Routt County Republican Robin Somerville reacts to a comment by Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin during a Republican viewing party Thursday night at Storm Mountain Ranch.

Photo by Matt Stensland

Routt County Republican Robin Somerville reacts to a comment by Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin during a Republican viewing party Thursday night at Storm Mountain Ranch.

Republicans praise Palin at Storm Mountain Ranch

Advertisement

— Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin held the rapt attention of Republican debate watchers Thursday night as a lodge at Storm Mountain Ranch was filled with hushed, intent local conservatives.

Only occasionally was the silence punctuated by jeers at Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., or cheers shouted after Palin's statements.

Host Mary Allen expected Palin's performance to be a "grand slam home run" before the debate began. After the show ended, she said she was satisfied that Palin had completed her goals.

"I think it was (a grand slam). She was composed, in control and on message," Allen said.

Allen described herself as an avid conservative who has lived in Steamboat half the year for the past 8 years. She said she wanted to host an informal Republican watch party because she "was upset about the fact that I felt alone in this community."

To remedy the situation, she hosted more than 50 people she described as "concerned with preserving conservative values" for dinner and drinks. The lodge held three televisions, including one large projection system with CNN's coverage of the debate.

Allen also invited Retired Air Force Col. Tom Kirk, who was held as a prisoner of war with Republican presidential nominee John McCain in Hanoi, Vietnam. Kirk, who shared his experience and endorsed McCain before the debate, said he was pleased by Palin's performance.

"I think that, fundamentally, Sarah Palin came across very strongly in knowing what she was talking about," Kirk said. "She is eminently more qualified to be vice president than Barack Obama is qualified to be president."

He also complimented Biden's performance, calling him a "gentleman," but said he thought "only half of it was true."

Some of the strongest crowd reactions during the night were jeers when Biden said climate change is manmade, and a shouted "Amen" when Palin said she did not want to redefine marriage to include same-sex couples. Biden and Palin agreed on that issue, with both parties saying they would like to offer the same protections and services to same-sex couples but not change the meaning of marriage.

Despite being the star of the night, Palin barely was mentioned in the group's discussions leading up to the debate, with the focus resting on McCain. Semi-retired Steamboat Springs resident Buck Buckland said he was wary of how Palin would perform in the debate, but he was pleasantly surprised by the outcome.

"I was a little hesitant with the idea that (Palin) wasn't up to the task, but she was up to the task, and she handled herself very proficiently," Buckland said. "She was not as knowledgeable and polished as she can be, but she proved she's a fast study."

Chris Allen, a construction worker in Steamboat Springs, said he appreciated Palin's lack of "polish" because it showed she was not a typical politician.

"I came away with a very favorable impression of Gov. Palin. I thought she articulated the issues very well, particularly when you notice she's not a Washington insider as she debated a Washington insider," he said.

According to CNN polls conducted after the debate, 87 percent of debate watchers thought Palin performed better than expected, with 7 percent responding that she performed worse. Despite that, Biden was considered the winner of the debate with 51 percent of responses. Palin claimed 36 percent.

Comments

Duke_bets 6 years, 2 months ago

'She articulated the issues well'............That is funny. Too bad she did not got a very darn good heck of a' education at a golly gee college.

And, she's more qualified? For What??????????????????

0

Terry Noble 6 years, 2 months ago

I agree with Doc Buckland and his take on the debate. I also noticed Sen. Biden left himself open for cheap shots (saying he wasn't sure but..) and Sarah didn't go there. Seems the Democrats are specialist at cheap shops and the Republicans are more like adults. If you check you'll notice that snowbow cut and pasted the same comment in the article about the Democratic group at Sunpies. If Obama wins this election I will have to do a lot more praying is all I have to say. I'm proud to be a Republican and proud to be a veteran. I will vote for John McCain as he is best qualified for the job. He has proven he is the best man for the job. Cheap shots come from cheap people.

