We often thought nobody was paying attention when, during the health reform debate, we urged the press to investigate the plight of some two million disabled Americans who qualify for monthly disability checks from Social Security. Yet they can’t get health coverage from Medicare for the very ailments that caused their disability—unless they wait two years. It’s an agonizing and cruel wait that sometimes means they can’t pay for the care they badly need.
So we were really pleased to see Sunday’s story in The Oregonian, by Anne Saker, which called attention to this problem by spotlighting a fifty-seven-year-old disabled woman named Sue Sherman who is coping with pancreatic cancer. Her plight illustrates the traps that snare the disabled in every state.
When Sherman’s COBRA benefits ran out, she was poor enough to qualify for the Oregon Health Plan. But a few months later, she was over the line—her Social Security benefits were too generous, and they disqualified her. She then turned to the state’s high-risk pool, and currently pays about $800 monthly for a policy that covers a portion of her doctor and hospital bills—but not her drugs, which cost about $8,000 each month. Her daughter, who is caring for her, says that the family is paying eleven different medical bills right now.
Even though the disease was taking its toll, Sherman tried to fight the two-year restriction by calling and writing Oregon legislators. Their responses, she thought, were uninformative. Rep. David Wu sent her a ton of research papers. In one of them was a statistic indicating that about twelve percent of Social Security recipients don’t last the two years. “That’s it then,” Sherman said. “They’re just waiting for us to die.”
When the drive for reform started, Medicare advocacy groups loosely organized around getting immediate coverage for the disabled, but their weak efforts failed to persuade the pols. You see, covering the disabled when they first qualified for Social Security disability would cost about $113 billion over ten years. That was less than the $210 billion it would cost to stop the doctors’ fee cut, but the doctors’ lobby and its slick PR apparatus outgunned the band of Medicare advocates. In the end, the docs got a partial reprieve from the cuts—plus a small increase—while the disabled continue to tough it out.
So what’s in store for this group? The rationale for not helping them now was the prospect of participating in the new state insurance exchanges, which will start in four years. Then, they can sign up for a policy; if they are poor, they’ll get some portion of the premium paid for. During the debate, there was no word on what they’re supposed to do in the meantime.
They might also apply to the new stop-gap risk pools the states are supposed to activate tomorrow. But there’s a catch. They have to wait six months to actually get coverage—victims again of another cost-saving move by the feds. Then, if they do get coverage, they have to hope that the state doesn’t run out of funds during the next four years.
As we have repeatedly noted, the $5 billion set aside for these new risk pools isn’t enough to cover everyone who may need coverage. As the AP reported yesterday, Medicare economists have estimated that around 375,000 people will sign up this year, but that the money will run out at the end of 2011. Virginia’s governor predicted that his state’s allocation of $113 million would run out after twenty-two months.
People like Sherman may have humongous drug bills, but the centerpiece of the government’s health care rollout so far—the $250 rebate for the three million Medicare beneficiaries with high drug expenses—doesn’t touch them. Remember, they are still waiting for Medicare. Kudos to The Oregonian for reminding its readers that, for 15,000 people in the state, the wait drags on.
This gives me the opportunity to point out two other very fine stories on this subject over the past couple of years.
In July 2009, Joseph Shapiro looked at the 2-year wait through the story of an early-Alzheimer's patient
http://n.pr/7tyst
In July 2008, Joanne Silberner compared the treatment an MS patient gets in the UK vs. the US - http://n.pr/8wzoj6
Joe Neel - NPR
#1 Posted by Joe Neel, CJR on Wed 30 Jun 2010 at 03:24 PM
Thanks Joe. Joanne's story was part of your series on health care in European countries which we at CJR.org praised and in my mind was one of the best series of the whole health reform debate. We would like to encourage other reporters to take a look at these examples and find stories in their own communities.
#2 Posted by Trudy Lieberman, CJR on Wed 30 Jun 2010 at 05:12 PM
So now it is "agonizing and cruel" to wait two years for somebody else to pay your bills?...
All thanks to the "slick" doctors who "outgun" the poor "advocates"...
Only in CJR-land would this Manifesto count as any sort of journalism.
So the big story here is that a lady is very sick with a serious illness that has left her with financial problems? That's it?
