Well I learned pretty quickly when my husband was in the military that more often than not the civilian doctors that worked for the military hospitals and clinics were pretty worthless. The doctors in uniform were generally good doctors.

But what I have really learned, and assume may become moot if the government starts setting the fees, is that the VA can't keep doctors. Over the course of two years my husband has had 5 different doctors, and all 5 of them think they know better than the last guy and start playing around with his medications etc. He had at least one doctor that I thought was a complete a total loon-and I am not convinced he even bothered to read my husband's medical history.

I don't know what explains the high turnover rate for the VA doctors, low pay would very likely top the list if I had to make a guess.

Outside of the public option, which is only a portion of what the president wants to do, and may not even pass in the Congress, how exactly will the government be "running" healthcare...

How else will health care get paid for... The government controls the budget. They also would control the amount of money, and where it will be distributed out to...

By the way there are no Black Helicopters here. Just studied my constitution. I know it will never be that perfect. Of course, we have already done many things that don't really follow the constitution. Often times learning the lesson the hard way. I just don't think it's irrelevant, and should be respected as premier guideline when making important decisions that affects the country, and the People. You don't want to turn a bad crisis into a worse crisis. Know what I mean?

Let me guess you don't.

So I guess that doctors who work for and/or get paid by the government are automatically no good because the government is involved? And how do you know for certain that the government would not have allowed that scenario to occur? How do you know that under another private insurance plan, that scenario would have been denied to you? As for teats and your nickel, that ship has already sailed, as the government already has a hand in healthcare involving seniors, the poor, government workers, and the military...I'm sure there are plenty of horror stories there (just like in the private sector) but I'll bet there are a lot of satisfied customers as well (just like in the private sector)...

For example, when everyone has a record from being treated under this new socialized health care system you will become one more number the government can check up on.

No doubt followed by the black helicopters...

The governments only involvement in it's citizens should be to establish law, and enforce it only when an individual steps over the line.

That genie was let out of the bottle a long time ago, and just about any conservative attempt to put it back in has failed miserably...

This is why I have concluded, that this idea for government run Health care is not the right way to go period.

Outside of the public option, which is only a portion of what the president wants to do, and may not even pass in the Congress, how exactly will the government be "running" healthcare...

This mentality of governance in my opinion seems to ignore the Founder's of this nation's original vision and, purpose behind the making of our Constitution. We our suppose to be a Republic, and less a Democracy. The governments only involvement in it's citizens should be to establish law, and enforce it only when an individual steps over the line. People should feel that they're protected, and safe under their rulers. Anything beyond this point pollutes the political atmosphere. It becomes more about personal gain, and self interest. This can become disastrous when trying to make decisions without being biased.

This is why I have concluded, that this idea for government run Health care is not the right way to go period. It might have some advantage's at first, just not in the long run. It will further the corruption in politics, and not help the nation in the future. The businesses, and health care should be left to our private sector.

Well you can add me to the list of people who haven't ever really had huge issues with their insurer but has a whole slew of apathy and problems dealing with government agencies.

But I am not naive enough to think that all private insurers are sweetness and light-but at least with a private insurer there are other avenues of complaint. I think the real naivete is in believing that the government run system won't be just as bad, when it comes to issues of having things covered and issues of appeal and what not.

I am pretty sure the government is not going to better when it comes to costumer service, when there are problems with coverage, and I only have to use my experiences while in the military and with the VA to know it likely will be worse.

On the other hand, I have aged considerably trying to reach a human being in almost every government agency I try to contact. It makes no difference whether it's federal, state or local. They do not care. Repeat - they do not care. There are no consequences for poor or nonperformance.

You're lucky to have had such good outcomes with your insurer, but I'm sure that there are other people who have had bad experiences, even ones as bad as your nightmare scenario regarding government agencies...as for caring, the flip side of that is that private insurers are in the business of making money, so I'm sure we could find horror stories of people who have been denied coverage or benefits because such things would put a dent in the bottom line...sorry to interrupt the anti-government jihad and capitalism bandstand parade, but it is quite a silly caricature to paint government as simply evil and private business as a wonderful panacea...

Oh my, the delusions of someone with an inflated opinion of himself...I hardly "bite at your ankles" every time you post something...do try to keep that ego in check, 'k? I was referring more to the consensus among the American people, as opposed to just the opinions of people around here...

Except why should we break what works for some since others can't have it?

Why not actually try to diagnose why some people don't have insurance and figure out how to fix that problem?

But I don't think it is selfishness or a lack of sympathy for those without for me to say I like the insurance I have and I don't want to see it taken away and replaced by something that may not be as good.