0

Jason Krueger 6 years, 2 months ago

Did anyone else notice the irony regarding where both parties chose to hold their debate viewing? The Democrats (the party of the intellectual elites) chose to hold it in a public "working mans" pub. The Republicans (main stream Americans) chose to hold it on a private compound. Certainly for those folks who own land in Storm Mountain Ranch or the handful of other quasi-ranches in this valley voting Republican will help you to continue enjoying subsidies including the tax credit you receive on your supposed "farm land". For the rest of us who earn a living by taking care of your estates, educating your grandkids, and ensuring your saunas stay running all winter, it seems the Democrats have a few better ideas.

0

Duke_bets 6 years, 2 months ago

Steamboatdog - Why is it that proud Republicans always bring up being a veteran? I personally know plenty of Democrats that fought in the jungle and they never bring that up when talking politics.

0

nikobesti 6 years, 2 months ago

Steamboatdog: I like the Palin I saw yesterday better than the one I saw at the RNC. If you watched that speech, there's absolutely no way you can say that she did not level cheap shot after cheap shot. Her RNC speech was filled full of lies and insults. Criticizing Obama for being a community organizer is not a cheap shot? I'm glad she stepped out of the sewer yesterday. Biden did go after McCain, but the attacks were true, unlike Palin's lies during RNC.

Sarah Palin is not prepared to be VP. This is not a huge issue in itself. I don't she'll have much to offer McCain's administration, but I don't think she'll hurt things. What's more important here than Palin's lack of qualifications is McCain's decisions making. What does this say for how he will select his cabinet? Will he again defer to the evangelicals when nominating Supreme Court appointees? McCain either showed a lapse of judgment or showed that he'll cave to interests within his party. Both possibilities are extremely dangerous for our country.

0

Fred Duckels 6 years, 2 months ago

Sarah, coming from a small town has probably been frequently labeled as a hayseed for most of her adult years. Being in that position she has learned to cope by going along with the role and using her talents, and the fact that she will usually be underestimated, to her advantage. Those who devalue her may be the real hayseeds. They may well have fallen into her trap. She is a dumb fox, thats how she has gotten where she is. Muhammed Ali had this down to a science, meanwhile laughing all the way to the bank.

0

Zac Brennan 6 years, 2 months ago

Jason, I too noticed the ironic locations the parties were held. The Republicans were in their tidy, plastic, rustic bunker hiding in fear. Which they preach 24/7. The Dems were out in public enjoying the show. As a Vietnam veteran I'm proud to be a Democrat. And not buying the whole boogey-man fear thing. Go Obama-Biden!!

0

justice4all 6 years, 2 months ago

I intently watched the debate. After hearing Palin's presentation, I have made up my mind to vote for NOBAMA. Yes, that is right----NOBAMA!! Go PALIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

0

Terry Noble 6 years, 2 months ago

I will stand by my original comment and also remain a proud veteran I don't care what you say. At least I put my ass on the line for my country! I too have rights and freedom of speech is one of them. I never said Obama would be a bad president I said McCain would be a better one. Maybe Republicans are MORE proud of being veterans would be a plausible explanation. As far as the notion all rich people are bad that also is a fallacy. Do I detect jealousy in your comment or resentment for those who give you employment, Jason?

0

JLM 6 years, 2 months ago

Oh, what silly nonsense! Of course, it's better to be rich than poor. Stop flagellating yourself, you pathetic pretentious losers.

And this nonsense about being the party of the intelligent elites? Poor folk can't afford a quality education that's why Barack and Obama are products of affirmative action.

And, what did they do as soon as they received their free education?

That got on down the road to riches!

Here's a secret --- it's OK to come to work early, stay late and work through lunch sometimes --- cause it will make you rich. And when you are rich you can do all kinds of good works. You can fund all the noble causes that catch your fancy.

The Republicans want everyone, including the pathetic self flagellating pseudo intellectual Democrats, to become rich. That's the American dream!

It ain't the IQ, babe, it's the I WILL!

Besides somebody has to make the money to fund your tax credits, don't they? LOL

0

JLM 6 years, 2 months ago

Hey, Jason, my hot tub needs cleaning. Could you please drop by on Saturday and give it a good scrub? Thanks, Jason.

BTW, that "working mans pub" --- it's owned by a Republican.