A couple of questions that the article fails to address...
1. Is Ms. Sherman being denied services or drugs? It would appear that she isn't.
2. How much money does she make? Disability alone wouldn't put her over the Oregon plan's income limit.
So how about this headline?
"Poor woman receives medical treatment and services despite inability to pay without dependence on government"
#3 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Wed 30 Jun 2010 at 07:41 PM
Heck, padikiller, why not change the headline to this: "Tinkerbell uses pixy dust to make poor womans medical bills disappear"?
#4 Posted by David Black, CJR on Wed 30 Jun 2010 at 11:29 PM
How's about this headline:
"Woman and her family choose between dying and bankruptcy
Medical treatment ineffective without drugs, $8800 monthly bill forces family to refinance house"
Only in America.
PS. padkiller? One word. Karma.
#5 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Thu 1 Jul 2010 at 12:17 AM
How many Oregonians are driven into bankruptcy by taxes?
How many Oregonians lose their jobs because of the crushing tax burden of social programs on small businesses?
How much more do Oregonians pay in private insurance premiums to fund the assigned risk policies for poor policyholders?
What do families paying these costs give up? Private colleges for their kids? Visits to see grandma? Investments in IRA's? Huh?
We won't see CJR tracking the misery of these people's lives.
Since when is it the government's responsibility to "make bills disappear"? Since when is it the government's responsibility to help people avoid bankruptcy?
Why limit this reasoning to medical bills? Why not sex? People need sex, right? Why not have the government pay for a trip to the Chicken Ranch every month?
You guys aren't talking about providing medical care to indigents - this lady is getting the medical care she needs. She is just suffering the consequences of living without paying for private insurance.
You guys are instead talking about redistributing wealth by force of law. Taking money (ultimately at gunpoint) from responsible or fortunate people to reward irresponsible or unfortunate people.
This is nothing but communist stupidity.
#6 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Thu 1 Jul 2010 at 06:59 AM
Paddy, paddy, paddy... What are we going to do with ya'.
If you could read, you would have read that she did have private insurance UNTIL she got pancreatic cancer.
She had private insurance through her employer, which is how most americans do it.
But the funny thing about cancer is sometimes you can't work because of it. And when you can't work, you lose the private insurance that covered you while you worked.
And, after that, you have to get insurance on the private market, but that's near impossible because of the, you know, cancer.
So then you go to the government high risk pool and they cover your physician and hospital bills, but that pool doesn't cover drugs for TWO YEARS and, when you make as much as DISABLED PERSON on SOCIAL SECURITY, the Oregon State Heath plan isn't on option either. So you have a choice: you can pay out of pocket for 2 years or you can die out of, you know, cancer.
That about 200 grand or death, nice choice.
But that's her fault... for getting the whole cancer thing.
Moron.
Karma Paddy. Karma.
#7 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Thu 1 Jul 2010 at 10:17 AM
Thimbles wrote: If you could read, you would have read that she did have private insurance UNTIL she got pancreatic cancer.
She had private insurance through her employer, which is how most americans do it.
padikiller responds: And THIS stupidity a perfect example of the culture of dependency that plagues this country.
Thimbles drones on: But the funny thing about cancer is sometimes you can't work because of it. And when you can't work, you lose the private insurance that covered you while you worked.
padikiller: It isn't "private insurance". It's her employer's insurance policy. Personal responsibility would have fixed this.
An individual can buy a private $7 million policy from Anthem through Sam's Club for less than $100 per month... Handled. Do this and you won't have a problem like this poor lady did.
Thimbles continues: And, after that, you have to get insurance on the private market, but that's near impossible because of the, you know, cancer.
padikiller: The time to consider this possibility and plan for it is BEFORE you get cancer. You don't buy car insurance AFTER you slam into a Roll Royce. You don't buy homeowner's insurance AFTER a tornado. And you don't wait until you get sick to buy health insurance.
Thimbles: So then you go to the government high risk pool and they cover your physician and hospital bills, but that pool doesn't cover drugs for TWO YEARS and, when you make as much as DISABLED PERSON on SOCIAL SECURITY, the Oregon State Heath plan isn't on option either. So you have a choice: you can pay out of pocket for 2 years or you can die out of, you know, cancer.
padikiller calls BS: This is just more liberal/communist bullshit. There is no medical problem here due to lack of services. The choice you present is nonsensical.
