Please don't miss the irony that the reform opponent, who had his finger bitten off and reattached, had Medicare for his medical expenses.

And don't miss the reality that if he hadn't had to pay for those benefits as a taxpayer he would have had more money for private coverage. Good for him that he recovered some of the stolen money that was his.

We have no weapons allowed in court houses (and on dangerous school campuses), for example.

Not only that, but his employer probably did what others have done, and put their sufficiently old retirees on Medicare (ending their employer health benefits). And even before it started happening, everyone who could think realized that employers would be tempted to drop drug coverage for retirees after Part D (the new drug benefit for Medicare) had been enacted.

Example:

http://knowledge.wpcarey.asu.edu/article.cfm?ar…

And, related to it, for example:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/04/business/04re…

And it was an obvious concern with expansion of S-CHIP.

http://www.ahrq.gov/chip/Content/crowd_out/crow…

And now, with the current Dem plan?

Of course, say the — [sigh] — proponents, there is no such problem at all with the “public option.”

Of course, say knowledgeable people, it will happen, and this is the intention, no doubt, of some.

[grin]

That's what Conrad Dobler (rep as a dirtyfootball player) said after a complaint he bit someone's hand.

“I only bit one guy: Doug Sutherland of the Minnesota Vikings. He put his fingers through my face mask, and I don't think they were there to stroke my mustache. So I bite one finger in my life, and I don't even chew on it. The legend grew from there. It's almost like I'm worse than Jeffrey Dahmer.”

http://www.esquire.com/features/what-ive-learne…

“The anti-socialist health care advocate is on Medicare.”

He doesn't have a choice. The government forced him to pay into it his whole life. So if he wants to voice his opinion on expanding government, you would expect him to forfeit the benefit that he was forced to pay for?

“Or, since Obama says he's going to pay for the new stuff with undisclosed, unquantified “savings and efficiencies” from Medicare, the guy might very well be upset as to why his program gets curtailed for the benefit of someone else. “

Good point, especially since he has disclosed one of those “inefficiencies” called Medicare Advantage: http://sovereignmind.wordpress.com/2009/08/29/i…

Actually, Father Time, you do. If you have a retirement account you're probably a shareholder in at least one health insurer. You get to control the company exactly like you control the government, by electing directors who will do your bidding.

I'm not against guns but this does bring up a rather interesting point…. when you know the situation will be volatile should guns be allowed?

It's happened before. Horsey (good lib cartoonist) didn't neglect this.

http://www.seattlepi.com/horsey/viewbydate.asp?…

(What does he think of Dubya?)

http://www.seattlepi.com/horsey/empirerising/

I've already told the Editors they should use this guy's work to start threads on this site.

http://www.seattlepi.com/horsey/

“We don’t want the government running programs”– What? Who the hell started this stupidity anyway?

The people control the government every two years via elections. You don’t control Insurance companies via elections. Giving Business Power over Government defeats your Constitutional power to bend Government to the Will of the People! What, you think “business” is going to, in any way what-so-ever, be concerned about you?

Btw – it's entertaining, but very very sad, watching the Righties call the Lefties bullies and the Lefties call the Righties bullies. This health care debate (my view) has now reached a point where opinions are hardened, nobody is likely to change anybody's mind, and both sides have been reduced to debasing the other. Why does it always have to come down to that?

The attacks on the public (including the large fraction that is strongly opposed to the public option, not just to the overall slightly negative view of the entire effort) by proponents, including the media, by using disruptive and worse events to try to smear everyone else through guilt-by-association portrayal using these worst protestors, have not gone unnoticed, though it's not surprising.

That this event ended sensationalistically with misconduct by the supporter, the act that was widely reported, is surprising — it's “dog bites man.”

* * *

“it looks like we are about to get a very lefty health care bill”

It remains to be seen, but the public option retains substantial support and the liberal Dems are strongly in favor of it (many of whom because they support the real reason for its being there, namely to replace privately-controlled and paid-for health care with federal government health care). I'll be interested in how Obama portrays this on September 9 (he'll probably be incorrect or misleading again) and what legislation finally results. It'll probably involve a modified public option, wholly unnecessary, and I'll be interested not only in the details of this thing but in what else is in the legislation, both actual reform elements and whatever silliness or largesse the Dems place in it.

Wait… Let me get this straight… The guy who STARTED the fight was from the right, and the LEFT is the side doing the bullying? While biting off someone's finger is inexcusable, I don't know that you couldn't argue self defense for the other guy had he not run off.

Oddly enough, this comes out the same day as news about a fight breaking out at another town hall here in Alabama– where the opponent to reform threw the first punch.

dear Mr. Gandhi, just wanted to let you know we are approaching the leading edge of mobocracy. . .

Good thing there were no loaded weapons involved when the anti-public option [on Medicare..lol.] guy slugged the pro-public guy. Things could've gotten a lot more ugly.