Just kidding you, Jason! Sorry!

But really, can you please take care of the hot tub for me? Thanks, Dude.

0

Jason Krueger 6 years, 2 months ago

Surely you learned how to scrub a latrine when you were in the military JLM. Hot tub cleaning is the same thing. You should do just fine! As for jealousy, Steamboatdog: No- just the observation that the party who claims to represent the "little people" also goes out of their way to make sure those little people stay "behind the jewelry counter, not in front". (JLM- you love digging up quotes- do you know where that one came from???). To clarify also Steamboatdog, no one "gave" me employment. I am hired based on my skills. My employment agreements are ones based on mutual respect and value between employer and employee. I know appropriate use of language is considered elitist among backers of Bush or Palin but it really does help to improve communication.

0

freerider 6 years, 2 months ago

GOLLY ...WINKY WINKY , YOU BETCHA , Hi I'm Chatty Cathy and I'd like to be your next president ...let's stay in Iraq forever .....and give lots of tax payer money to bailout wall street . I support Fascism ...cuz it's the corporate way ...my I.Q. is 78 ,,,,, I like AK47'S and to kill animals wearing a bikini ....I've got 5 kids cuz my husband's organ don't have no stops....blush ...my favorite person is Ann Coulter , and Rush Limbaugh ...golly bye bye for now

0

David Stone 6 years, 2 months ago

They all must be dreaming,or have been drinking the Kool Aid again!It is too bad that McCain was not,"allowed", to have Liberman,or Tom Ridge as his running mate.How could any sane person see Sarah Palin as US President.Just the thought frightens me into voting for the other team.

0

Terry Noble 6 years, 2 months ago

Again I will stick to what I originally said. Your attacks and personal tirades not only speak for you but your party. When will people learn to think before they speak! These blogs are a dead give away as to who is using common sense and not IQ.

0

JLM 6 years, 2 months ago

The Palin - Biden debate brought into clear focus the learning experiences of representing or governing a "little state."

One state has only 780,000 people while the other has 670,000 --- not a huge difference.

One state has annual revenue of $13.6 billion and an annual budget of $11.4B.

The other state has annual revenue of $3.37B and an annual budget of $3.25B.

Alaska has a total of 670,000 people, an annual revenue of $13.6B and a budget of $3.25B while having no income tax and providing each of its citizens with an annual payment from its PFD (Permanent Fund Dividend Division of Alaska) which increased from a 2007 amount of $1,654 to $3,269 in 2008.

Why did it increase? Sarah Palin became Governor!

So who do you want worrying about your 401K for the next 4 years? Who?

The Governor of Alaska who has overseen the Alaska economy and doubled the PFD payment in one year? Or the Senator from MBNA? LOL --- pretty easy choice, eh?

For me, I want that point guard, beauty queen, moose killing, field dressing, hottie --- the 'Cuda!

And, hey, have a nice damn day!

0

Jason Krueger 6 years, 2 months ago

Steamboatog- you said it best as an accurate representation of your party. "I will stick to what I originally said" -regardless of any level of truth to those statements and against all evidence to the contrary.

Going back to the original point of the article, what I don't understand is why Republican's seem ok with candidates who refuse to directly answer questions posed to them. Candidate Palin (and I am paraphrasing) during the 2nd or 3rd question of the evening flat-out said, "I will not necessarily answer you questions but will talk about what I feel is important." -Regardless of your political views, why is this considered acceptable behavior during a televised debate where BOTH parties agreed to the format? Please explain someone... (I am asking this as an honest question to you Republicans)

0

JLM 6 years, 2 months ago

The debates are simply a vehicle for the candidates to advance their candidacy. They are not there at the order of the media.

The media fails to "play nice" by engaging in "gotcha" journalism and does not engender any trust among the political class.

The politicians therefore answer the questions they wish they had been asked rather than the actual questions.

They are both at fault.

I do not understand why the Committee for Presidential Debates bothers to use the media as debate moderators. It would be more useful to use a more neutral party (e.g. a well respected college president).