The woman is getting treated and she isn't paying out of pocket. She is just racking up debt.
Dude... Squeeze this little slice of reality between your ears until it settles into your neurons... The poor lady is RECEIVING THE TREATMENT SHE NEEDS.
Repeat this truth until your lips stop moving and then maybe we can move on...
Hers is a purely financial problem - the result of poor decision making and personal misfortune.
Thimbes presents another false dichomoty: That about 200 grand or death, nice choice.
But that's her fault... for getting the whole cancer thing.
Moron.
padikiller: Grow up Thimbles...
You are dancing around the issue.
This woman has a F-I-N-A-N-C-I-A-L problem.
She is in PRECISELY the same situation she would be in if she had run up credit cards in Vegas or if she had lost 200 grand playing the futures market before getting cancer.
She made bad decisions and she is now unfortunately suffering the adverse financial consequences. Happily, she is being treated.
A sad story, no doubt, but certainly no jusitification for government intervention.
And leave off with your infantile "karma" death wish.. Deal with the reality.
#8 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Thu 1 Jul 2010 at 02:56 PM
"Personal responsibility would have fixed this."
Wow.
"The woman is getting treated and she isn't paying out of pocket. She is just racking up debt."
Wrong again. She's racking up her children's debt. The daughter was the one chipping in.
"An individual can buy a private $7 million policy from Anthem through Sam's Club for less than $100 per month... Handled. Do this and you won't have a problem like this poor lady did."
http://www.extendhealth.com/health-insurance
Try out a Portland zip code and tell me how that works.
"And leave off with your infantile "karma" death wish."
It ain't death wish, it's warning. You're building up a bunch of bad ol' karma. I know you probably think "There but by the grace of God go I" is a bunch of communist claptrap, but there's some wisdom to it. You can make all the right decisions, all personal responsibly buying health insurance on the private market to go with the health insurance from her job, and still lose coverage:
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/186565.php
That's a systemic problem. When you are that dependent on "personal responsibility" you are that vulnerable to the various shocks of fate. There by the grace of God, go ye.
"Deal with the reality." OMG. You're hopeless.
#9 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Thu 1 Jul 2010 at 08:39 PM
Speaking of reality, paddy, can you start talking about the real socialists in America?
http://www.eschatonblog.com/2010/07/they-could-have-shored-up-my-balance.html
#10 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Fri 2 Jul 2010 at 05:38 AM
Thimbles wrote: You can make all the right decisions, all personal responsibly buying health insurance on the private market to go with the health insurance from her job, and still lose coverage
padikiller responds: You can make all the right decisions, responsibly choosing a home in a good neighborhood, and still get whacked by a tornado.
Does the government owe you a house?
You can make all the right decisions, responsibly picking the right car using the best data, and still end up with a lemon.
Does the government owe you a car?
You can make all the right decisions, responsibly choosing a career, and still end up laid off.
Does the government owe you a job?
Your logic is facile.
Among the many inescapable truths you must ignore to propound your communist nonsense are:
1. The poor lady in question is being treated. There is no medical story here, other than her horrible misfortune in getting cancer and her extremely good fortune in living in America where she can extend her life with the best drugs and treatment available.
2. She has private insurance, subsidized by others in the form of an assigned risk policy imposed by force of law. This cost to others is in fact a hidden tax.
3. She is not destitute. Were she so, she would qualify for free medicine. But she isn't.
4. She could choose to give up her disability and qualify for Oregon's free health care program. But she chooses not to do so. She is making a financial decision- not a medical decision.
Funny how the "professional journalists" who preside in CJR-Land dance around these little facts.
Repeat. This woman is making the conscious financial decision to go without free health care in order to collect disability payments.
This unfortunate outcome was entirely preventable. There a TONS of low cost catastrophic insurance plans available in Oregon:
http://www.oregonhealth-insurance.com/equote/index.php
When a society devolves from a culture of hope, ambition and independence (there were no employer health plans before WWII) to a culture of dependence, sloth and expectancy, people get screwed over.
