention that "Freedom in (sic) based on logic an (sic) reason not emotion..." because you obviously base your pursuit of freedom on emotional overreaction to problems you perceive in the government we have, and the panicky efforts to project all responsibility for the poor state of our society onto some shadowy boogieman the conservatives are serving up to you.

Yes, those obsessed with power use emotion to paralyze the weak, but emotion is also what empowers to people to demonstrate their love of their fellow citizens by making a pact via our Constitution to band together to make our lives better. Buck up, man!

Ed you say "improved conditions for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." that is done by providing more personal freedom, what made America Great, truly not more regulated bureaucracies.

Life is not black and white, my friend! Personal freedom is counterbalanced by responsibility for your fellow citizen's welfare. "No man is an island, entire of itself"

I reject the Olberman=Beck false comparison. Olberman deals with facts, reality and the real world: Beck lies, distorts and mangles history in order to advance his hateful, racist, anti-American agenda.

Oh really? Check out Olberman's hateful, name-calling rant against Scott Brown last month. Hardly the behavior of a balanced mind.

Thanks, Pat, but I think others such as the quoted John Donne have said it better.

Olbermann sometimes gets hyperbolic, but he is almost always right on the facts and humane in his orientation.

Beyond being a middle aged white male media workers, I see little in common with Beck, who is a clown with little concern for the correlation between fact and reason and what he says.

Ed "The govenment is not the enemy" is right. It also is not the answer.

Your quote "Personal freedom is counterbalanced by responsibility for your fellow citizen's welfare. "No man is an island, entire of itself". Yes your right there again, and let the non-profit companies, (that I just finished working for today) have the freedom to do their jobs, they - we can do better than any large government program

But the problem is "government takes away responsibilities" That's what we are debating, you want more government control and you say that government involvement gives you more responsibilities. Your conterbalance therom is dead wrong, but I have too agree until I thought, it sounded very good to me too.

Your goal is very good as mine, I just afraid your overly complicated and thus hurting more the ones you and I want to help.

Give people free and personal choices and make America great!!!!. Come on , Cuba, North Korea, East Germany, China, all hurt the poor compared to their higher freedom neighbors, USA, South Korea, West Germany, and the highest ("standard of living" for poor too)in the world until the China took over Hong Kong.

Ed my questions is why are you trying to hurt the ones you say need help! Do you work for G.

Come on , Cuba, North Korea, East Germany, China, all hurt the poor...

I'll agree with you that the abuses of human rights, the environment, and many other areas were atrocious in these countries. I would caution you to use them as examples to support your argument that removal of government control = superior health care for its citizens.

I find it tragicomical that I received excellent free medical care as an exchange student (i.e. non-citizen) in the former East Germany (over 20 years ago). I often sadly quip that I look forward to the day when one can enjoy in the US the kind of medical care available over 20 years ago in the former East Germany.

As soon as I see the vast majority of industrialized nations experience a huge groundswell of grassroots support to scrap their socialized medicine/public health/public insurance plans in favor of a for-profit US model, I'll start to believe your perspective has merit.

-tl

Recognizing that answering disjointed ramblings is potentially fraught with misunderstandings, I will attempt a response.

Non-governmental agencies can play a role in addressing societal concerns, but are not capable of taking on the large-scale problems that government is designed to do.

I just don't understand where you get the idea that government takes away responsibilities, unless you simply do not understand the concept of representative government. I do not want more government control, just more control over government. Super-rich contributors are having more success at drowning out the voices of real people. That is just a problem, not a death-sentence mind you!

Your call to oversimplify the task of getting hundreds of millions of obstreperous human beings to work together for the common good of this country is naive and dangerous. You need to give some serious contemplation to the task of co-existing with your compatriots. It is not all about you.

N. B.: America is already great and as free as is practical; the task is to preserve all that.

Carla, yes I personal given chooses would select the option that's best for my family and hopefully so would my Doctor, as I helped make some very tough end of life decisions a long time ago. How can a bureaucracy improve my families personal needs and wants.

My point is yes East Germany was a failure, but it did some things well, most things bad. Freedom to choose and innovation provided better solutions, especially compared to regulation and limit freedoms.

I know people want to help, so do I, but putting resources into the most ineffective place(government) HURTS the poor, the Hospitals, and society. Again the freer the society the higher the standard of living for the poor. That freedom made us "America" great. And by the way the lack of competition ended East Germany.

Sorry I'm very dyslexic, I sould of said The east government could not compete with free enterprise system of the west and that help to end East Gremany.