I also don't know why it is important to keep the questions secret. I would rather have a well thought out and reasoned answer with the benefit of good staff work --- kind of like a real world solution --- than some off the cuff response. Particularly when the answers are often not grounded in fact.

John McCain's idea of 10 town hall meetings with the questions coming directly from you, the American citizen, turns out to have been a pretty good idea. This would likely have resulted in getting real answers to real questions.

The job of a really good interviewer is to draw from the candidate their views on a wide range of subjects so the audience can develop an impression of the candidate as a means of evaluating their suitability for high office. The media does a lousy job of it when they become the center of the event by their questions and style. It is not a dissertation defense.

0

Jason Krueger 6 years, 2 months ago

Please JLM and Steamboatdog, explain how the following factors into your definition of honor or honesty?

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/04/palin.obama/index.html

Two falacies:

1- The attack is a distortion and a lie. 2- The attack is coming from a candidate whose own husband is a member of a party who wants to secede from the Union.

How dare any Republican state they are honorable, patriotic, or honest when they choose to support campaigns that have on more than one occasion stated the election is "not about issues".

0

JLM 6 years, 2 months ago

Jason, nice job on the hot tub today. Thanks. LOL Sorry that was a cheap shot and beneath me. But still, nice job on the hot tub.

Get back on the meds, babe, you're hyperventilating.

Actually Barry Obama is such a fundamentally flawed and corrupt candidate the campaign doesn't really have to be about issues because he simply cannot do the job. Not by experience, temperment, judgment, character or integrity.

He is the choice of the liberal left, the losers, the thugs, convicted felons and the dregs of society --- ooops, that's just the Obama "get out the vote" program in Ohio, isn't it? My bad.

He's a total fakir and poseur unqualified by any measure. He's a complete head fake.

The campaign is about the candidates and their governing philosophy, their idealogy which defines their approaches to the issues. When you have a candidate who is so far left liberal as to espouse slave reparations (notwithstanding he has no blood in his veins from the American slave experience) and the redistribution of wealth and is a product of the Chicago political machine, the issues never really get a good hearing, do they?

I would love to hear his answers as to how he was able to ignore the role that his party and Dodd, Schumer, Frank played in preventing the regulation of Fannie and Freddie and how or why he was able to be the second highest beneficiary of political campaign contributions from that cesspool? Would you not also?

Or about his views on hand gun control?

0

Terry Noble 6 years, 2 months ago

Jason your not worth my time feel sorry for ya dude. Now I'm a liar! I'm not worried the truth always prevails! I'm finished reading your irrational rhetoric! Have a nice weekend!

0

Jason Krueger 6 years, 2 months ago

Again, both Steamboatdog and JLM, just like their party, couldn't or wouldn't answer a single question.

0

ybul 6 years, 2 months ago

So, Obama wants to leave Iraq. But he wants to go to Darfur to end the genocide. How is that any different from staying in Iraq to police a civil war. Also, Obama's desire to cross the border into Pakistan, seems little different than McStains views.

In addition Obama seems to be utilizing Henry Kissinger as an advisor. Personally, Kissinger and those like him are the problem. Those members of the Council on Foreign Relations, who seem to think that their high powered indoctrinations they receive at Harvard or Yale makes them able to make decisions for all of us. When they do they tend to make a mess for all of us, the current bank problems (listen to this american life's show from this weekend) which have grown into a nightmare as a result of the credit default swaps.

These markets were legislated under the waning moments of the Clinton administration to stay unregulated. Obama's claim that Bush policies are responsible for the current problems are false. The problems stem from bipartisanship and corporate lobbying.

Quit saying my party is best and going to bring change. No new change from either party. We have steadily moved away from a government trying to preserve individual liberties, towards one which preaches that governing for the whole is the best way.