#11 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Fri 2 Jul 2010 at 08:25 AM
This is becoming like our discussion of Global Warming, where I give science and you give talking point, ouija board nonsense.
"padikiller responds: You can make all the right decisions, responsibly choosing a home in a good neighborhood, and still get whacked by a tornado.
Does the government owe you a house?"
No, your insurance agency does. Then the question becomes, "If you bought a tornado policy and your house is destroyed by a tornado and the insurance agency tries to claim that it's hail damage to get out of the bill, does the government owe its citizen some protection?"
And the answer to that question is yes, because a government that does not try to defend the legitimate claims of its citizens is a worthless government.
"You can make all the right decisions, responsibly picking the right car using the best data, and still end up with a lemon.
Does the government owe you a car?"
If the car company produced a defective and unsafe car, the car company owes the customer. Then the question becomes, "If you bought a defective car does the government owe its citizen a hearing of his complaint?"
The answer is yes, http://www.safercar.gov/ , because a government that does not try to hear the legitimate complaints of its citizens is a worthless government.
"You can make all the right decisions, responsibly choosing a career, and still end up laid off.
Does the government owe you a job?"
If you were working and you paid a payroll tax to fund social security benefits, then the government owes you unemployment benefits and some assistance in finding a new job for its own benefit. Because a government that does not try to protect its citizens is a worthless government.
You come from a cartoon world that is based on cartoonish simplicities, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRQ3UcO5P8k
Grow up.
"1. The poor lady in question is being treated." Until she and her daughter with her own children go bankrupt. Then she dies.
"2. She has private insurance, subsidized by others in the form of an assigned risk policy imposed by force of law. This cost to others is in fact a hidden tax. " Man that must boil your Mr. Potter blood.
"3. She is not destitute. Were she so, she would qualify for free medicine. But she isn't." Because she's on social security disability, which puts her over the l... screw it, you know this. You're just being a douchebag.
"4. She could choose to give up her disability and qualify for Oregon's free health care program. But she chooses not to do so. She is making a financial decision- not a medical decision."
You don't know the particulars of that decision (the time it takes to et approval for the OSH while without income etc.. ) but the fact of the matter is the particulars don't matter. There should not be a two year doughnut hole between Social Security Disability eligibility and Medicare. That's just a bit of bureaucratic cruelty which the sadist in you might enjoy, but to normal people seems like a problem needing fixing.
"This unfortunate outcome was entirely preventable. There a TONS of low cost catastrophic insurance plans available in Oregon:"
Use your link. The lowest cost for a twenty year old woman is $233 dollars a month with a $1500 treatment deductible and a $1000 prescription deduct.
The lowest cost for a forty year old woman is $345 dollars a month with a $1500 treatment deductible and a $1000 prescription deduct.
Your individual medical paradise sucks. Travel somewhere and experience life out of your small minded yard. You are paying twice as much, as much in taxpayer dollars as other countries pay for their whole government regulated/single payer systems, for shoddy and inhumane service all so that rich people can skip ahead in
#12 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Fri 2 Jul 2010 at 11:57 AM
Thimbles wrote: "Then the question becomes, "If you bought a tornado policy and your house is destroyed by a tornado and the insurance agency tries to claim that it's hail damage to get out of the bill, does the government owe its citizen some protection?"
padikiller responds: Another screwy false comparison.
How did any of this poor lady's insurers avoid contractual liability? HUH?
Answer: They didn't. She didn't have her own insurance.
Of course the government has a duty to provide a forum to resolve disputes - whether over a car purchase or an insurance claim. However the government has no responsibility to pay for your medicine. You are just dodging the issue.
The government doesn't owe you a car. Or food. Or housing. Or medicine.
And despite your silly overreaching... The fact remains that this poor woman CHOOSES to receive disability payments... She could walk into any Social Security Office and stop her payments immediately if she wanted to. She just chooses to take the money and rack up debt. I would do the same thing if I were her and had screwed up by neglecting to insure my health.
She's not a bad person. She just made a mistake, and mistakes have consequences.
Your true colors emerge in your anti-American, anti-capitalist utopian notion. But this silliness is nothing more than a ridiculous crack dream.
You don't see this lady hopping off to Havana, London or Ottawa for her (capitalist-made)cancer meds. She is GETTING TREATED.
