Anyone who can see that Sarah Palin has from start to finish been a vapid, hypocritical, sensationalist hack isn’t completely unreedemable.

Rasmussen now has over 40% of voters *strongly* opposed to Obama and to Obamacare, and a majority opposing Obama.

Obama will only worry about his ratings when someone other than Ramussen does the polling. It’s well known they have a srtong Republican bias in their numbers.

(A) That’s false generalization (what about that College kid that stumped BHO in Colorado?), (B) that still covers at least half the voters, and surely represents ‘mainstream America’ and (C) How did you detect the ‘class’? The lack of ascots? No Benzes and Jaguars in the parking lot?

(A) I plead guilty to generalizing the average Tea Party goer, but I don’t think calling the vast majority of them older is false. (BTW, did you mean the one who worked for the RNC? That’s certainly not your average college kid!)
(B) That’s certainly true, but isn’t this same segment of “mainstream America” thats been against every liberal movement and government action since FDR’s time? (And where were they during the last 8 years protesting government overreach and budget deficits?)
(C) Guilty again; I was just looking at how people in the videos were dressed and how they were talking/screaming, when I made my comment. I didn’t detect any graduate degree holders, millionaires, welfare recipients, non-whites, children, gays, or disabled/sick Americans protesting against health care reform. Did you?

” When I look at those protesters, I see that 99% of these folks are white, over 40, and lower/middle class.”

(A) That’s false generalization (what about that College kid that stumped BHO in Colorado?), (B) that still covers at least half the voters, and surely represents ‘mainstream America’ and (C) How did you detect the ‘class’? The lack of ascots? No Benzes and Jaguars in the parking lot?

You would have the lawyers bill and the doctors bill, respectively.

(And I may be missing some of the doctors.)

Basic problems include new drug introduction and how long that patent is protected. The longer the protection the longer the R and D costs may be amortized and new drug will cost less before it goes to generics and then costs even less. The shorter the protection, the higher the consumer cost, because the Pharma company would like to recover the R and D costs, and will charge what it takes to make that money until generics appear.

If they don’t cover those costs (and make a little profit), then R and D will suffer, and fewer new drugs will come to market. Cap what they can make on new drugs and you essentially cap new drugs from being made in the first place.

New tests? Same basic problem. They need to pay for the R and D or it’s not going to be worth the innovation. Of course, cost avoidance, in the form of malpractice avoidance, may spur the development of new tests for various conditions. That’s not guaranteed, nor can one predict where development might occur. Most malpractice insurance companies don’t own pharmaceutical outfits.

If Obama is squealing about “unnecessary tests” (and there for a while he was), then it is illogical (and purely political) to avoid tort reform. Of course, with politicians like John Edwards, we know why we won’t see “Democrats for tort reform.” Now don’t we?

The differences between the two are just semantics.

Either option means the government controls health care and that is what very few people in this country wants.

If you want to see ‘insurance co-ops’ at work look at Medicare.

I did think that was one of my more clever retorts.

And soup? I wouldn’t dare suggest comparing a fellow citizen to a Nazi (upon penalty of banishment by Rick), but are you trying to tell Republicans “NO SOUP FOR YOU”?

I know, that’s pretty weak humor, but I’m supposed to be working, and its tough being creative when you have to keep hitting the “boss” key.

The town hall voices merely were a reflection of the wrath this failed power grab stirred, and voters will register their anger at the polls against this slimy crew next year and again in 2012.

But are the town hall voices representative of America? When I look at those protesters, I see that 99% of these folks are white, over 40, and lower/middle class. (Not exactly the Democratic party’s base of supporters.) Were some of these folks disgruntled Obama supporters, he might have to worry about 2012, but I’m willing to bet that practically all of the town hall “angry participants” all voted for McCain or Ron Paul anyway. Certainly they can register their “anger” at the ballot box, but its not as if they weren’t going to vote against the Democrats anyway.

I’m flattered you read my book, GONE. Don’t forget, the second one, HUNGER is out now. And LIES comes out in fall of 2010.

And check out THE MAGNIFICENT 12, coming fall of 2010. To a store near you.

Oh, wait, that looks like advertising. Let’s disguise that with some politics so Rick won’t notice:

Republicans eat too much soup!

They’ll call it the Ted Kennedy Health Care Reform.

Heh. And coyotes will talk, and snakes will fly. You really are good at fiction, Michael.