Your quote

"I'll agree with you that the abuses of human rights, the environment, and many other areas were atrocious in these countries"

North Korea and South Korea strated at the same time. So did East and West Germany. Same with Hong Kong and China

You miss the point, for the poor, for health care, for thier society, to help the poor. The free the system to choose the better the treatment for it's women, racism, child birth rates, with higher innovation and weatlth accoss the board had much higher standards.

East Germany collapsed because the dying hand of their Soviet occupiers lost their four-decade long grip on the Germans. They'd have kicked out the Americans had we tried to maintain our occupation that long.

Sorry ED your quote "getting hundreds of millions of obstreperous human beings to work together for the common good of this country is naive and dangerous"

Your saying freedom is "Naive and dangerous" wow I though your quote of government additional involvement to increase responsibilities of our citizens was a reach, but after your thoughts the freedoms what makes America "naive and Dangerous" that government needs more control. I would like to taste your kool-aid.

Your goals have high ideals are great, your path just wrong,

Attack successful people (THE RICH) shows anger and hides the facts regulations and bureaucracy hurt the poor the most. Lets lift our social standard and be happy for those who are successful.

"Come on , Cuba, North Korea, East Germany, China, all hurt the poor..."

Cuba has its problems, but when it comes to health care we could learn a thing or two from them. They hurt the poor? BEFORE the earthquake hit Haiti, Cuba had 500 doctors helping the poor in Haiti. The World Health Organization report for Year 2000 ranked Cuba at 39th for attainment and performance. The U.S. was ranked at 37th. Since then, given the enormous increases in health care costs in the U.S., we would probably be below Cuba at 40-something if another survey were done now.

Little Andorra, which is smaller than some of our counties, came in fourth.

Life expectancy at birth in Cuba was estimated at 68.4 years, just under 70 years for the U.S.

The East Germans are now much better off under the West German system, but the German system is a combination of government and private insurance corporations that, unlike American insurance corporations, don't own the government.

Yes The more socialized the country, the lower the standard of living, thus the lowered standard of living hurt the poor most. (hopefully you know why)

The Higher the personal freedoms the higher the standard of living which is again is the benchmark for the poor.

Hey your using Cuba and East Germany, deeply broken societies to suport your cause.

Please, Please put the right decisions for the right reason ahead of politics, it was hard for me at first.

Bill, Thanks, For your pointing out Andorra, It just proves my point. I believe since Andorra is a tax haven, I assume it has very little government(It's new to me} involvement thanks for help!!!!!

I quote Wikipedia

It is a prosperous country mainly because of its tourism industry, which services an estimated 10.2 million visitors annually,[7] and also because of its status as a tax haven. It is not a member of the European Union, but the euro is the de facto currency. The people of Andorra have the 2nd highest human life expectancy in the world — 82 years at birth.[8] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andorra

Kari Quoted

"RDurig wrote: Lets increase free market competition, so we could lower cost of medical help, and increase the level of health care.

I wholeheartedly agree. The problem is that in many states there is only ONE insurance provider. In most places, there are only two. That's not free market competition. Furthermore, even where there are multiple insurance companies, most individuals only get one choice through their employer. That's not free market competition.

Personally, I agree with Ron Wyden that the best solution is to end the employer/health-care connection. Decouple employment from health care and everyone becomes free to shift their personal health care to another company with better rates, better service, etc. (Just like auto insurance.)

In the absence of that radical reform, adding a public option would be a great to create free market competition. Simply give employers another choice, and you'll get downward pressure on prices.

Free market competition really is a big part of the solution. What I don't understand is why so many conservatives, who are usually free market absolutists, fear the free market solution in health care.

Private monopolies and cartels can be just as oppressive to freedom as are governments. In fact, they're often even more effective, because they don't even pretend to be democratically and transparently governed."

Great Post Kari you got it!!!! lets open competition like you said and drive down cost and improve service, this will allow more worker being covered, great solution, great call. That is a win, win for everyone but the bureaucratizes.

You can all debate socialism versus corporations versus free market, but how many of you have had a serious but treatable disease for which you could not get treatment because you could neither afford its cost, or insurance to cover the cost. Where has the humanity gone in this country? Ration health care? We already do, not by person, age or illness but by the ability to pay.

Cindy,

I have a friend how does "Acts of Kindness", possibly for such situations like you're describing. No guarantee, but I could coordinate for possible help. Please email me at [email protected].

Thanks, Cindy, for reminding us that only in the US can one go bankrupt for simply having the audacity of getting sick, including those who have health insurance.

For all the arguments that went down the rathole re: healthcare in E. Germany and Cuba, no one has pointed out why we don't see other countries scrapping their systems for one like the US.