What happens when the government makes a mistake? We all pay, where as if I make a mistake then I pay for it. Just as what works on my farm because of environmental conditions is different from what works elsewhere, to have someone tell me what is best for my land is absurd, as they are basing their decisions upon there previous experiences and training which may not apply to my land. Peace

0

Jason Krueger 6 years, 2 months ago

Sorry JLM- I missed your earlier response to the question. Yes, the format of the debates is lacking and it is odd that we seem unable to find an impartial moderator but, nonetheless, both parties agreed to the format and therefore should abide by the rules. The "town hall" format is pretty flawed as well though. It always seems those questions end up being "talking point" blurbs that really don't advance anyones understanding. Invariably some Democrat will ask a question along the lines of "Mr McCain, why do you hate gays" and some Republican will ask, "Mr Obama, why can't I shoot my gun at passing cars? The Constitution says I can."

As for the interviewing debacle, I assume this is partly in reference to the Couric interview w/ Palin. Again, Palin made a number of references to McCain reforming things in Washington. It seems logical to me that an appropriate follow-up question would be to find out specifics to such a generalized response; which is what Couric did. Every one of us learns to do this at about the age of 2- when we start to become "abstractly" aware of the world around us. If you can't back up your statements with evidence you shouldn't be making it.

0

JLM 6 years, 2 months ago

Actually the very first public event which Rick Warren moderated was very good. It would be fair to say that that event provided great insight into the candidates' views, qualifications and personalities. The moderator was not an impediment to the candidate's ability to give voice to their views.

It had the unique benefit of being about one candidate at a time and did not introduce the meaningless "he said - she said" background noise.

The only problem is that it was not long enough and therefore was not able to touch upon some very important topics.

I thought the exchange on "when does life begin" was particularly illuminating. The answers showed a direct comparison between a decisive candidate and one who thought there was a "pay grade" above that of President of the US.

I would love to have heard Obama's views on gun control, slave reparations, his Illinois Senate voting record and community organizing because the candidate Obama is not speaking with the same voice as his earlier books on these subjects.

On the issue of gun control alone, Obama endorsed the Illinois hand gun ban, served on a foundation board which funded a legal forum and other anti-gun legislative efforts, wrote in his book (TAOH) that he wanted to ban handguns in the center city and has routinely endorsed local handgun bans as a matter of policy. I would like Obama to be asked a question as to how his newfound support for the 2nd Amendment corelates with his previous positions and votes.

There would be nothing wrong about having a town hall meeting with the subjects of the questions being identified (e.g. foreign policy, economics, social issues, voting record, life experience, etc.) and the attendees asked to fashion questions on those subjects.

Fakir, poseur, etc.

0

Terry Noble 6 years, 2 months ago

This will be my final blog in here. The facts are all pretty simple! We have a choice between two very good candidates here, for that I am grateful. The key words in this election are bipartisan, change, economy and war. All the name calling and bickering I see in here are NOT the solution. I am happy to see so many intelligent responses in here and extremely happy to see that people care. I have seen these promises in elections for many years and it ends up being the same thing no matter who gets elected. This is a very important election, not just for President but also for Congress. Democracy was set up where there is no dictator and the President is as effective as the Congress allows. An individual and his supporters (who we were one when he was fighting the Russians) attacked our country when he brought down the World Trade Center. His purpose for choosing that target was to destroy our economy. We can win these wars and who knows maybe destroy this man but the ideology he represents seeks our destruction. If he succeeds in destroying our economy he will have won in the end. Do your civic duty and VOTE, I will! It has been a relief to see the intelligence that has been conveyed in many of these blogs. I personally go to CBS/Denvers "Reality Check" to find out what is the truth and what is "spin" as they call it. May the best man win! God Bless America!

0

playa46 6 years, 2 months ago

This is what I don't understand,

We all hear a lot of points in debates of plans to get us out of the problems we face today. But I heard quite a lot of "He said, she said" between the two parties. Becuase I am young, I find myself asking, What's the point? All I have seen is finger pointing at the other party. I see ourselves in a strugle between two different parties, Liberals and Conservatives (don't know if I spelled that correctly). My point is why must we fight each other to make ourselves seem higher than another. Do we really need to fight Democrats as Republicans or vice-versa? We have bigger problems than pointing fingers at each other and laughing at another's believes! I think staying openminded and considering the other's ideas than just laughing at it makes this country great. "United we stand, divided we fall."

0

JLM 6 years, 2 months ago

Actually the "two parties" are called Democrats and Republicans.