#13 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Fri 2 Jul 2010 at 05:25 PM
"How did any of this poor lady's insurers avoid contractual liability? HUH?"
"You can make all the right decisions, all personal responsibly buying health insurance on the private market to go with the health insurance from her job, and still lose coverage:
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/186565.php"
"There should not be a two year doughnut hole between Social Security Disability eligibility and Medicare. That's just a bit of bureaucratic cruelty which the sadist in you might enjoy, but to normal people seems like a problem needing fixing."
"You are paying twice as much, as much in taxpayer dollars as other countries pay for their whole government regulated/single payer systems, for shoddy and inhumane service all so that rich people can skip ahead in the queue and claim that America is number #1.
You're not.
http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Publications/Fund-Reports/2010/Jun/Mirror-Mirror-Update.aspx
As things currently are, you suck. And as people like you currently are, things will never get better."
#14 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Fri 2 Jul 2010 at 08:02 PM
You've been rendered non-responsive, Thimbles.
Regurgitating communist platitudes doesn't address the issues:
1. The poor lady of the article is being treated with very expensive, life-extending medicine, courtesy of capitalism.
2. The poor lady has chosen to receive cash disability payments and rack up debt rather than give up the cash and go on Oregon's "free" (taxpayer subsidized) health insurance plan.
3. There are loads of low-cost catastrophic insurance plans available that would have prevented her dilemma.
I know, I know..
Don't bother replying... I'll do it for you.
"America sucks, and the rich are casting the poor to die in droves unmedicated on the streets of our cities..."
The horror!...
#15 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Fri 2 Jul 2010 at 09:23 PM
Padikiller, Get a life!
#16 Posted by dianne, CJR on Sat 3 Jul 2010 at 12:59 AM
Dianne, Deal with the issues!
#17 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Sat 3 Jul 2010 at 06:53 AM
As Thimbles and the other liberals try to muddy the waters with anticapitalist nonsense, it falls to me to state the truth of the matter.
1. There is NO breach of any insurance contract alleged in the article, despite Thimbles' ridiculous assertion to the contrary. This is NOT a case where the "evil" insurance companies or the "slick" doctors have done anything wrong or illegal.
This simple fact of the matter is that this poor lady suffers from both terrible misfortune and her own neglect - she relied on "somebody else" to provide health insurance and now she is suffering the all-too-predictable consequences of dependency.
2. This lady now CHOOSES to incur debt in order to gain disability income. If she weren't recieving cash payments from the public treasury, her medical service providers would instead be paid by the Oregon taxpayers. She could get off of disability simply by walking into any Social Security office and filling out form number SSA-521. But she doesn't want to. She wants the cash.
You have to wonder why the reporter didn't ask the lady why she didn't do this.. It's almost like there's one of those "bias" thingies going on. Maybe the "slick" doctors did it.
3. This lady isn't getting her medicine from Cuba, China or the England. She is extending her life on the teat of capitalism - this story is a success story. Behind the drugs she takes is a profit motive gone good. Yes, she and her family are incurring debt. But she is alive.
Bankruptcy will eliminate the debt and keep the capitalist life-saving machinery oiled. There is no sob story here, aside from her cancer.
