I believe the repubilcans should start the meeting with one question to the liar in charge; Is congress going to do away with both versions of National Health Care and start over with small reforms in plain language that all can agree on, like tort reform, free market reforms of interstate access, and reduced government regulations? And when they are denied this, walk out!!!!

If past performance is any indication, Obama is merely calling together the Republicans to give them his list of demands. His calls for bipartisanship mean nothing more than getting both sides to agree with him. His ego is so large, it needs its own zip code. All he is going to do is tell the Republicans, "This is what I want to do, and your concerns are not worth listening to. I only called you together to try to fool the American public into thinking we are all working together."

"It's as if the patient has a minor fever and the Democrats (as doctor in this example) want to cut off his arms and legs. The Republicans want to give the patient two aspirin. "Compromise" means the Republicans agree to amputate only one arm and one leg."

The most succinct distillation of the health care debate ever written. That's precisely what the Democrats are doing, and that's precisely what "compromise" with them always means.

It's time to quite fooling around with the Democratic-controlled media and start telling it like it is. The Liberals have been running around like schoolyard bullies telling Americans that Republicans don't have any ideas. That's a lie and they know it. Yet nobody could ever claim the GOP has done everything possible to bring those ideas -- fine ideas they are too -- to the attention of the American people. If it wasn't for Conservative columnists like Ms Coulter, George Will, Charles Krauthammer and Thomas Sowell, and talkers like Rush and Glenn Beck, nobody would have heard of those ideas. As it is, we need to present the GOP alternative to Americans in a clear, plain-English manner, rather in the tradition of Ronald Reagan. When they see how and why those ideas are better, they will get on board in droves.

In fact, that's exactly what a lot of us Conservatives in the blogosphere said the GOP should do at the start of this phony summit. Go on the offensive, take the case to the American people, and let the fur fly. Obama controls the Oval Office, the House, the Senate, the media, Hollywood, etc. He's given 9 million speeches on this one subject alone. Yet he still claims the problem is that he hasn't gotten his message out. So we're not simply winning this argument. Against those kinds of odds we are totally kicking their butts. Now is the time to go on the offensive, take away their steam, and make the debate about OUR ideas for a change. Then Americans can come away from this fight with GENUINE health care reform instead of Socialized medicine, which helps nobody but Democrats. It's a win-win!

Why is it that the President of the U.S. uses 1970's cold war rhetoric to refer to the Republican party when he calls us "The Opposition Party"? The name calling is getting a bit old, don't you think? His rudeness to Sen. McCain last week was appalling. Why do we not call him on this? If my memories haven't totally fled me, we fought for EQUALITY in the sixties, not special treatment and tolerance. Why can't anyone stand up and discuss how this is patronizing at best? Maybe the RNC Chair should be the one to take this tack?

Why don't we have candidates being prepared for the 2012 election? The time is now, not the last second like we did in 2008. Please encourage the powers that be to get with it and move ahead or we will be stuck with the same inhabitant of the Oval Office for another four years.

Best regards,

Ed

Let's have a real blog discussion:

As if Republicans have not been rude to the President? You lie! As if you did not read the above column? Give me a break! The President took on the whole Republican leadership at the caucus and at the meeting with the Senators and he held his ground in the debate quite well, and, if you want to get catty, he is no George Bush!

So, let's get right to the point and talk "socialism":

Is Massachusetts a socialist state because of its health care plan? Yet, the Massachusetts plan has a Republican governor and a brand new U.S. Republican Senator who support it? Am I correct?

Do you live in a state? In that state is law enforcement organized and paid for by public tax money? What about your county agencies? Or, your city police, fire, and water departments? Socialist policies?

Health care also deserves public support for everyone, paid for by taxes, as is public education. It is all called "love your neighbor," or is that not an acceptable social policy? The Catholic Hospital Association supports national health care because it is the right thing to do for human beings.

What about private enterprise? It is still allowed to exist. If someone wants to contract for private fire and burglar or body guard protection or a gardener, they are allowed to do so.

The fact is the USA has millions of poor citizens, including children, who live without medical insurance because they cannot afford it, due to inadequate income and living wages, which is why I support national health care in the United States of America.

Gene Garman, M.Div., author of The Religion Commandments in the Constitution: A Primer

Tort reform, yes... but put out of business the lawyers who can keep the medical profession honest and competent? Checks and balances are necessary everywhere. Reducing the punitive damages, sure, but I was a patient for a long time. Trust me. Not everyone's and angel.