I know it can get mighty confusing. And, guess what, there are actually "conservative" and "liberal" Democrats. It gets a bit complicated at times.

Heck, there are even some independent thinkers who make up their mind on the actual issues without regard to what the parties think about those same issues. These folks are called "adults" or "thinkers."

Unfortunately, the way politics works in the US, there are usually only two candidates running for President and therefore you have to make a choice. Usually the choice is only between a Republican candidate and a Democrat candidate. But really, the choice is between individuals who are a complex goulash of thoughts on sometimes confusing issues.

If you are a thinker, you might just concentrate on the issues and vote for the candidate who is most closely aligned to your way of thinking. In some instances, this is a vote FOR a candidate and in some instances it is a vote AGAINST a candidate.

It's a little like a job interview. Who should we hire for this job as President of the United States and leader of the free world? Who can best handle the uncertain American economy? Who can keep America safe?

Should we hire a chap who has a bit of relevant experience and who has demonstrated a willingness to serve his country or should we hire a chap who is woefully inexperienced and a product of the most corrupt political machine in America?

I am not voting for John S McCain because he is a Republican. I am voting for him because I view him as the candidate with the highest probability of keeping America safe; and, because Obama is an inexperienced fakir and a poseur who is risky and dangerous to all that I hold dear. I am not voting against Obama because he is a Democrat but because he is a wildly liberal individual who is pre-occupied with dangerous issues like wealth redistribution, slave reparations and abortion.

0

playa46 6 years, 2 months ago

I know all that you said in your comment JLM, I am simply asking not you, but all of us why do we have to point fingers at each other and try to make Reps. higher than Dems., or the other way around. I see you reasons why you are voting for McCain and why you aren't for Obama, but that was not my full question, care to elaborate?

0

JLM 6 years, 2 months ago

We should have useful national debates in which candidates are given long periods of time to present, explain and defend their plans with ample time for responsible parties to fact check the assumptions of their plans. We spend an awful lot of time fooling with erroneous or false assumptions.

The funny thing is that most voters want the same things but they don't want to be fooled again and again.

Examples:

I want universal health care but I don't want it by government mandate. I know of no service --- other than national defense --- which is best when provided by government. So, I solved the problem by myself as I provide health care to all of my employees. I don't need government to solve that problem for me and my employees.

I want to be safe in the world. I want my government to eliminate all threats to American safety in the world. I don't want to negotiate with terrorists or evil doers. Iran is a nation of evil doers who directly fund evil doers --- Hamas, Hezbollah, Quds --- and who are led by a wacky insane leader who threatens a regional ally whom we have promised to defend. I don't want my President to sit down and have tea with a crazy person.

I want to stop sending $700B to nations who sell us oil and then fund terrorism or who are not worthy allies. I want to develop American energy independence. The solution is not to tax the oil companies more or to prevent nuclear energy or to stymie offshore drilling or to pooh pooh more domestic drilling.

In the final analysis, it the judgments of the American President which are important.

0

Jason Krueger 6 years, 2 months ago

JLM- On more than one occasion I have found reason to agree with you. Yet, invariably you then resort to using talking points right out of the political playbook. I too would love universal health care. Yet I see a fundamental conflict of interest in the concept of "maintaining health" being a "for-profit" venture (which is by definition, what must occur within the commercial sector). If America is such a great country, why can't America also be the first country to figure out how to provide health-care to all of its citizens without it being a giant cluster-f**? I too want to be safe in the world and leave a safe world for my children but I also believe in one of the fundamental tenants of Christianity: "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you". As I've posted before, our foreign policy has to be deeper than who our friends are at one particular moment. -Both parties are guilty of this behavior. We cannot create havoc in one region of the world to further our immediate agenda and then scratch our heads in collective wonderment when 2, 10, or 30 years later the "chickens come home to roost".
I too want to stop sending $570B (not $700) oversees (1/3 of which goes to Canada, and Mexico and other ally's) (-fact check for ya buddy!) for energy needs. Nor do I want to see millions of jobs shipped oversees merely because current American doctrine looks merely at the financial statement and not the big picture. In other words, if everyone's purchasing patterns are primarily based on price, we shouldn't be surprised when our corporations outsource their products to cheaper suppliers. I am fine with not taxing the oil companies but nor should we give them tax credits to assist them with their wall-street balance sheets. You are right JLM- the judgments of our next President ARE important. It is unfortunate the din of noise from the right and left wing drown out rational discourse.

