Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

President Obama: Health Reform Will Put Patients’ Interests Ahead of Insurance Company Profits

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 10:52 AM
Original message
President Obama: Health Reform Will Put Patients’ Interests Ahead of Insurance Company Profits
Health Reform Will Put Patients’ Interests Ahead of Insurance Company Profits

Remarks of President Barack Obama
Weekly Address
Saturday, August 15th, 2009


This week, I’ve been traveling across our country to discuss health insurance reform and to hear directly from folks like you – your questions, your concerns, and your stories.

Now, I know there’s been a lot of attention paid to some of the town hall meetings that are going on around the country, especially those where tempers have flared. You know how TV loves a ruckus.

But what you haven’t seen – because it’s not as exciting – are the many constructive meetings going on all over the country where Americans are airing their hopes and concerns about this very important issue.

I’ve been holding some of my own, and the stories I’ve heard have really underscored why I believe so strongly that health insurance reform is a challenge we can't ignore.

They’re stories like Lori Hitchcock’s, who I met in New Hampshire this week. Lori’s got a pre-existing condition, so no insurance company will cover her. She’s self-employed, and in this economy, she can’t find a job that offers health care, so she’s been uninsured for two years.

Or they’re stories like Katie Gibson’s, who I met in Montana. When Katie tried to change insurance companies, she was sure to list her pre-existing conditions on the application and even called her new company to confirm she’d be covered. Two months later, she was dropped – after she’d already gone off her other insurance.

These are the stories that aren’t being told – stories of a health care system that works better for the insurance industry than it does for the American people. And that’s why we’re going to pass health insurance reform that finally holds the insurance companies accountable.

But now’s the hard part. Because the history is clear – every time we come close to passing health insurance reform, the special interests with a stake in the status quo use their influence and political allies to scare and mislead the American people.

As an example, let’s look at one of the scarier-sounding and more ridiculous rumors out there – that so-called "death panels" would decide whether senior citizens get to live or die. That rumor began with the distortion of one idea in a Congressional bill that would allow Medicare to cover voluntary visits with your doctor to discuss your end-of-life care – if and only if you decide to have those visits. It had nothing to do with putting government in control of your decisions; in fact, it would give you all the information you need – if you want it – to put you in control of your decisions. When a conservative Republican Senator who has long-fought for even more far-reaching proposals found out how folks were twisting the idea, he called their misrepresentation, and I quote, "nuts."

So when folks with a stake in the status quo keep inventing these boogeymen in an effort to scare people, it’s disappointing, but it’s not surprising. We’ve seen it before. When President Roosevelt was working to create Social Security, opponents warned it would open the door to "federal snooping" and force Americans to wear dog tags. When President Kennedy and President Johnson were working to create Medicare, opponents warned of "socialized medicine." Sound familiar? Not only were those fears never realized, but more importantly, those programs have saved the lives of tens of millions of seniors, the disabled, and the disadvantaged.

Those who would stand in the way of reform will say almost anything to scare you about the cost of action. But they won’t say much about the cost of inaction. If you’re worried about rationed care, higher costs, denied coverage, or bureaucrats getting between you and your doctor, then you should know that’s what’s happening right now. In the past three years, over 12 million Americans were discriminated against by insurance companies due to a preexisting condition, or saw their coverage denied or dropped just when they got sick and needed it most. Americans whose jobs and health care are secure today just don’t know if they’ll be next to join the 14,000 who lose their health insurance every single day. And if we don’t act, average family premiums will keep rising to more than $22,000 within a decade.

On the other hand, here’s what reform will mean for you.

First, no matter what you’ve heard, if you like your doctor or health care plan, you can keep it. If you don’t have insurance, you’ll finally be able to afford insurance. And everyone will have the security and stability that’s missing today.

Insurance companies will be prohibited from denying you coverage because of your medical history, dropping your coverage if you get sick, or watering down your coverage when it counts – because there’s no point in having health insurance if it’s not there when you need it.

Insurance companies will no longer be able to place some arbitrary cap on the amount of coverage you can receive in a given year or lifetime, and we will place a limit on how much you can be charged for out-of-pocket expenses – because no one in America should go broke just because they get sick.

Finally, we’ll require insurance companies to cover routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms and colonoscopies – because there’s no reason we shouldn’t be saving lives and dollars by catching diseases like breast cancer and prostate cancer on the front end.

That’s what reform means. For all the chatter and the noise out there, what every American needs to know is this: If you don’t have health insurance, you will finally have quality, affordable options once we pass reform. If you do have health insurance, we will make sure that no insurance company or government bureaucrat gets between you and the care that you need. And we will deliver this in a fiscally responsible way.