The real tragedy would occur if the goverment were involved, like this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1255858/Neglected-lazy-nurses-Kane-Gorny-22-dying-thirst-rang-police-beg-water.html
#18 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Sat 3 Jul 2010 at 08:54 AM
My thanks to Trudy Lieberman for due diligence throughout the process of reshaping American healthcare. I wish her msm peers were worthy of a footnote to the good work she has done. My comments below single out Dems of whom I had been a lifetime supporter. They spell out how their healthcare plan (formerly put forth by republicans) was largely a charade, barely a shadow of what could have been under a man with such great leadership "potential" the whole world cheered his election-as did I. In electing the exceptional we were given instead only an exception in 44 presidents. A few evenings commandeering the evening airwaves for a fireside chat with the nation explaining the compelling and simple math behind medicare for all would have convinced even empty headed tea baggers the path America COULD have taken for compassionate affordable care for all of us. Warren Buffett and David Walker see this as an imperative, morally and fiscally for America. You should read up on them padikiller as they're advocates of market based economies WHERE appropriate. Instead, Obama went on national tv, looked us in the eyes and said: A public plan was never part of my campaign". This was unforgivable and a bald faced lie. I'm an independent until one day real democrats are again at the helm. Read on to learn of the sleight of hand by dems:
Nothing has been done to stop denial of coverage-faux reform legislation has buried within it a nominal $100 a day fine for denial of coverage which makes a lie of any claim to have stopped this heinous practice. Lets be honest-insurers are the only industry to routinely and legally kill Americans through rescission, the denial of coverage after, say, 20 years of premium payments, for failing to mention a grass allergy on an initial application when you were 10 and you now have cancer so actually NEED insurance. Read about those killed here: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=105680875
What Massachusetts and now the nation's healthcare delivery system represents is the grandest money laundering scheme ever hatched where our premium dollars are scrubbed clean by insurers then used to lobby against the very Americans paying those premiums. This adds four hundred billion dollars to our cost over a medicare for all system, assuring no movement towards slowing the rapid siphoning of what little disposable income remains for the ailing American consumer who is now mandated to buy insurers deadly product.
Read about Massachusetts here http://masshealthlawtruth.org/mass_health_mandate_truth_vs_spin_index.htm
#19 Posted by Scott Carlo, CJR on Sat 3 Jul 2010 at 11:04 AM
A lack of car insurance doesn't cause car accidents.
A lack of homeowner's insurance doesn't cause tornados.
And a lack of health insurance doesn't cause injury.
Indigents in America are entitled to (and receive) FREE health care on the taxpayer's dime courtesy of Medicaid.
It is against the law for any hospital that accepts Medicaid to deny necessary services to anyone who can't afford to pay.
You guys can dance around this little reality all you want, but it isn't going anyplace.
#20 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Sat 3 Jul 2010 at 12:15 PM
Padkiller: "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUlw4NT08Ds "
You're looping your argument, paddington. If there's nothing new for you to say, then there's no need for anyone to make a new response.
PS.
"It is against the law for any hospital that accepts Medicaid to deny necessary services to anyone who can't afford to pay."
Wrong. It's emergency services.
#21 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Sat 3 Jul 2010 at 03:49 PM
Padikiller:
Scott is not dancing around reality. Neither am I. You are. For example, reality is the adverse effect on the lives of hundreds of thousands in Masschusetts under the faux health care reform in that state which is the underlying model of Obamacare, and we know what we are talking about b/c we have been living under this despotic law for nearly 4 years and, among many, are uninsured.
We understand quite well how Obamacare won't work and the devastating effect it will cause to many millions. It has NOTHING to do with access to affordable, quality health care. It has everything to do with control of people's finances, who gets care, who doesn't and is a form of eugenics while the gov't steals the money you need to heat and eat. It is coercion and collusion, and the law is filled with discrimination and exploits people to the nth degree. It is a gift to the corporations that run this country.
If you want to learn about reality, visit http://www.masshealthlawtruth.org, and I suggest you do this before the end of July.
Then read the Obamacare law from top to bottom and also do some research to find out about the IRS mandates that were recently shoved into that law which have nothing to do with health care. The CATO Institute has this info. I just read it yesterday.
Until you do your homework, stop blabbing off your mouth about everything and anything.
Are you an insurance company infiltrator or just a know-it-all person who likes to hear yourself talk and has an answer for everything?
I was a lifelong Democrat and unenrolled last August b/c of the lies, lies, lies and half-baked truths, coverups, charades re the so-called health care reform. It was the biggest dog-and-pony show ever. I will never vote for anyone with a D after their name again. Since Republicans are no better, I probably won't even bother voting unless it's for the sheer joy of getting an incumbent out.
We have a one-party system in this country masquerading as a two-party system. The Ds pretend they are for the working class while the Rs are up front about not giving a damn. It's a game of good cop, bad cop. These public servants do not care about you or I. It's about power, greed and control.
Don't forget to bone up on what's going on before you jump all over everyone who comments, and more importantly, journalists like Trudy Lieberman, who are doing their upmost to expose what is happening in this country that the bought-and-paid for MSM fudges.
#22 Posted by dianne, CJR on Sun 11 Jul 2010 at 10:09 PM