0

JLM 6 years, 2 months ago

The answers to complex problems often nessitate "incrementalism" --- that is, solving the problem by making smalll incremental improvements until ultimately the majority of the problem is solved.

This is the basis for calculus wherein the rabbit jumps halfway but only halfway to the lettuce each time until it can simply stretch its neck and eat the lettuce.

Another concept to be employed is "convergence" whereby seemingly unrelated ideas converge as their similarities become more obvious.

This is, of course, what is happening with cell phones, cameras, iPods, computers, the internet and PDAs.

Health care availability, as an example, can be expanded enormously if initially tax policy would simply provide the appropriate encouragement while incorporating wellness programs into the overall health milieu.

Unfortunately, politicians are attempting to swallow the entire elephant in one bite rather than providing encouragement and picking the low hanging fruit.

There is nothing wrong with "for profit" enterprises engaged in health care. This is where the MRI and other important diagnostic tools have come from.

The health care industry needs a Charles Schwab --- someone who priced the service based upon its cost to execute rather than its traditional pricing mechanism. A $7,000 trip to the emergency room is simply silly as is a $40 aspirin.

We actually have universal health care right now --- it's the emergency room. But, it's very, very expensive.

Want affordable health care?

Create a healthy economy in which employers must compete for skilled labor by providing extraordinary benefits including health care. This cannot be done by increasing taxes.

Deliver meaningful health care tort reform. Make the dispute resolution technique binding arbitration. This is what is done in the securities industry.

Stop bottlenecking the creation of doctors by allowing the AMA to accredit medical schools. Make different levels of medical training available. Not every doctor has to aspire to become Dr. Debakey. Some just need to prescribe simple medicines. Produce more doctors.

Reduce the compensation of doctors. Doctors are too highly compensated as a result of the artificial shortage created by the medical schools. A pill prescribing clinic doctor should make about $100,000 annually.

Dramatically reduce the cost of liability insurance by funding the deductible of all doctors and extending "sovereign" immunity in cases which are not gross negligence.

Underwrite medical education while simultaneously expanding the eligibility. The existing programs fail in part because nobody with a new medical degree really wants to practice in rural New Mexico. The Public Health programs are simply not working.

Go paperless and make everybody own and carry around their own digital medical records on a flash drive.

0

ybul 6 years, 2 months ago

You are addressing symptoms of the health care problem which, is fundamentally caused by environmental issues, poor diet, toxins in the environment, and mostly stress.

Why not look at protecting private property rights, and tax coal fired power plants, vehicles, etc. for the toxins they emit.

Stop subsidizing corn as it is jacking up peoples diets. Encourage organic farming, and teach nutrition in school. Most doctors have ZERO training in nutrition and that is where health care starts. Unfortunately there is more money to be made in treating a symptom that the root cause of the problem.

0

dmaz101 6 years, 2 months ago

Wow. As a Steamboat outsider (I hope to live there one day), I was completely sucked in to this blog, kind of like watching a slow-motion train wreck. I have to say that there was some really ugly comments made, on the part of the McCain-Palin supporters. This just confirms what I've noticed lately at the Republican (more like Repug-lican) rallies... They are getting hateful and ugly.

OBAMA/BIDEN 2008 TIME FOR CHANGE!!!

0

freerider 6 years, 2 months ago

OMG ...... More Bush politics with McShame and Chatty Cathy ...golly gee what should I do now now that I'm president....I guess I'll go SHOPPING

0

playa46 6 years, 2 months ago

Just thought I would post this.

I am watching the debates and heard McCain say that Obama supporters are wearing t-shirts that are hateful, as McCain supporters call Obama a terrorist. What a good argument, LOL!

0

Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.