I know there’s plenty of real concern and skepticism out there. I know that in a time of economic upheaval, the idea of change can be unsettling, and I know that there are folks who believe that government should have no role at all in solving our problems. These are legitimate differences worthy of the real discussion that America deserves – one where we lower our voices, listen to one another, and talk about differences that really exist. Because while there may be disagreements over how to go about it, there is widespread agreement on the urgent need to reform a broken system and finally hold insurance companies accountable.

Nearly fifty years ago, in the midst of the noisy early battles to create what would become Medicare, President Kennedy said, "I refuse to see us live on the accomplishments of another generation. I refuse to see this country, and all of us, shrink from these struggles which are our responsibility in our time." Now it falls to us to meet the challenges of our time. And if we can come together, and listen to one another; I believe, as I always have, that we will rise to this moment, we will build something better for our children, and we will secure America’s future in this new century.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
HopeOverFear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 11:03 AM
Response to Original message
1. God, I love that man
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zalinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Oh, yeah, me too.
He's putting insurance companies ahead of people. Gotta love him for that.

zalinda
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. If he were putting people ahead of insurance companies, he would be for Single Payer
and not "another convoluted hybrid plan that will do little if anything to relieve our health care system of the $660 Billion dollar annual burden of obscene corporate profits, grotesque CEO salaries and the administrative nightmare caused by the existence of over 1200 competing insurance company systems," according to The Citizens Alliance for National Health Insurance.

There are very good reasons why AFL-CIO supports HR676!

What Is Single-Payer National Health Insurance?

To begin with, it is NOT “Socialized Medicine”, far from it in fact. Also, it does not mean that our medical system will be taken over by the government and run like the post office as many of our opposition friends would mistakenly have you believe.

Basically, House Resolution (H.R.) 676, the “New Expanded Medicare” bill now in the House of Representatives simply creates a new and far more functional “single payer” method of collecting and distributing payments for medical services while leaving the medical system itself completely alone and intact. This will eliminate the hundreds of complicated and redundant payment plans currently imposed on the system by private “for profit” health insurance companies and save literally BILLIONS of dollars every year by eliminating such wasteful duplication. This will allow your doctors offices and hospitals to function much more efficiently and serve your needs much more effectively as well. Just imagine what a huge benefit this will be!

Taxes: We all know that nothing of any real value is ever free, but if you think of the taxes that will be required to support national health insurance as simply a lower cost alternative to the staggering private health insurance premiums that most of us already have to pay but which will be totally eliminated under the new system, then it becomes immediately clear that this could be a really good deal after all!

http://www.hr676.org/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. No, if he wanted to but his head against a wall, he'd be spending time trying to push through
single payer, which would take a lot longer to phase in because you would have to phase out the entire existing health insurance system.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. What are you babbling about? Expanding Medicare to all would be easier
Edited on Sat Aug-15-09 11:47 AM by IndianaGreen
than any of the hybrid plans now being offered.

TITLE I—Eligibility and Benefits


SEC. 101. Eligibility and registration.

(a) In general.—All individuals residing in the United States (including any territory of the United States) are covered under the USNHI Program entitling them to a universal, best quality standard of care. Each such individual shall receive a card with a unique number in the mail. An individual’s social security number shall not be used for purposes of registration under this section.

(b) Registration.—Individuals and families shall receive a United States National Health Insurance Card in the mail, after filling out a United States National Health Insurance application form at a health care provider. Such application form shall be no more than 2 pages long.

(c) Presumption.—Individuals who present themselves for covered services from a participating provider shall be presumed to be eligible for benefits under this Act, but shall complete an application for benefits in order to receive a United States National Health Insurance Card and have payment made for such benefits.

http://johnconyers.com/hr676text
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 11:50 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Please, get real!
1965--Medicare and Medicaid were enacted as Title XVIII and Title XIX of the Social Security Act, extending health coverage to almost all Americans age 65 or over (e.g., those receiving retirement benefits from Social Security or the Railroad Retirement Board), and providing health care services to low-income children deprived of parental support, their caretaker relatives, the elderly, the blind, and individuals with disabilities. Seniors were the population group most likely to be living in poverty; about one-half had health insurance coverage.

1966--Medicare was implemented on July 1, serving more than 19 million individuals. Medicaid funding was available to States starting January 1, 1966; the program was phased-in by States over a several year period.

1967--An Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment (EPSDT) comprehensive health services benefit for all Medicaid children under age 21 was established.

1972--Medicare eligibility was extended to 2 million individuals under age 65 with long-term disabilities and to individuals with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Medicare was given the authority to conduct demonstration programs.

Medicaid eligibility for elderly, blind, and disabled residents of a State could be linked to eligibility for the newly enacted Federal Supplemental Security Income Program (SSI). Eighteen million individuals were covered by Medicaid.

1977--The Health Care Financing Administration was established by Secretary Califano to administer the Medicare and Medicaid Programs.