If I was Keith Olbermann's father, I would want to die as well.

Having an ignorant boob on every night giving my family a bad name, I too would opt for an out.

Way to further the discussion and show some compassion, blafor. Nothing persuades people more than attacking people rather than ideas. I don't wish misfortune on anyone including those with whom I disagree or those as thoughtless and rude as you.

Rdurig, your butchering of my comment proves your claim of dyslexia is either an understatement or a disingenuous disclaimer of responsibility. It is you who have the naive and dangerous idea, the one in which you oversimplify the task of getting people to work together for the good of their country. Lacking an understanding of freedom, you have nothing constructive to contribute to the debate.

Ed I'm sorry you have such anger, attacking others is just a way to hide and misinform. We need to be transparent and honest do right for the right reason.

I understand your trying to do right, as I am, but since your reasoning just doesn't support your argument. (and now your attack with anger) I don't beleive you realize yet, it took me awhile, but your hurting the ones you want to help, let's lift our society out of this anger and funk. I want a high society standard for the poor, and it's done by attaining more personal freedoms.

Yes it is simple, Einstein (by the way a Dyslexic)made science simple. That was his gift

Indeed you need to be transparent and honest RD, which would preclude butchering my comment to subvert my argument. You do nothing to advance your purported ideals of advancing society and freedom by dishonest argument.

What is really sad is that your stunted conception of freedom precludes actually undertaking the responsibility of working with your compatriots to form a consensus to solve problems in the real world. It's just too complicated... Yeah, that makes me angry!

If it were left to the likes of you, people would left to their own devices if they needed more resources than they have on hand to deal with their health crises. Wouldn't be prudent to impinge on your freedom to be self-absorbed!

RDurig is genuine and simply challenged by the language. Remember that when you're trying to score points.

"Yeah! Where the fuck is the compassion?" Americans. It must be big business why the system of health care is totally scrwed!

I am transparent and honest, you attack attack attack, and to credit yourself, you are admitting your have anger.

Anger is wrong, it's hurtful, try to be progressive and open, to do what's best for all!!

You will see the light it took me a while!

Sorry I don't have time or more honestly prefer to have a dialoged with anyone who use this forum as a way to vent their emotions of anger, to others!

If we had the Obama plan, Olberman's dad would have long past his economic viability and, the net present value of further investment in his life would be negative. How could they justify spending the public treasure on a negative return? What option would the public sector pursue to control the risk to public funds? What would be the final solution?

Anger when confronted by obstinate obstruction is laudable! The challenge to RD is not the language but the honest use of it.

I hope that the Democratic caucuses use a righteous anger to thrust aside the obstinate obstruction of the R's and use the rule of the majority to pass desperately needed, if necessarily complex, health care reform.

Get out of the way, RD and other obstructionists, the real progressives are on the march!

WTF, sounds like you are defending your sock-puppet. It is incumbent upon you to use civil language when commenting here, should you have forgotten your manners!

@Ed Bickford - funny how you tie the administration's inability to execute to the R's ... before Brown was elected, the D's had absolute domination of the legislative branch, the R's could have sat out and, the D's could have passed anything they wanted -- that is, if they could get their OWN caucus behind their schemes. Gladly, they could not and, your "march" has become a stumble. Carry on.

ed. This sounds like a quote you would support

"Capitalism as a whole will now be destroyed, the whole people will now be free."

Roll on trolls!

I wonder why Keith would let his dad be tortured by America's horrible health care system. You'd think the hypocrite would fly his dad to Cuba to experience the type of health care he wants to impose upon the rest of us. That shameless tool even tries to politicize the death of his own father. Does he realize that all the technology, drugs, advancements and skill trying to keep his father alive exists because of our health care system? The man is completely clueless. Have you no shame, sir?

"Olbermann deals with facts and reality..."

Bovine excrement. Olbermann lies continuously - most recently with his claim that Dan Abrams was fired from NBC. (He still works there.) And Olbermann is too cowardly to ever debate anybody he fundamentally disagrees with. He won't even debate college-age tea partiers from Texas. I'm sorry to hear about the suffering his dad is undergoing, but taking that fact and turning it into a political sledgehammer is thoroughly tasteless.

Ed vs the trolls (not). What a dignified approach to the subject.

Since we're going to drag it through the gutter...

<h2>This could be a revenue answer. What if folks that qualify for death with dignity sold the rights to be the one that puts them down to the highest bidder? I'm going to go that way. Tell me you wouldn't shell out big bucks to deliver the coup de grace!</h2>