It's just so strange - or dare I say partisan. The event is called "Kill the Bill Rally" for legislation that has already passed both houses of Congress, and in the Senate with a super-majority.

Why would anyone want to "kill" a bill that finally ends discrimination against Americans with pre-existing conditions? Why obstruct legislation that covers 31 million more people in the country that are uninsured (including me), makes health care quasi-affordable and reduces premiums when families, businesses and our government is going broke single-handily from these sky-rocketing costs? Even the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office says this sucker will reduce the budget deficit by $100 billion over the next 10 years.

Look, this health insurance reform is far from perfect. But at least it gets us closer to being a normal society when it comes to health care. So why are these folks on the right so vehemently opposed to some decent steps forward? Oh yeah, as P. J. O'Rourke aptly put it, "Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it."

Aaron N (#1): The purpose of Killing the Bill is to hurt Obama and his administration. Then folks like Michele Bachmann could say, "See, they couldn't get it done. They can't do anything right" (blah blah blah).

The bill is no doubt an improvement over our current insurance company-managed system of corporate enrichment, but it certainly could have been better if the Dems had:

--Realized at the beginning that the Republicans will not vote for any bill the Dems produced and stopped trying to please them;

--Left single-payer not just on the table but at the seat of honor ($400 billion saved per year while providing care to all);

--Avoided pandering to the insurance, drug and other medical industry "stakeholders" that led to such as NOT negotiating prices for Medicare drugs ($80 billion excess cost per year, some in taxes and the rest in higher premiums, co-pays, deductibles and doughnut hole purchases).

Neither you nor anyone anywhere should be denied care for any reason. Health care is a common good and a human right and deserves to be treated as such.

Check out what 65% of Americans want (but which was NOT admitted to the Washington discussion): Single payer national plan, HR-676, $400 billion per year saved; single payer Minnesota plan, SF118/HF135.

http://lloydletta.blogspot.com/2007/12/minnesota-majority-suggests-lack-of.html

Bachmann should be asked what she thinks about this statement from a Minnesota Majority position paper on Health Care:

FACT: The U.S. health care system serves the most diverse racial and ethnic population of any country in the world. This fact adversely affects every statistic by which we are compared to other countries. Black women, for a variety of reasons, are more prone to underweight babies than are Caucasian and Asian women. It is not surprising that Sweden has a lower infant mortality rate, or that Japan has a longer life expectancy than the United States does. They are nearly racially pure: we are not.

FACT: There is a direct correlation between two parent, marriage-based families and lower infant mortality rates. We need to do everything we can do to maintain traditional marriage.

Please note, after this got exposed on a number of blogs, and written up by Rachel Stassen Burger in the Pioneer Press, it got scrubbed by Minn Majority.

http://lloydletta.blogspot.com/2007/12/minnesota-majority-scrubs-racial-purity.html