1980--Coverage of Medicare home health services was broadened. Medicare supplemental insurance, also called Medigap, was brought under Federal oversight.

link


That's just for 19 million, and leaving the health system intact.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HopeOverFear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Whoever that is you're arguing with I put on ignore a long time ago
so I don't know what he said to me lol but thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-16-09 07:30 AM
Response to Reply #5
30. Expanding Medicare, perhaps starting with ages 55-65, easier to explain, but corrupted Congress will
Edited on Sun Aug-16-09 07:33 AM by flpoljunkie
never support it, and there is not enough public support to get them there. Too many of them have lobbyists holding fundraisers for them and bundling those precious dollars they need to stay in office.

There are now 77 co-sponsors for H.R. 1826 in the House--A bill to reform the financing of House elections, and for other purposes--but only a lousy 4 co-sponsors to Dick's Durbin's companion bill S.752 in the Senate for the Fair Elections Now Act--A bill to reform the financing of Senate elections, and for other purposes. And, all four Senators face the voters in 2010-although I was very pleased Senator Russ Feingold co-signed the bill. But where is Bernie Sanders?

Sen Dodd, Christopher J. - 5/14/2009
Sen Feingold, Russell D. - 7/9/2009
Sen Gillibrand, Kirsten E. - 5/18/2009
Sen Specter, Arlen - 3/31/2009

It will be instructive to see how many Dems in the House for for single payer--as Nancy Pelosi has promised a vote in the House.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LWolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. That's true. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #3
11. True +1. The very fact that we are "negotiating" a "Public Option"...
...PROVES that Health Insurance Industry Profits come FIRST!




"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans. I want us to compete for that great mass of voters that want a party that will stand up for working Americans, family farmers, and people who haven't felt the benefits of the economic upturn."---Paul Wellstone






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
debbierlus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 02:15 PM
Response to Original message
9. Sorry, Mr Obama, ANYTIME insurance profits off health care dollars they are put ahead of us

You want to protect the for profit private health care insurace leeches.

Go ahead.

But, don't pretend you are advancing a bill that protect us over profit.

Insurance companies are leeches syphoning away almost a third of our health care dollars for delivering not a SINGLE health care service.

They are completely replaceable at a MUCH cheaper cost.

And, as for the public option, you have put that on the table to be completely negotiated away and whittled down to complete impotency. I have YET to hear you make a impassioned speech demanding a REAL public option with parameters for what that means.

And, THAT is pathetic.

You dismissed single payer at your first televised town hall with five trite words - 'It would be too disruptive'.

Doctors and nurses were arrested in Congress for protesting the lack of inclusion of ONE single payer advocate in the Senate Finance Committee. And, not a peep from you.

This whole bill is nothing but ensuring the insurance companies are allowed to continue the life blood out of the system.

And, it is disgusting.

You could have been a hero instead of corporate spokesman.

Shame on you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 02:25 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. K&R
Edited on Sat Aug-15-09 02:29 PM by IndianaGreen
Obama did not introduce his own health reform bill in Congress. Obama does not support HR676, Medicare for all, or Bernie Sanders Senate version. Obama cannot come out for Pelosi's bill for that would offend the DLC Democrats in the Senate. So what does Obama support?

We know the GOP is against ANY change, but what change is Obama specifically supporting in Congress?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. "But, don't pretend you are advancing a bill that protect us over profit."
Right, because doing nothing is better.

Whether you choose to admit it or not. If you save on health care, cannot be turn away or lose your coverage between jobs, the plan is putting people first.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Has Obama endorsed any of the bills currently in Congress?
Or is he still making deals out of public view, and keeping the White House logs secret as Bush did?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 02:58 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Maybe if you stopped freaking out, you'd be better able to keep track of what's going on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. Meanwhile, in the Senate Finance Committee
During the town hall, Obama brought up one of the biggest differences he is likely to have with the bipartisan plan that comes out of the Senate Finance Committee. Obama defended the "government option" he favors — one that Baucus so far doesn't — that would let those without private health insurance buy into a plan like Medicare.

"And not everybody, not even every Democrat, agrees on the public option, but I just want at least people to be informed about what the debate is about," Obama told the crowd of about 1,300 people. "The only point I want to make about this is whether you're for or against a public option, just understand that the public option is not a government takeover of health insurance."

Congressional colleagues have been increasingly frustrated with Baucus as he tosses aside liberal ideas like the government option, in favor of carving out a compromise with Republicans.

For his part, Baucus doesn't appear worried that a bipartisan group of six senators has already blown through several targets for producing a Finance Committee bill. The veteran senator has told Obama that "it will be ready when it's ready" — even if that means waiting until September.

Baucus said he met with the president Friday to discuss overall strategy. He said his bipartisan panel and the president all agree on the big picture — getting health insurance for almost everyone, controlling costs and doing so in way that can clear Congress.

"We're on the same page, the president and I," Baucus said in an interview after the event.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090815/ap_on_re_us/us_health_care_overhaul_montana

And why does Obama need Baucus? Carbon cap and trade legislation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #14
20. They would prefer he endorsed a perfect bill that is destined to fail
than to actually get something passed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. Putting Single Payer off the table, and off the debate, is not democratic
What this country needs is a real debate in which all options are fully discussed and weighted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. lol there is a debate just not the debate you and I want


The reality is that this country is very conservative when it comes to change and logical scientific arguments are not going to win, if that were true we would have converted to metric measurements 30 years ago.

The only way to single payer is to have a strong public option that will enables people to get comfortable with it and builds a constiuency that will demand expansion.

Even the strongest supporters of single payer understand this reality and have accepted the strategy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. We are not going to get a viable public option
and you can take that to the bank.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. based on your complete misreading of the political temper of the country
I wouldn't take it to the piggy bank

But every little difference may become a big one if it is insisted on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dflprincess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 10:29 PM
Response to Reply #9
28. +1000!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 03:02 PM
Response to Original message
15. Who was invited to the WH and to testify before Congress and who
was excluded, people can say anything, watch was is done instead.

Nuff said.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. Obama has kept secret the White House visitors' log
just as Bush did. Why? Where is the promised transparency in government?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. CREW did obtain some names, but this should have reported
instead of having to fight for it.

:(

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PurityOfEssence Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 03:22 PM
Response to Original message
19. Hint: middle-of-the-roaders are condemned to fighting two-front wars...
Obama has done very well by carefully walking the middle path, avoiding controversy, and being on both sides of most issues that he couldn't avoid taking a stance on, but he's in a different world now, and the tactics need to change. It's often hard to convince people who've basically used one simple tactic and been exceedingly successful with it that IT'S TIME TO CHANGE.

Then again, there's another problem: this may very well not be mere Clintonian need to be loved by everyone, it might be the manifestation of a true belief in the sanctity of for-profit commerce as the ONLY viable mode of human interaction. I don't think he's a monarchic corporatist, but he's DEFINITELY a pretty solid corporatist in not merely a fellow traveler.

If he's charting this middle course with some misguided belief that the reactionaries will go easy on him, then he's in for a nasty surprise, and just like Bill Clinton, he's apparently never going to learn. I don't think this is merely expediency; I think he's actually of the belief that private enterprise is NECESSARY in virtually every sphere of life. Whatever, though; it really doesn't matter.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. HINT..you don't know
what you're talking about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PurityOfEssence Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #22
25. Thanks for the drive-by; care to elaborate?
Slap-downs are easy; debate takes some work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-15-09 05:03 PM
Response to Reply #19
26. Great post n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-16-09 07:04 AM
Response to Original message
29. No, you will NOT be able to keep your doctor
Insurance companies will still have their preferred provider lists, and keep telling you who you can see without paying an arm and a leg.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-16-09 08:14 AM
Response to Original message
31. Democrats have tried three times to reform healthcare
1970 -73 Kennedy tables single payer in favor of HMO's- fail

1992 - 94 Clinton tables single payer in favor of managed competition aka HMO's and a few regiulations - fail

2009 Obama tables single payer in favor of a privatized public option (very weak public option in the house bills and privatized public option in the HELP bill) and a few regulations- may pass but will fail when implemented.


It seems to me the folks who are pounding their heads on a brick wall aren't single payer advocates.

Fatal flaw- it leaves for profit insurance companies in charge of all access. Every other indusrialized country understands this basic fact and refuses to allow for profit private ins to take any role that is not severely regulated in price, coverage and profit or allowed to serve only a niche market of luxury add ons.


Being uniquely american = being stupid and easily manipulated.

60% of doctors and 58% of americans want medicare for all. The insurance industry is telling our representatives it's impossible. Our representatives parrot that back to us and even supposed "progressives" parrot it to each other to squash any talk or action towards real reform.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-16-09 08:57 AM
Response to Original message
32. Sebelius: Obama OK with insurance co-ops
Sebelius: Obama OK with insurance co-ops


18 mins ago

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama's health secretary is suggesting the White House is ready to accept nonprofit insurance cooperatives instead of a government-run public option in a health overhaul plan.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius says Obama still believes there should be choice and competition" in the health insurance market — but that a public option is "not the essential element."

Obama has been pressing for the government to run a health insurance organization to help cover the nation's nearly 50 million uninsured. But he had not seen a not-for-profit co-op as sufficient to offer consumers choice and competition that would bring down the costs of private insurance.

Sebelius spoke on CNN's "State of the Union."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090816/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_sebelius_health_care


Privatized public option is not putting patients interests above that of ins. companies.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6318017
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 12:15 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC