Patterico's Pontifications

9/11/2009

The Hill: Prepare for the Nuclear Option

Filed under: Health Care,Obama — DRJ @ 4:59 pm



[Guest post by DRJ]

The Hill says President Obama has set up a win-win scenario on health care:

“By offering Republicans olive branches during his address to Congress on Wednesday, Obama has set up a win-win situation. If GOP lawmakers embrace compromise, a healthcare bill would pass Congress easily. But the more likely scenario is that Republicans will continue to oppose Obama’s plan, and the president later this fall will be able to note he tried to strike a deal with the GOP but could not.

That will set up a Democratic argument that Senate leaders have been forced to use a partisan budget tool known as reconciliation to pass a health bill through the Senate by a simple majority, instead of 60 votes. Under the budget plan they passed earlier this year, Democrats could invoke the reconciliation process on Oct. 15.”

Under this theory, Obama benefits by painting Republicans as bitter obstructionists — a theory bolstered by Rep. Joe Wilson’s recent “You lie!” comment.

I think the Democrats will opt for reconciliation or the so-called nuclear option, and while I view that as Obama’s big gamble rather than a win-win strategy, sometimes big gambles pay off.

— DRJ

198 Responses to “The Hill: Prepare for the Nuclear Option”

  1. I’m trying to figure out exactly what olive branches the president offered Republicans during the speech. I saw him pay lip service to the idea of exploring tort reform via some non-specific pilot programs, but otherwise saw absolutely nothing that was even vaguely conciliatory or olive-branch-ish. What the heck is The Hill talking about?

    BC (fe6289)

  2. This scenario would indeed be win-win for Obama … if there were no voters. But there are.

    ras (20bd5b)

  3. I’m trying to figure out exactly what olive branches the president offered Republicans during the speech.

    I completely agree.

    So here’s the deal with using reconciliation or the nuclear option. If he does it, it means he doesn’t want the Republicans for anything anymore. Which means he isn’t planning to ask Congress to do anything Nancy Pelosi doesn’t want to do when it comes to our war in Afghanistan.

    If he needs to do something like increase troops in Afghanistan, he’s going to need Republicans.

    MayBee (cdbb72)

  4. Too bad we put so much faith in nebulous qualifiers like suggests, may, could and so on. Force them to let the spoon fly on that hand-grenade, and lets see what actually happens next for sure.

    Bad Science (105d8f)

  5. This option means that the Dems will own Obamacare, all by themselves and forever, and all the anger that goes with it.

    That’s why I made my comment above about the voters; the Dems are terrified of voter backlash, which is why we’re even having this discussion. More likely, they’re just using the threat to rally their dispirited supporters.

    One side note, tho: Apparently Obama’s speech didn’t help or they wouldn’t be into Plan B so soon, would they?

    ras (20bd5b)

  6. MayBee I for real don’t think the little president man’s dirty socialist Associated Press and his dirty socialist NPR would be talking down support for the war in Afghanistan if he wasn’t perfectly happy with public opinion heading in that direction. This is a what would Hugo do question. Asked and answered.

    happyfeet (6b707a)

  7. Sure. They think people are angry now?

    It’s a lot harder to take over a country than some may imagine, and every day their numbers are falling.

    Apogee (e2dc9b)

  8. There’s really very little evidence Mr. Apogee that the little president man isn’t explicitly aiming at fomenting social unrest that will undermine the democratic and economic institutions in our little country. We just have his word for it, and he lies.

    happyfeet (6b707a)

  9. It’s lose-lose for the Dems at present. They have garnered the anger but have nothing to show for it and are flailing for a way out. What they really want is for the R’s to share some of the blame with them.

    We’ll have to wait and see if the R leadership will let themselves be stampeded into that trap.

    ras (20bd5b)

  10. So far, he hasn’t said what his health plan is. We just have the bills running through congressional committess that people are disecting. I think he is hoping to let Congress take the heat and he can come in with enough changes at the last minute to win over Snowe, Collins, Voinovich and one or two others to vote for it and call it bipartisan like the last debacle. The press would go nuts in their praise and hosannas.

    Bill M (cc9708)

  11. Obama acknowledged in his speech that there is agreement on 80% of his proposals. If the GOP wants to parry, they should quickly draw up a bill codifying the 80% and present it as the compromise that Obama is demanding. If Obama tries to go beyond it — the public option, expanding coverage to non-citizens, etc. — the GOP can start complaining about “poison pills.”

    Not that Republicans have much of a chance in getting their message out in the Obama Spin Machine (also known as the mainstream media), but at least they can have a unified front for the online community.

    JVW (d1215a)

  12. Happyfeet – …fomenting social unrest that will undermine the democratic and economic institutions in our little country.

    Institutions that he and his supporters depend on for sustenance.

    IMO – this is all about creating a shit storm of trouble to distract from the ‘allocation’ of large sums to ‘associates’.

    It’s a heist. Plain and simple. They’re just planning on their useful idiots taking the fall (as we see with ACORN), while in the end there’s no real accounting for monetary outlays.

    Apogee (e2dc9b)

  13. While the nuclear option is the best road for Obama to get the Health Care Reform passed but I don’t see it working. There are too many politicians who will be done if this passes due to them ramming it through congress. I think if this is the path they take there is a good chance the House, Senate, and White House could change hands by 2012.

    FOP Vermillion (939d28)

  14. and sometimes big plans don’t…ask Gingrich how threatening to shut down the government worked for him. If Obama goes the nuclear option he will have proven to all those I’s who thought he would be post partisian that indeed he is anything but and those I’s will be the deciding factor in 2012 and they will decide there was no hope and change and send him home.

    Jaded (2dcf17)

  15. The Democrats will never, never, never, never, never, never, never use the nuclear option. I know because a few years ago all the Democratic Senators and the New York Times said how valuable the filibuster was at stopping bad legislation.

    Am I to believe they really didn’t mean that? I always thought Harry Reid and Chucky Shumer were modern day Madisons and Jeffersons.

    MU789 (073b8c)

  16. MayBee I for real don’t think the little president man’s dirty socialist Associated Press and his dirty socialist NPR would be talking down support for the war in Afghanistan if he wasn’t perfectly happy with public opinion heading in that direction. This is a what would Hugo do question. Asked and answered.

    Yeah, there’s that.

    MayBee (cdbb72)

  17. There are at least 5 Republican bills floated. But you wouldn’t know it from what the media is reporting. Or what I is saying.

    It’s all about the narrative. Control the narrative, control the country, that’s the Democratic way!

    Dan S (7910cf)

  18. err, make that “I” into an O.

    Dan S (7910cf)

  19. I hope you’re right, Apogee.

    happyfeet (6b707a)

  20. But the more likely scenario is that Republicans will continue to oppose Obama’s plan, and the president later this fall will be able to note he tried to strike a deal with the GOP but could not.”
    My take on this faux ‘compromise’ –

    http://travismonitor.blogspot.com/2009/09/government-option-dead-but-all-pain-no.html

    Take off the table Government run ‘option’… but keep the 53 agencies, the $900 billion price tag, the higher taxes, the Medicare squeeze, the unfunded mandates, and the freedom-destroying individual mandate and job-killing employer mandate on healthcare. They will throw in monkey-wrenching the health insurance market with ‘community rating’, a way to shifts costs from unhealthy to healthy people.

    That’s the ‘compromise’.

    It’s not a compromise. A real compromise would address the ‘pre-existing conditions’ issue with some sort of assitance and regulatory changes and stop there – no mandates, no higher taxes, no huge new bureaucracies. The Baucus Plan is the all-pain no-gain version of ObamaCare.

    Travis Monitor (e991bc)

  21. The Democrats seem to be pursuing the Wilson censure which is a great way to completely overshadow Obama’s message. I thought they were smarter than that. I don’t see how it works but he may choose to ram it through and that’s OK with me. I think he lives in a left wing bubble and has no idea what the country is thinking.

    Mike K (addb13)

  22. A single Republican could shut down the Senate under “Reconciliation”.

    The Democrats do realize that sometime in the future, they’ll need to pass a budget again, right?

    Techie (482700)

  23. “So far, he [Obama] hasn’t said what his health plan is.”

    Plan A:
    Unicorns fart pixie dust to cover up the stench of deficits, higher taxes, bureaucratic power grabs, kill-granny medicare squeezes, and the destruction of health care freedom.

    Plan B:
    Blame the Republicans.

    Travis Monitor (e991bc)

  24. #12 Apogee:

    It’s a heist. Plain and simple.

    Ding! Ding! Ding! Give the man a cigar!

    Of course it is. On several different levels, as well. The tossing about of trillions of dollars is simply a smoke screen for “the ‘allocation’ of large sums to ‘associates’.”

    OTOH, the attempt at dismantling our democratic republic may be a little more difficult than the O!ne imagined, but the ploy again is to confuse and distract while favored players collect their winnings.

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  25. The healthcare reform non-bill has been on the radar screen far longer than we would like. Yet, I have a sense that a few people may have heard about the “everybody’s gotta buy insurance” part for the first time on Tuesday. I’ll be quite interested to see how that all polls out in a day or so. For me personally, helping subsidize fellow citizens who truly cannot afford coverage is one thing; but subsidizing people who don’t even want insurance but are forced to buy it, is another matter entirely.

    elissa (c654db)

  26. “Obama acknowledged in his speech that there is agreement on 80% of his proposals.”

    Actually that is just one of the many lies he told in the speech.

    eg HR3400 is radically different from HR3200.
    – mandates vs no mandates
    – higher taxes vs no higher taxes
    – Govt using QALY vs not
    – unfunded mandates on medicaid expansion vs not
    – no tort reform vs tort reform
    – no health savings accounts vs expanded HSAs
    – Govt-run system vs healthcare choice

    The only possible area of agreement might be regulating pre-existing conditions, but I dont think ANY Republican should be voting for ANY bill that lacks tort reform components.

    Travis Monitor (e991bc)

  27. Yet, I have a sense that a few people may have heard about the “everybody’s gotta buy insurance” part for the first time on Tuesday. I’ll be quite interested to see how that all polls out in a day or so. For me personally, helping subsidize fellow citizens who truly cannot afford coverage is one thing; but subsidizing people who don’t even want insurance but are forced to buy it, is another matter entirely.

    Indeed. To me, Mandates are the Rubicon. Once crossed, you have abandoned the notion of freedom of choice in the healthcare arena. The ultimate result will inevitably be single-payer or an equivalently govt-controlled and bureaucracy-addled attack on choice, freedom, and healthcare access.

    Travis Monitor (e991bc)

  28. “I’m trying to figure out exactly what olive branches the president offered Republicans during the speech.”

    I third that sentiment.

    I’m glad we were reminded here about 9/11. Between Obama’s speech and Obama’s speech there wasn’t much air time or newspaper print left over for such things.

    MD in Philly (d4f9fa)

  29. If you’re going to dress up and play pundit, you really, really ought to check out the difference between “nuclear option” and reconciliation in the law and parlance of how Congress works.
    It will make you more erudite, though admittedly cramp your style.
    But as it stands now, it’s not even a stretch to sit up straight and yell: “You lie!”

    Larry Reilly (45c8f2)

  30. p.s.
    Reconciliation is set forth here:
    Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. § 641(e)(2)
    That’s the rule, by statute.

    Invoking the nuclear option is to deliberately ignore the rules. That’s not what’s going to happen here. Deliberate ignorance of the rules was heavily played and perfected in the first eight years of this decade/century.

    Larry Reilly (45c8f2)

  31. This explains Harry Reid’s otherwise inexplicable statements at his press conference where he said how much Obama’s plan incorporates Republican ideas and how seriously Obama has ‘reached out’ to republicans (he offered an “olich” branch!). They are trying to set up the spin…

    LASue (2e186f)

  32. If the Democrats abuse the existing rules to get a health care takeover legislation with high unpopularity, they’ll lose control of Congress in 2010 and they know it.

    Democrats in Congress won’t throw themselves on the bonfire just to sacrifice themselves for Obama’s legacy.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  33. The Republicans need to call them on it, bluntly. Maybe McCain can go on TV and refer to the President as “that lying sack of ****” or some such.

    I hear there’s a Demo tomorrow.

    Kevin Murphy (3c3db0)

  34. I don’t think he’s going to do it. He knows it’s the Dems who are holding him back, not the Repubs.
    It would expose him as a political idiot.

    Patricia (c95a48)

  35. Obama has offered Castro more olive branches than the Republicans. Oh, wait.

    Kevin Murphy (3c3db0)

  36. This is going to be an interesting 14 months to come. It may affect the rest of our history or it may show the failure of an inexperienced candidate who was elected with no qualification.

    Mike K (addb13)

  37. Republicans only need to offer to repeal the act in 2010. The majority of Americans do not want what Obama is offering. Since most of the damage of HB3200 do not kick in till 2013, the damage will be averted. Obama needs to pay attention to the number of folks at the Washington DC tea party. Next time they come they could come armed.

    Zelsdorf Ragshaft III (bb8b3f)

  38. The Rebbubbacans used reconciliation to pass the “Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act” of 2001, the “Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act” of 2003, the “Deficit Reduction Act” of 2005, and the “Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act” of 2005.

    The “Nuclear option” refers to the ending of the filibuster. Maybe you’d like to change that, but it’s not that easy.

    Stop lying.

    Please.

    JW Democrat (213e20)

  39. The President has the majority in both Houses of Congress. He can do what he wants.

    He may well nationalize health care. It really is his choice, whether I, or you, agree or disagree.

    That’s why elections matter.

    JFK stared down the Missiles of October and that was his ultimate triumph.

    But he was facing a foreign foe.

    What happens when the President has to face a domestic foe?

    Although persistent indoctrination over the course of decades has made our Republic’s citizens willing receptors of an all-knowing, benevolent government, what actually will happen when they are forced to accept that government’s edicts?

    I don’t know. We may be at the point that “We, the people” really don’t care. We’ve turned to the government so often and so long to solve problems that we will willingly give up our rights as citizens — as individuals — for the greater benefit of all.

    That’s definitely the impression I’ve received from the detractors on this board.

    The people in Washington, which we elected, really do know best, as evidenced by so many commentators here.

    It’s time to sit down, shut up, and let our betters direct our lives and the nation.

    Ag80 (dfbb64)

  40. The Rebbubbacans used reconciliation to pass the “Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act” of 2001, the “Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act” of 2003, the “Deficit Reduction Act” of 2005, and the “Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act” of 2005.

    1) Learn to spell.
    2) Those acts were BUDGET acts, which the BUDGET Reconciliation process is designed to handle, lest each line item be subject to a filibuster.
    3) While Obamacare severely trashes the budget, it mostly orders Americans around and stuff, so it is not a budget act, and it should not use the reconciliation process.

    Kevin Murphy (3c3db0)

  41. That’s why elections matter.

    Which is why it’s especially heartening today to see Meghan’s daddy’s piss-ant little flunky working to increase the margin of the dirty socialist majority.

    Meghan’s daddy is truly a gift that keeps on giving.

    happyfeet (6b707a)

  42. Why is it that every time you see JW Dhimmi’s name in the sidebar, hilarity ensues?

    JD (f52b33)

  43. JW Democrat said:

    The Rebbubbacans used reconciliation to pass the “Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act” of 2001, the “Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act” of 2003, the “Deficit Reduction Act” of 2005, and the “Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act” of 2005.

    The “Nuclear option” refers to the ending of the filibuster. Maybe you’d like to change that, but it’s not that easy.

    Stop lying.

    Please.

    Although I wasn’t responding to you, the internet gods smiled on me.

    You’re right. It’s not that easy.

    Parties in power use that power to enact, whether you, or I, disagree or not.

    And, I’ve never called you a liar, although you misrepresented a point I was trying to make in an earlier posting.

    I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again, people are not liars because they disagree with you. People are liars when they misrepresent the facts.

    And, I’m quite sure you will call me a liar now.

    But, it really doesn’t advance your cause.

    Republicans used the their majority power to advance their beliefs, by the the constituents who elected them. Democrats are now doing the same.

    So, exactly, why was the GOP wrong and the
    Dems right? They were, and are, doing what they were elected to do.

    Ag80 (dfbb64)

  44. hf,

    McKinnon was Bush’s PR person and then he moved on to McCain’s team. But McKinnon had vowed he would leave the McCain ad team if Obama became the Democratic nominee because he thought Obama’s election “would send a great message to the country and the world.”

    DRJ (662925)

  45. DRJ – McKinnon was on MSNBC with Joan Walsh and it seemed like a contest who could praise Barcky more.

    JD (f52b33)

  46. DRJ, I can think of lots of reasons to elect someone like Obama as Presidnet, but “to send a message”??!?? That’s so dumb the person saying it shouldn’t be trusted with anything important ever again.

    Kevin Murphy (3c3db0)

  47. For those of you thinking that Obama and the Democrats will never pursue reconcilation, you simply don’t understand how essential health care reform is to Democrats. I hold to my view that a plan is passing this year. Something is going to pass one way or the other, b/c failure would gut the party. As Republicans have found the hard way, splitting your base is what kills you in the end (Hello, John McCain). The Democratic base would be crushed by failure. DeMint, the bastard, was right: It would be Waterloo. The foot soldiers would dry up; the money would wither.

    The timing is right and may never be better. The AMA, Big Pharma, companies like Wal-Mart, the unions, even several insurance giants (despite the way they’re being demonized) are lined up in a way they never have been. You’re dreaming if you think the Dems are just going to throw that all away along with 59 votes in the Senate and a 70-vote advantage in the House.

    Obama did indeed set potential reconciliation up by emphasizing during his speech that he was incorporating Republican ideas. The reason for that was to send the message: “We have their ideas. That’s bipartisan. We don’t necessarily need their votes. Just so you know: We tried to work with them.”

    The GOP could get more or less what it wanted if it followed JVW’s advice from No. 11. If five GOP senators signed onto the 80 percent areas of agreement, or enough to get them to 60 for cloture, Obama would be in a jam, the public option would be put on the back-burner and I think a decent amount of tort reform could be added.

    But none of that is going to happen, I don’t think, b/c the Republicans have no intention of signing onto any plan proposed by Obama or the Democratic Congress.

    Maybe no one here watches MSNBC, but their chief Washington correspodent Chuck Todd several weeks ago, speaking with what expertise I don’t know, said that he had heard that the president privately thinks trying to get 60 votes is riduculous when a bill can pass on 50.

    Note the movement by Nancy and other top leaders to soften their stance on the public option. This is that last major piece to attract the straggling Blue Dogs. If Nancy can hold together her caucus through the whittling down to nothingness of the public option, a bill is as good as passed.

    Finally, Joe Wilson is absolutely perfect for getting the Dems’ esprit de corps at a high rev after Obama’s well-received speech. ($848,000 raised for Rob Miller since “You Lie.” PPP now has the race, once in the bag for Wilson, at dead even.)

    To sum up, I think you guys are about to get served. Only time will tell.

    Myron (e63c20)

  48. Hey, Moron, in case you haven’t heard, poll numbers crash and burn for Democrats if the pubic option is pulled out of the socialist healthcare rationing bill. If Pelosi pulls that out, she does so at her own political risk.

    I remember when the Contract With America swept Republicans into the House. After they got there, some Democrat was blathering on in a committee, spouting all sorts of disinformation. A freshman Republican walked up, placed a copy of the bill in front of the Democrat, pointed to it, and the Democrat was forced to “shut up” because of. Lack of decorum? Yes. More integrity in the freshman Republican’s little finger than in the entire body of the old coot Democrat? Yes.

    And that’s what Debs in power cannot handle.

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  49. Myron,

    That is by far the most reasoned and persuasive comment I’ve ever seen from you. I hope your wrong, but you make a very strong case and may be absolutely right. As you say, time will tell.

    Stashiu3 (ed6467)

  50. perhaps I was unfair

    I’d forgotten that that was McKinnon. McKinnon McClellan McCain … I just… it’s just too much sometimes.

    happyfeet (6b707a)

  51. It is a game to Myron and its ilk. A tiresome partisan game. Like Barcky said, “I won”, so STFU and get out of his way.

    JD (f52b33)

  52. Of course, if and when the Dems go to the nuclear option it will set up the moment somewhere down the road (hopefully soon) when we will have a Republican President and a GOP majority in the Senate of, let’s say, 55 members. The GOP will then decide that they too can pass essential legislation of a partisan nature — major tort reform, private accounts for social security, etc. — on a majority vote, then suddenly all the lefty talking heads in the media, academia, and on the blogs will once again decide that the cloture rule requiring 60 votes is sacrosanct.

    JVW (d1215a)

  53. “even several insurance giants (despite the way they’re being demonized)”
    What?
    They’re trying to save their own asses. And Obama’s already caved by pushing congress to disallow negotiation for volume drug pricing.

    And please no Rebubbacan squealing about profit margins. The government funds R&D up the wazoo and Pharma price margins are huge.

    JW Democrat (105b91)

  54. John,

    Myron’s point is well-taken. They realize that there won’t be a better time than now. If they can get something passed, they can build on it later… but now is their best shot at getting the foot in the door. The ones facing reelection may hope that the short-memory public will have forgotten what the fuss was about, or still be willing to give it more time.

    Stashiu3 (ed6467)

  55. Myron said:

    To sum up, I think you guys are about to get served. Only time will tell.

    But why? So you’re saying we have to have national health care because you’re pissed off? Because, Wal-Mart and the insurance companies make profits? Because we all need to be taught a lesson? Because you know better? Because Europe has been doing this for years and we should follow their example? Because someone didn’t receive the necessary care?

    Is this about people or is it really about payback?

    I don’t give two craps about Chuck Todd or Nancy Pelosi or the AMA or the useless GOP.

    Your guys have the votes available in the House and Senate. Pass it. As your folks say, “We won.” By god you did, implement your mandate.

    What I think about your rights and that bothersome Constitution doesn’t really matter.

    Maybe, we’ll “get served>” And you win on points.

    Have fun with that.

    Ag80 (dfbb64)

  56. And just as an aside, what the hell is a “Rebbubbacans?

    Does that mean people who are too stupid to understand your inherit knowledge because they didn’t attend college or live in a rural area?

    As an insult, it really doesn’t work well. As a snark, it doesn’t make sense. I thought your side was the champion of the little people.

    Stick to the old tried and true “Rethuglicans.”

    Otherwise, you’re insulting your base.

    Ag80 (dfbb64)

  57. “Obama did indeed set potential reconciliation up by emphasizing during his speech that he was incorporating Republican ideas. The reason for that was to send the message: “We have their ideas. That’s bipartisan.”

    Myron – Everybody but his acolytes recognize that Obama’s speeches are mostly empty words and what counts is what he does. The promises he has made in speeches have mostly all had expiration dates before he reneged on them. There has been no actual reaching out by Obama or the House leadership. If he continues with that fiction and attempts to shift blame for not getting a bill done to Republicans, rather than keeping it on his own his own side of the aisle where it belongs, he will be called out on it.

    Those are the facts and on those there is no debate.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  58. Kevin Murphy,

    I don’t agree with McKinnon. I was just pointing out that he had expressed support for Obama even before Obama had won the Democratic primary.

    DRJ (662925)

  59. The GOP could get more or less what it wanted if it followed JVW’s advice from No. 11. If five GOP senators signed onto the 80 percent areas of agreement, or enough to get them to 60 for cloture, Obama would be in a jam, the public option would be put on the back-burner and I think a decent amount of tort reform could be added.

    But these GOP Senators would not be in a position to shape the bill, as the Democrats control the committees where the bill will be hashed out.

    Thus, the GOP Senators would have the option of signing on to something they don’t want and be played as supporters who betrayed their constituents, or refusing to sign something they don’t want and be foolishly played like obstructionists. Besides, the GOP has other ideas, but can’t get the media to report them. As dim witted as the GOP is, it’s not surprising.

    Either way, the Democrats will get the bill they want.

    And just like Bonnie and Clyde, who got what they wanted in a similar manner, their biggest concern is that they can last long enough to spend it.

    Which is why I don’t believe that this is about anything other than a huge disruptive diversion. Obama and his ‘team’ picked something that is hugely unpopular, health care reform, and they know this from the experiences of the Clintons. Their problem is how to get away with the funds, after the heist. The bill is crap, it won’t work and Obama and team know it. That’s why they can’t be around to answer for its failures. It has to turn into a crisis that’s too good to waste.

    And it really is the perfect ‘crisis’. Just fucking with health care will create a huge cloud of anger from the majority of people who don’t want this thing, which will be used to obscure the transfer of ‘organizational’ funds. By the time the smoke clears, the voters are heard and the travesty is halted, enough will have been stolen to float those who lent a hand. Besides, it’s been proven that the American people have a short memory, and will quickly grab onto useless slogans and vague catchphrases. The entire time the return to sanity will be portrayed as a partisan battle that ‘stopped health care before it could work’.

    I swear, if someone produced audiotape of a stoned Obama and crew watching a dvd of Die Hard, it wouldn’t surprise me. You can hear Rahm exclaiming “That’s it! We blow the economy and once the smoke clears everyone’s in too much shock to go looking for the missing money.”

    Apogee (e2dc9b)

  60. JD: No, not a game. I don’t think people should die b/c they don’t have money. That’s not a game for me.

    Myron (e63c20)

  61. JVW: The GOP already has a record of passing legislation on reconciliation, namely Bush’s controversial tax cuts for the wealthy. This will be brought up. Obama again previewed the strategy, by saying that the tax cuts cost the country more than his proposed reform.

    Myron (e63c20)

  62. now is their best shot at getting the foot in the door.

    Exactly. That’s the goal for this year.

    Myron (e63c20)

  63. Like I said, this will be a very interesting 14 months. Moron probably agrees. Showdown in 2010. America on the line.

    Mike K (addb13)

  64. This thought just occurred to me. Perhaps I am becoming paranoid and seeing conspiracies everywhere, but what if the whole House Dems/Liberal squawking about abandoning Afghanistan was a warning to Obama telling him that if he messes up health reform that they are going to have to deal him a major foreign policy setback in order to placate the left-wing base base? It will be interesting to see if and when Obama gets his health care legislation whether the Dems give him some breathing room on Afghanistan.

    Of course, on the other hand, passing health care will make money all the more scarce in Washington, and with Obama promising that health care will be deficit neutral maybe Afghanistan will still have to be kissed off simply because of financial reasons. I only hope that if Iran is going to nuke Los Angeles that they do it before the public option is fully phased-in so that I don’t have to stand in line for the rationed radiation poisoning care.

    JVW (d1215a)

  65. By the way, I agree with DRJ’s assessment: This is a gamble, not win-win. But Dems are feeling big-risk, big-reward right now.

    Myron (e63c20)

  66. JVW: The GOP already has a record of passing legislation on reconciliation, namely Bush’s controversial tax cuts for the wealthy. This will be brought up. Obama again previewed the strategy, by saying that the tax cuts cost the country more than his proposed reform.

    Myron, I’ll type this very slowly so that you understand: by rule, budgets are always passed on reconciliation. Otherwise, a determined band of 40 will be able to hold it up indefinitely.

    JVW (d1215a)

  67. Or I guess, technically, 41.

    JVW (d1215a)

  68. No, not a game. I don’t think people should die b/c they don’t have money. That’s not a game for me.

    Canada health system.
    Great Britain health system.
    Oregon health system.

    People die because the government decided their health care is too expensive.

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  69. I don’t think people should die b/c they don’t have money.

    Link please?

    You are, of course, okay with (other) people dying if it’s for the greater good.

    Apogee (e2dc9b)

  70. The Netherlands too, John. That is an outstanding example of where people are being euthanized (at their own request) even though they are likely only suffering from depression, and where the board overseeing “death with dignity” requests from patients only responded negatively in three out of over two thousand cases.

    JVW (d1215a)

  71. Which is why I don’t believe that this is about anything other than a huge disruptive diversion.

    Apogee: If health care is the diversion, what is it do you think the Obama team wants exactly?

    Health care is the main event.

    Myron (e63c20)

  72. People die because the government decided their health care is too expensive.

    J. Hitchcock: Not even fringe politicians in those countries suggest throwing out their universal health care systems. So the people must like those systems OK. There are problems in every system. None are perfect.

    Myron (e63c20)

  73. Dirty socialist health care is for herds, not for people.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  74. Apogee:

    20,000 a year die for lack of access:

    http://christyhardinsmith.firedoglake.com/2009/04/02/20000-americans-die-each-year-due-to-lack-of-healthcare/

    Beyond that, under the current system we all pay for the ER visits of people who use the ER as their primary care. As a country, we have chosen the most expensive way to fund the uninsured.

    Beyond that, many people with health care are broken financially by their health care bills.

    All of these scenarios are disgraceful.

    So no, it’s not a game, to return to my original point. And I don’t think Democrats are the ones treating this country’s problems like a game.

    Myron (e63c20)

  75. And I don’t think Democrats are the ones treating this country’s problems like a game.

    No, they treat it — and politics in general — like a religion, as a need to pray at the altar of their (supposed) compassion and love. The fact so many of them at the same time can be so blase or unconcerned about the outrageous nature of lawsuit-crazed people — and their ambulance-chasing trial lawyers — creating huge burdens on practitioners in the medical industry really shows just how shallow and corrupt their compassion really is.

    Mark (411533)

  76. As a country, we

    herdthink

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  77. What about the homeless? Were’t we told by so-called homeless advocates that 20,000 a year die in the streets for lack of access?

    But that doesn’t mean the Federal Government should take over all housing in the United States, and then fine people around $1,000 a year if they haven’t managed to find somewhere to live. And it doesn’t mean the Feds should seize vacant properties and let illegal aliens live there.

    Tell you what, Myron. If you’ve got such an unmanageable bleeding heart, I suggest that you pay for all the people’s medical care when they need some. That’s compassion.

    Official Internet Data Office (2a54fa)

  78. “Beyond that, many people with health care are broken financially by their health care bills.”

    Myron – Many people are also broken financially by their mortgage bills. Obama and democrats find that disgraceful, but the government cannot insure against stupidity and job loss for everybody or perhaps you disagree.

    Having the government as an insurer of last resort does not mean making the government the insurer for everyone and restructuring the entire system. Why can’t the Democrats discuss this honestly?

    daleyrocks (718861)

  79. That’s right–the government cannot insure against stupidity. If they could, we wouldn’t have Myron.

    Official Internet Data Office (2a54fa)

  80. The fact so many of them at the same time can be so blase or unconcerned about the outrageous nature of lawsuit-crazed people

    Mark: I don’t think it’s that. It’s more that constraining people’s ability to pursue their legal rights is not as important to Democrats as getting every American covered. It’s the “so-called” compassion thing. So sue us. 🙂

    Myron (e63c20)

  81. ” … cannot insure against stupidity …”

    Daley: It’s not stupidity if someone cannot pay high medical bills, which can be in the multiple thousands even for insured people, b/c of an unexpected illness. But your judging other people is always appreciated and productive.

    Myron (e63c20)

  82. I appreciate people that tell me in order to meet their standards of compassion, they need to forcibly take my money.

    It’s so — refreshingly touching.

    steve miller (c5e78c)

  83. that s/b who

    steve miller (c5e78c)

  84. #75 Mark:

    No, they treat it — and politics in general — like a religion, as a need to pray at the altar of their (supposed) compassion and love.

    All that “compassion and love” boils down to “I’m smarter, so you should do things my way.”

    See, the real problem is that Democrats don’t like people. You get too many of ’em in a room, and they get smelly. Hell, some, like farmers, are smelly anyway. And they ain’t too bright. See, most people are average, and of course, Democrats aren’t. Average, that is. They’re unique. Just ask ’em.

    So, where a conservative would say, “I dunno, figure it out for yourself” because, in the end, most people don’t like being told what to do, a Democrat will say “Here, here! Do it my way!” not at all realizing that the people that get helped that way generally tend to build up a resentment towards being treated like they are less than “average.” And a Democrat in a position of authority is far more likely to tack on an “or Else!”

    It really just is as simple as whether you like people or not. With all their warts, foibles, dried up cow pats stuck to their shoes, and their clothes that are so last whatever. If you like ’em, you’re usually willing to let them live their own lives, and if not, you become a Democrat.

    And that also explains the charity gap.

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  85. Daley: It’s not stupidity if someone cannot pay high medical bills

    Myron – I was referring to mortgages. You seem to have a problem with reading comprehension and condescension. At least Wednesday Obama modified his mortgage demagoguery to make it clear he was only referring to keeping responsible Americans in their homes.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  86. #78 daleyrocks:

    “Beyond that, many people with health care are broken financially by their health care bills.”

    Did ol’ sharp as a beach ball really say that?

    Huh, looking back up the thread, I guess he did. I am gonna have to guess that isn’t really what he meant since it is so nonsensical, but a lot of his comments are which is why I typically let somebody else read ’em first.

    First of all, everybody has “health care.” I guess you mean health insurance, and even so, I still ain’t exactly sure what your point is. But I think you really mean: “People without health insurance are subject to financial hardship because of an adverse health event that is expensive.” (Also true of people that do have health insurance, so it could be read either way.)

    You know what? Life happens. If, with a little foresight and planning, you prepared yourself financially for an adverse health event, by buying insurance and saving some money “for a rainy day,” it is possible to weather such an event with some things intact. Like your house. Maybe a car.

    That doesn’t mean you buy health insurance when you turn 18 and you are healthy as a horse and you don’t race stock cars professionally. You buy health insurance later, when you are financially a little more established, when you have obligations to others, when you have discovered that your family history has some predisposition towards what might be an expensive thing to handle.

    And even when you have prepared for all that, and you do get sick anyway, and all your planning hasn’t been for nought, but you do spend all of your resources on getting well again, you don’t go moping around that “life ain’t fair!”

    Because guess what? It ain’t. And if you done good enough to come through all of that alive, you thank your lucky stars, your parents, your Ineffable Name, and get on with life.

    Because shit happens.

    [Released from the filter — DRJ]

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  87. #82 steve miller:

    It’s so — refreshingly touching.

    Nah, its typical of a Democrat twatwaffle, is what it is.

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  88. It’s the “so-called” compassion thing.

    I’d give you people on the left some leeway for your frequent lack of common sense if I saw studies that indicated your compassion — your supposed humaneness — at least corresponded with your talking the talk, walking the walk. But when I observe the harsh light of reality, and see that the liberal political instincts that “leftys” pride themselves on is more likely to do nothing but make them flaky and sloppily dishonest, time and time again, I don’t believe there’s much of anything left to admire:

    Nicholas D. Kristof, New York Times, December 2008

    This holiday season is a time to examine who’s been naughty and who’s been nice, but I’m unhappy with my findings. The problem is this: We liberals are personally stingy.

    Liberals show tremendous compassion in pushing for generous government spending to help the neediest people at home and abroad. Yet when it comes to individual contributions to charitable causes, liberals are cheapskates.

    Arthur Brooks, the author of a book on donors to charity, “Who Really Cares,” cites data that households headed by conservatives give 30 percent more to charity than households headed by liberals. A study by Google found an even greater disproportion: average annual contributions reported by conservatives were almost double those of liberals.

    “When I started doing research on charity,” Mr. Brooks wrote, “I expected to find that political liberals — who, I believed, genuinely cared more about others than conservatives did — would turn out to be the most privately charitable people. So when my early findings led me to the opposite conclusion, I assumed I had made some sort of technical error. I re-ran analyses. I got new data. Nothing worked. In the end, I had no option but to change my views.”

    Something similar is true internationally. European countries seem to show more compassion than America in providing safety nets for the poor, and they give far more humanitarian foreign aid per capita than the United States does. But as individuals, Europeans are far less charitable than Americans.

    Americans give sums to charity equivalent to 1.67 percent of G.N.P., according to a terrific new book, “Philanthrocapitalism,” by Matthew Bishop and Michael Green. The British are second, with 0.73 percent, while the stingiest people on the list are the French, at 0.14 percent.

    According to Google’s figures, if donations to all religious organizations are excluded, liberals give slightly more to charity than conservatives do. But Mr. Brooks says that if measuring by the percentage of income given, conservatives are more generous than liberals even to secular causes.

    Conservatives also appear to be more generous than liberals in nonfinancial ways. People in red states are considerably more likely to volunteer for good causes, and conservatives give blood more often. If liberals and moderates gave blood as often as conservatives, Mr. Brooks said, the American blood supply would increase by 45 percent.

    If you’ve got such an unmanageable bleeding heart, I suggest that you pay for all the people’s medical care when they need some.

    I think analyses or assessments like what’s described directly above gives you an answer to your suggestion.

    Mark (411533)

  89. #88 Mark:

    — your supposed humaneness —

    I’m telling ya, has nothing to do with “compassion” or “humaneness” or anything like that!

    They really just don’t like people and think they can do a better job of your life than you can!

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  90. It’s fun when you can use conservatives to counter earnest lightweights like Kristof and right wing loons:

    Lindgren on Brooks’ “who really cares”
    http://volokh.com/posts/1164012942.shtml
    It’s moderates who are stingy not liberals.

    Never mind the question of how many conservatives actually make their living as teachers, doctors, nurses, or any of the other fields involved in things other than the pursuit of wealth.

    [Released from the filter — DRJ]

    JW Democrat (105b91)

  91. If you’ve got such an unmanageable bleeding heart, I suggest that you pay for all the people’s medical care when they need some.

    I’ll one up you on that. Come the next shift in party power, how about ‘restructuring’ the country so that people like Myron ‘donate’ all of their earnings and assets to the poor?

    Myron and his friends can live in government subsidized housing – we could call it ‘District 10’ – Near Baker or Barstow perhaps, and eat fresh, nutritious government cheese.

    We cannot allow our Democratic constituents to continue avoiding their charitable contributions. We’ve seen the article (proof enough for most Democrats) – they’re cheapskates. Therefore legislation should be enacted to ‘apportion’ an ‘acceptable’ percentage (decided by the Republicans in office) of Democrat earnings and assets to the downtrodden. Who are these downtrodden? Don’t worry, we’ll let you know after we take the money.

    Myron would also have to take some re-education courses to rid him of his penchant for untruth.

    Take, for example, his statement about 20K a year succumbing for ‘lack of access’ to health care. The link simply has those words written in quotes – no link to the actual ‘study’ – no explanation about what ‘access’ defines – no breakdown of age, previous disorders or circumstances.

    An absolutely shining example of the sloppy and uninformed thought processes necessary to argue in favor of this scam.

    He then goes on to complain about treating “people who use the ER as their primary care.” – Who might that be, Myron? The very same group of people that Obama has pledged will not be covered by healthcare? Do you even think before you write this stuff? Even if you don’t believe Obama (and why would anyone at this point), you shouldn’t structure your argument to conflict entirely with the message of the person who you are trying to support.

    Like, again for example, your simultaneous complaint that many people are ‘broken financially by their health care bills’ and your steadfast refusal to do anything about tort reform, when most Doctors complain that malpractice insurance and lawsuit abuse is their major concern in how they conduct their practices.

    This is why this entire bill is nothing but a distraction, Myron. It won’t work because Democrats aren’t serious about reforming health care.

    Listen closely – the only reason for this bill is the opportunity to run an incredible amount of money through the hands of Democratic committees for the purposes of ‘funding’ politically connected groups. When this inevitably crashes, as is currently happening to ACORN, enough will have been transferred to ensure the survival of Democratic support for years.

    This has nothing to do with helping people, and everything to do with stealing public funds. The unserious actions of the Democrats (vague, unspecific ideas; no tort reform; cost estimates wildly out of touch; etc) prove that this is nothing other than a distraction. Since we have already seen how Obama’s politically motivated funding works, my only question is: why would they assume nobody would notice?

    Apogee (e2dc9b)

  92. “That will set up a Democratic argument that Senate leaders have been forced to use a partisan budget tool known as reconciliation to pass a health bill through the Senate by a simple majority, instead of 60 votes”

    Majorities are all that are needed to pass bills. 60 votes are needed to end debate. Recently. In the past conservative opponents of progress had to actually sit there and filibuster and look like silly assholes.

    imdw (66f2a5)

  93. They really just don’t like people and think they can do a better job of your life than you can!

    And regardless of their income level, their tendency to talk out of both sides of their mouth — and to be totally unashamed about doing that — means a good number of them are the essence of limousine liberals. A truly well-known example of one of those involves a beloved figure of the left/Democrat Party, sort of an Obama Part I (or Obama being FDR, if not Jimmy Carter, Part II), if you will — who presided over a previous period of major economic weakness in America — as described below…

    taxhistory.org:

    Consider, for instance, the tax returns of Franklin D. Roosevelt. The returns were not released during FDR’s presidency, but had they been, they would have proved an embarrassment. Tax Analysts has recently acquired from the National Archives copies of the tax returns that Roosevelt filed between 1913 and 1937. And as a group, they reveal something striking: Roosevelt — a vicious and moralistic scourge of tax avoiders everywhere — had a penchant for minimizing his own taxes.

    Throughout his 12 years in office, Roosevelt was a frequent critic of Americans who tried to avoid taxes, even using legal means. “Mr. Justice Holmes said, ‘Taxes are what we pay for a civilized society,'” Roosevelt told Congress in 1937. “Too many individuals, however, want the civilization at a discount.”

    Roosevelt’s 1937 message on tax avoidance decried a variety of popular techniques, including the use of overseas and domestic personal holding companies, the creation of multiple trusts for the support of family members, and the incorporation of money-losing country estates and personal yachts.

    Such bombast carried the day in 1937, when FDR pushed a tax bill through Congress that tried to eliminate some of the more glaring loopholes. Other high points in Rooseveltian tax policy — including the Wealth Tax Act of 1935, the undistributed profits tax of 1936, and the tax bill veto of 1944 — were also rooted in a conviction that rich Americans were gaming the tax laws.

    But Roosevelt’s tax returns reveal him to be something of a hypocrite. At various points, both before and after his election to the White House, he indulged in the sort of tax avoidance that he claimed to find so objectionable.

    For instance, Roosevelt repeatedly urged Congress to end the tax-free treatment of interest on state and municipal bonds. The special treatment accorded to those financial instruments, he told Congress in April 1938, “has created a vast reservoir of tax-exempt securities in the hands of the very persons who equitably should not be relieved of taxes on their income.” Congress should act to end the injustice, he declared.

    Yet just a month before, FDR had filed a tax return indicating that he owned some $17,000 in tax-free bonds.

    An even more striking example of Roosevelt’s tax avoidance involved a technique that only a president could love. During his first term in office, FDR repeatedly claimed that he was exempt from the high tax rates on personal income that Congress had enacted — and Roosevelt had approved — in the revenue acts of 1934 and 1935.

    In a series of letters to internal revenue officials, Roosevelt insisted that he could not be taxed at the heavy rates imposed on rich taxpayers during the mid-1930s.

    Taken as a whole, Roosevelt’s tax returns show a scrupulous attention to detail. Many of the forms seem to have been completed in his own hand, and he clearly played an active role in filing them (especially before he was elected president).

    [I]f Roosevelt met the legal standard for tax compliance, he fell short when judged by his own standards of tax morality.

    “It is enlightening,” wrote historian Mark Leff in his study of New Deal taxation, The Limits of Symbolic Reform, “to attempt to square Roosevelt’s distaste for tax avoidance with his own tax forms.” To be blunt, it can’t be done.

    ^ This also shows that FDR not only was a phony, but an idiot too, in that he didn’t understand the basics of human nature that can either help or hurt economic synergy and productivity. IOW, he expressed a desire to discourage people from investing their money, even when it came to friggin’ municipal bonds, no less!

    No wonder UCLA economic analysts who did research awhile back on why the Great Depression lasted so long concluded that a good share of the blame had to be laid right in front of President Limousine Liberal, aka Franklin Roosevelt.

    Mark (411533)

  94. Myron: Beyond that, many people with health care are broken financially by their health care bills.

    Myron: It’s not stupidity if someone cannot pay high medical bills, which can be in the multiple thousands even for insured people, b/c of an unexpected illness.

    Correct, it is not stupidity, but it is an unfortunate component that your crowd are not going to solve, even with the proposed government health reform. If a person has something requiring expensive treatments, then they are most likely unable to work. If they have any other debts, excluding the medical ones, then they go bankrupt.

    I think we have all seen the statistics about 60% of bankruptcies are due to medical bills, but what would doing that same study in a year say. How much will be due to the current economy and job loss? Anyone should prefer seeing high number of bankruptcies occurring due unpleasant natural events as opposed to broader economic ones.

    Say I become ill with a condition and I am on the new proposed government plan. It will not pick up all the costs and treatments, just like private insurance. Therefore, I decide to go and find something experimental or not properly codified as “best practice”. I take out as much money as my situation allows to pay for it, based on my financial picture at the time. However, an adverse income situation occurs, company goes out of business, lose my job, etc. I would have no other recourse, but bankruptcy.

    The government plan cannot stop this from happening. Even if they have complete control of the health industry, there is still medical tourism. People are going to do and pay whatever they can to save their own lives.

    pwr (2cf0a8)

  95. J. Hitchcock: Not even fringe politicians in those countries suggest throwing out their universal health care systems. So the people must like those systems OK. There are problems in every system. None are perfect.

    Comment by Myron

    The Netherlands “threw out their universal health care system” and went back to private insurance. Lefties have protested that the insurance companies are regulated but the US health insurance industry is the most regulated industry in existence.

    Moron, they have this thing called Google. Try it sometime before you make these declarative statements that show you don’t know what you are talking about.

    Mike K (addb13)

  96. #91 Mark:

    in that he didn’t understand the basics of human nature

    And Democrats wonder why they are resented by the very people that should “love” them.

    #92 pwr:

    The government plan cannot stop this from happening.

    Like I said above, life is unfair.

    Not only can the government NOT stop this from happening, in the interest of allowing us individual liberty, it should not attempt to do so. Any action arising from such a fundamentally flawed view of the universe is not only doomed to failure, but will have horrendous consequences for all the people affected as well.

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  97. Back at you MIke:

    “So, how does the Dutch system work?
    Their system is fairly simple, everyone is required to purchase insurance from highly-regulated private providers. They describe it as “private health insurance with social conditions”. Insurers are tightly regulated for quality, provision of basic services, and to prevent discrimination, as they are required to accept everyone in their coverage area at a flat rate, no matter what their health status. To prevent loss of profitability from chronically-ill patients, they have a risk equalization system so that rather than losing profits from recruiting sicker patients, insurance companies are compensated for providing service to those patients who need it most. And if a citizen wants to change companies, or buy additional insurance they are free to. It’s a system that encourages competition, but is regulated to prevent the companies from selecting only healthy patients, or otherwise abusing the system to prevent health care provision to sick people. The incentives are designed to provide excellent care to as many people as possible, cheaply and efficiently no matter what their health status, rather than the perverse US system in which the incentives are to deny care and only sign on the healthy. The government even runs a website allowing patients to comparison shop among the different insurance companies and hospitals based upon their ratings for quality, outcomes and performance indicators.

    A survey of health satisfaction comparing the US and several other countries, including the Netherlands, showed that the Netherlands led the pack in most measures of patient satisfaction and provision of care.”

    No link because I’m having spam filter problems. But select a bunch of the text and google it. It’s on Scienceblogs’ Denialism blog. You won’t like what you read

    JW Democrat (213e20)

  98. Once any health care bill is passed into law, there is no going back. There is no un-doing, there is only another incredibly huge new and constantly growing federal power over us. Democrats may never win another election again, but the damage will have already been done. Federal jobs. Check. Federal banking system. Check. Federal auto companies. Check. Federal health care. Check. They OWN us now. Political consequences won’t matter one bit. They won.

    DaveinPhoenix (dff67b)

  99. JW – From MikeK’s link regarding the Netherlands at 10:56AM –
    The Dutch reforms are interesting and seem to be going in the opposite direction from Obama’s agenda. I wonder if he knows ? Maybe he or his allies do know and don’t care. He was willing to lose revenue with a capital gains tax increase. Maybe ideology is driving this regardless of practical economics.

    If his ideology is massive theft, it sure is driving his actions.

    Your problem is that you repeatedly make the false assertion that Obamacare is the only option for health care reform, and attempt to smear opponents as defenders of the status quo.

    I, along with most others here understand the need for health care reform. Obamacare will not deliver that reform and is quite obviously a scam to heist public funds. That is why sane people oppose it.

    Apogee (e2dc9b)

  100. Dave,
    They are us. It’s all us. Wingnuts and Kos-acks are us.
    We’re all responsible for what happens to the country; and we can either take responsibility or not.

    Social conservatism and libertarianism don’t mix well. Social conservatives distrust utilitarianism and liberals take their values for granted and then become corrupt. Social conservatives become reactionaries the same way: by re-acting. But when libertarians talk about us and them, “us”=”me.” Liberals are attracted to that, but I’m not. Social conservatism is about community. I may disagree with the terms but that’s not because I think the individual is first. The American revolution was about freedom for the people not the person.
    This country has to grow up.
    All of it.

    JW Democrat (213e20)

  101. The American revolution was about freedom for the people not the person.

    You’ve got to grow up. You can’t have freedom for ‘the people’ by enslaving individuals. By your logic JW Democrat, we should never have implemented the emancipation proclamation, because keeping those blacks enslaved was argued better for ‘the people’ by the southern plantation owners.

    You are one sick fuck.

    Apogee (e2dc9b)

  102. You won’t like what you read

    Comment by JW Democrat

    If you were really interested instead of trying to score points, you would have looked at my blog, selected “health reform” and would learn that the Dutch system you describe is pretty much what I recommend. What I don’t recommend is Obama and Pelosi’s plan to shift the country left by embarking on a massive reorganization of health care that they are lying about. They have no idea of the costs and Obama lied about not costing “one dime more.” That is absolute BS. He plans massive cuts in Medicare which he previewed by his comments about his grandmother. Then he lies about that.

    I WOULDN’T TRUST HIM TO TELL ME WHAT TIME IS SUNRISE, let alone what the Democrats plan to do with health care. They are incompetent running any program, let alone 16% of the economy. He is especially ignorant of economics.

    Most of the Dem leaders in Congress are crooks.

    Pelosi has included many earmarks to benefit not just constituents but her own husband’s businesses, as has Feinstein.

    I needn’t mention Rangel who chairs the committee that writes tax law.

    The administration doesn’t seem to be able to appoint anyone who has paid their taxes.

    ACORN is a criminal enterprise and Obama was heavily involved with them for years.

    Nobody knows what Obama’s college grades were or how he got into Harvard Law. He is a man of mystery. I think he will fail ignominiously and then we may learn his history once he is disgraced.

    Mike K (addb13)

  103. “JVW: The GOP already has a record of passing legislation on reconciliation, namely Bush’s controversial tax cuts for the wealthy. This will be brought up. Obama again previewed the strategy, by saying that the tax cuts cost the country more than his proposed reform.”

    Obama lied. It cost the country nothing, and was a benefit the country. The ‘cost’ was only to Federal tax revenues, but economic growth more than made up for any shortfall.

    The Bush tax cuts are controversial only to those who oppose prosperity and allowing people to keep what they earn.

    Travis Monitor (e991bc)

  104. “McKinnon was Bush’s PR person” and before that worked for Liberal Democrat Texas Gov Ann Richards.

    If he has a Republican bone in his body, its the funny bone, because he’s about as Republican as Arlen Specter and his claims are a joke.

    Travis Monitor (e991bc)

  105. “Obama has offered Castro more olive branches than the Republicans. Oh, wait.”

    Obama sat while Huge Chavez viciously attacked the USA on a 45 minute tirade of a speech. Didnt bat an eyelash. He can take that but cant take a solitary heckle against his own demagogic dissembling?

    Travis Monitor (e991bc)

  106. For those of you thinking that Obama and the Democrats will never pursue reconcilation, you simply don’t understand how essential health care reform is to Democrats. I hold to my view that a plan is passing this year. Something is going to pass one way or the other, b/c failure would gut the party.

    Passing a bill that squeezes medicare with ‘kill granny’ provisions (bye-bye over 65 crowd), add mandates and taxes galore (bye-bye investor class), and limits our ability to make healthcare choices (bye bye the pro-limited govt mods), will make the Dems a permanent minority. This will be 1994+1980, on a much more massive scale.

    The largest taxpayer march in American history just took place. The sleeping giant has been awakened. Passing a bill with higher taxes, mandates, 53 bureaucracies and ‘cost bending’ by govt fiat will create a backlash much larger than if the Dems back off.

    Travis Monitor (e991bc)

  107. No link because I’m having spam filter problems.

    Sure, that must be the reason. Gawd.

    Dmac (a93b13)

  108. JWD – The Dutch system sounds like ObamaCare, but without the government option. As for customer satisfaction, apparently you have other sources than I found:

    “According to Rosenau’s evidence-based assessment, U.S. policymakers seeking to establish universal health care should be aware that, according to the Dutch model, it may not control costs. Insurance companies have seen profit loss on basic policies, health care providers are in opposition and public satisfaction is not high in the Netherlands.

    “The Netherlands is the best test of market competition-based health insurance reform to date,” Rosenau said. “But U.S. policymakers should be careful with this form of universal coverage because it has failed, so far, to reduce costs or improve quality.”

    However, according to Rosenau, the quality and access to health care is sometimes better in the Netherlands, while the healthcare cost per person is half the amount of the United States.

    “We suspect that if patient satisfaction with the Dutch healthcare system has not declined dramatically since the insurance reform (and surveys provide conflicting findings), it is because of a dedicated ‘army’ of primary care physicians who remain committed to their patients. An excellent example is the after-hours care provided by Dutch primary care physicians,” says Rosenau.

    With several industrialized countries providing universal health care coverage, Rosenau believes the Netherlands’ model closely resembles the model that U.S. policymakers are looking to create.”

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081206130857.htm

    Hopefully both you and Nyron agree that the concept of mandatory issue regardless of preexisting conditions, coupled with community rating, which Obama did not discuss Wednesday night so may or may not be part of the deal, put severe upward pressure on health insurance rates. Having an individual mandate may mitigate increases somewhat, but that has not been the case overall. Democrats have not been forthcoming or honest about this aspect of what ObamaCare will do to insurance costs. It’s really dishonesty by omission.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  109. JW D – Just as the partisan piece you linked yesterday about selling insurance across state lines sounded reasonable on the surface, anybody reading it would have immediately realized the authors were using a completely different set of assumptions to reach their conclusions than are being discussed with respect to the health care reforms in front of Congress, rendering such conclusions inoperable. Based on that, I can only conclude you did not read the article or chose not to inform people of its invalid conclusions in order to perpetuate the appearance of supposedly valid points.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  110. This has nothing to do with helping people, and everything to do with stealing public funds.

    Apogee: This is just silly cynicism. To suggest there is nothing wrong with our health care system is naive in the extreme. You should get out more and talk to people. I have: In my job I have countered dozens of people pushed over the brink by unexpected medical costs. They weren’t bums. Their problems weren’t fake. They were decent, hard-working, middle-class people.

    You may have noticed how people from both sides of the aisle are disgusted by insurance companies denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions.

    Your version of reality seems to be gleaned from others’ talking points.

    Myron (e63c20)

  111. Myron,

    At heart, I think your argument is that people shouldn’t have to use their savings and resources to pay for health care and that’s ultimately an argument for a right to health care. But people spend themselves into bankruptcy for all sorts of reasons. What’s wrong with a system that requires people file bankruptcy if they exhaust their resources on medical care? They will still get care and debt relief, but there are also consequences for spending oneself into bankruptcy.

    I know we all feel compassion in individual cases but on a macro level, unlimited medical care means there will be no limit to what people will be willing to spend … and that leads to national bankruptcy.

    DRJ (e06615)

  112. There is no un-doing, there is only another incredibly huge new and constantly growing federal power over us.

    This paranoia sounds familiar.

    Where have we heard it before?

    “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.” – Ronald Reagan

    Same old crap from the same old crowd.

    I’d like to see folks try to snatch Medicare away from seniors in the name of freedom, i.e. freedom to be broke. Good luck.

    And for those worried about the Dutch system: That won’t be our system. Our system will eventually be whatever passes in Congress in the next few weeks and what the president signs into law. A mix of public and private care.

    Myron (e63c20)

  113. “You may have noticed how people from both sides of the aisle are disgusted by insurance companies denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions.”

    Myron – Continuing to demonize insurance companies for legal and rational business decisions just makes you sound like a socialist. If you approach the issue without pointing fingers or assessing any blame for those currently operating within the framework of the law you would sound like a rational person who wants to change structural problems in the way the industry operates. You see injecting the government further into the industry as the solution, others see other ways to sollve some of the same problems you see.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  114. Hey, guys, remember Michael Moore? “Free” healthcare!

    Myron wants Daddy to take care of him. And Daddy can. But then two things follow:

    1. He has to be happy with decisions made in the future by other Daddies who may not agree with Myron politically. I’m continually surprised by the Left not getting this; power is not always wielded by people you like. That is the genesis of why collectivism is so dangerous..

    2. Daddy doesn’t have infinite money. Not that the White House seems to understand this—good thing that there are some nice scapegoats. Partisans of all stripes love scapegoats.

    So, Myron is on board with POTUS “blaming” those eeevvviiiilll insurance companies and eeevvviilll doctors. Mind you, Myron doesn’t work in the insurance business, nor is he a physician.

    He just knows that they are lining their pockets, and that health care should be free. It feels right that way.

    Oh well.

    The take home lesson: freedom times security equals a constant. The more of one, the less of another.

    But why should anyone be surprised? Remember POTUS jawboning about doctors amputating limbs and removing tonsils to line their own pockets?

    And the ironic part is how the Left accuses the Right of class warfare and rank ignorance.

    Projection, thy name is the DNC.

    Eric Blair (0b61b2)

  115. EB, for a scientist, you sure know your way around Eng/AM Lit.

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  116. Eric – Mega millionaire Michael Moore just preiered his new movie declaring “Capitalism is Evil.” I think there is something deeply ironic in that.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  117. premiered

    daleyrocks (718861)

  118. Eric – Last I heard too, Moore was not making his movies in the U.S. to the extent he could avoid it because he would have had to pay his crews union scale. Fucking hypocrite.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  119. Rep. Joe Wilson’s (R-S.C.) outburst on Wednesday was an unexpected gift to the White House, accentuating Obama’s point that bitter politics is getting in the way of improving the healthcare of Americans.
    Thanks Joe!

    The Emperor (1b037c)

  120. DRJ said: “… unlimited medical care means there will be no limit to what people will be willing to spend … and that leads to national bankruptcy.”

    There is a glaring refutation to your argument. Namely: Every other western nation and a great many other countries have had universal health care for years, in some cases, decades. Are they all bankrupt? Of course not.

    This notion that the country that put a man on the moon is the only civilized country that finds it absolutely impossible to provide health care to every citizen — I just don’t buy it. We’re better than that, we’re smarter than that and we’re more moral and compassionate than that.

    Myron (e63c20)

  121. Passing a bill that squeezes medicare with ‘kill granny’ provisions

    Travis, such nonsense moves you immediately out of the realm of rational discourse and onto my “ignore” pile.

    Myron (e63c20)

  122. Canada: People go to US to avoid govt-mandated months-long lines for ‘elective’ care. Others die due to Canada’s decision their care is too expensive.

    Great Britain: People die because the govt decides.

    Nederland; Govt health care dumped because it didn’t work (thanks for the info, whoever provided that link0

    Oregon: We cannot pay for your life-saving chemo but we can pay for doc-assisted suicide.

    Answer those, libturds. And be honest, instead of libturds.

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  123. This notion that the country that put a man on the moon is the only civilized country that finds it absolutely impossible to provide health care to every citizen — I just don’t buy it. We’re better than that, we’re smarter than that and we’re more moral and compassionate than that.

    Comment by Myron — 9/12/2009 @ 6:31 pm

    You are wasting you breath, Myron. Except of course with DRJ. She and a few others are the only good things left here. And I say that with sadness. But keep it up. I love to read your comments.

    The Emperor (1b037c)

  124. “There is a glaring refutation to your argument. Namely: Every other western nation and a great many other countries have had universal health care for years, in some cases, decades.”

    Myron – It is not a refutation. Remember a big part of the conservative argument against nationalizing health care. One word. Rationing. Putz.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  125. Thanks Joe!

    Emperor: When you put Obama next to Joe Wilson as the two competing voices on health care reform, the president’s going to win that every time.

    Sixty-nine percent of people in the district that re-elected Joe have said they disagree with his foolish outburst.

    Everyone has ignored the official Republican response by that boring dude from Louisiana (and no, it wasn’t Bobby Jindal this time.)

    Joe Wilson had the real Republican response, and it wasn’t pretty. That he’s being celebrated as a hero by some on his side only feeds the narrative of the Party of No.

    Myron (e63c20)

  126. Lovey – Is it hard to defecate past your teeth? Do you have to floss after each bowel movement or do you wait until the end of the day?

    daleyrocks (718861)

  127. If you’re in a car and your headed directly toward a washed-out bridge while I’m a passenger, I would suggest you turn around. But if your decision is to step on the accelerator, I will most undoubtedly tell you “NO!” That doesn’t make me a “party of ‘no'” but an intelligent person. You already refused my “turn around” statement.

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  128. oh, groan

    “you’re headed”

    I hate that stupid typo I made with a passion.

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  129. Travis – How are you going to be able to live with yourself? You have been placed in Myron’s ignore pile!

    daleyrocks (718861)

  130. Myron:
    Watch and it won’t be long before folks here throw him (Joe Wilson) under the bus. Especially when the advantage he presents (to Obama) become obvious. We thank him for his outburst. We need more nuthead, Joe Wilsons.

    The Emperor (1b037c)

  131. Ya know, the more people here Myron ignores, the more ignore-ant Myron proves himself to be.

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  132. Myron:

    Are they bankrupt? Of course not.

    They spend 6-12% of their GDP on health care and still rely on American innovation. More important, they all rely on American military power to protect them:

    The United States is the only nation capable of unilaterally conducting large-scale, effective military operations far beyond its borders. There is and will continue to be a great demand for U.S. forces, not only to protect the United States from direct threats and to help maintain peace and stability in regions critical to U.S. interests, but also to help support multinational efforts to bring peace to regions torn by ethnic, tribal, or religious conflicts and to ameliorate human suffering.

    We have to chose where to allocate our resources and that means we don’t have enough money to pay for everything.

    DRJ (e06615)

  133. DRJ: That’s a fascinating argument.

    So, our people must suffer b/c we provide military protection for others? We must be content ranking in the 30s on health care outcomes and mortality rates, for its more important to us that we spend money toward our allies’ defense than provide care for all our people? This is so our allies, in turn, can extend the lives of their citizens through universal care?

    Europe owes us even more than I thought.

    Anyhow, I thought most conservatives believed in “America first”?

    But seriously, I don’t think this is the either/or proposition you’re making it out to be.

    Myron (e63c20)

  134. Allright, I want to know where “healthcare is 16% of the economy” came from? What does it include? All pharmaceuticals produced? All medical equipment manufactured? All ambulances off the assembly line? Because if “16% of the economy” it’s just money going to hospitals, doctors, nurses, and pharmacists, we are in a big shitload of trouble.

    nk (df76d4)

  135. Pick and choose arguments based on what you think you can counter? You are giving ground right into the end-zone and then fumbling the ball. Your best hope is the ball trickles out of the end-zone and your opponents (us) don’t fall on the ball beforehand.

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  136. (and, yes, I am listening to the Buckeye game.)

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  137. I choose where I allocate my resources.

    happyfeet (6b707a)

  138. Social conservatism is about community. I may disagree with the terms but that’s not because I think the individual is first. The American revolution was about freedom for the people not the person.

    Wow.

    I have only to describe them, and they show up.

    An absolutely perfect example of “I am smarter than you. The simple words that have been passed down to us through generations of people that have studied, fought, loved and died do not mean what you think they mean! They mean something totally different, and you aren’t smart enought to know what that is. But I am.”

    Tell you what. Apogee is right about you. But I have one other thing to say.

    Stuff it.

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  139. We need more nuthead, Joe Wilsons.

    Your presence has been nothing but an abscess here, but every once in a while you utter something that is right.

    But obviously not for the reasons that you think.

    Even so, you wouldn’t be missed any more than the other sharp as a beach ball moron calling itself Myron.

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  140. DRJ said: “… unlimited medical care means there will be no limit to what people will be willing to spend … and that leads to national bankruptcy.”

    There is a glaring refutation to your argument. Namely: Every other western nation and a great many other countries have had universal health care for years, in some cases, decades. Are they all bankrupt? Of course not.

    There is a glaring refutation to your argument. They don’t have unlimited medical care. It’s very limited. The continual failure to acknowledge that indicates you’re either obtuse of just full of it.

    Gerald A (78e08a)

  141. “We must be content ranking in the 30s on health care outcomes and mortality rates”

    Myron – Do you believe the U.S. ranks where it does on these studies the left loves to cite because it spends too little on health care and lacks a single payer system? Is that your argument? Seriously?

    daleyrocks (718861)

  142. Or would the non-reporting of infant mortality rates be factored in? Or, perhaps, some people’s idiotic decision to allow a full pregnancy when the infant will be guaranteed to die (“idiotic” in this sentence is full-on snark)? Self-reporting, when big bad business does it, is evil. But self-reporting, when fascist, socialist, communist, or totalitarian governments do it, is good.

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  143. daley, those rankings are pretty political, as I’m sure you know. Remember Cuba having that “great’ infant mortality statistic? The fact that any pregnant woman with complications is encouraged (ahem) to terminate the pregnancy didn’t have anything to do with it.

    Teh Narrative is very simple: American stuff, bad. European stuff, good. I would go further: Non-American stuff, good. Tom Friedman thinks that China is great, as well—despite breaking down prisoners for parts (the organ trade), draconian social controls, and brutality we all tiptoe around.

    Facts don’t matter. Narrative is all. In other words, how things ought to be.

    Anyone who agrees with Teh Narrative is good and honorable and pooting rainbow Skittles of lovingkindness. Anyone who disagrees is…craven, in the pocket of special interests, and untrustworthy. In other words, Republican in the dictionaries of our MSM.

    I left out racist. Because only white Americans can be racist. That too is part of Teh Narrative.

    So remember: health care in Europe is MUCH better than ours. Why, the NY Times says so. It must be true. They couldn’t possibly have any political motivations.

    Nor could Myron.

    Eric Blair (721b15)

  144. EB, only whites can be racists, that’s true. And non-whites who are conservatives are, by definition, race-traitors, as emphatically agreed to by “Some NY Guy” on “Sadly, No!” and not contradicted by anyone as I previously reported.

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  145. Sigh. This is some post-racial period, isn’t it?

    Actually, I don’t think that the people who yell “racism” care one whit about race. They just are throwing verbal bombs against political opponents.

    Eric Blair (721b15)

  146. Well, I can say my future grandchild won’t be a racist or a race-traitor. Put that in your smipes and poke it, libs (to borrow from drunk Barney Fife).

    (Of course, that may force some of them to think, something they haven’t done in years.)

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  147. We need more nuthead, Joe Wilsons.

    And we therefore must also need more nutheads like Jeremiah “Goddamn America” Wright, the radical/fanatical who the guy now in the White House embraced and blew kisses to—until controversy forced him to throw his beloved pastor and advisor under the bus.

    As for whites being the only true racists, we also know that liberals — white, black and any other racial/ethnic classification thereof — are the only ones who can screw up time and time again, and never have to apologize, because they’re so full of kum-bah-yah benevolence and generosity.

    Case in point:

    The 2007 tax return for the current vice president, Joe “FDR-gave-fireside-chats-on-TV” Biden (and wife Jill):

    Adjusted gross income: $319,853
    Charitable contributions: $995

    The 2007 tax return for Todd and Sarah Palin:

    Ajusted gross income: $166,080
    Charitable contributions: $3,325

    Source: taxhistory.org

    Mark (411533)

  148. Gerald A: I did not say those countries had “unlimited care.” I said they had universal care.

    You’re commenting on a blog, so I know you can read.

    DRJ was saying we could not afford “unlimited care,” which, far as I know, no one is proposing.

    I don’t understand how you folks can say “unlimited care” will bankrupt us on the one hand, then cry that we will be forced to ration care on the other hand. Which is it?

    I think such contradictions characterize the whole approach of the opposition to health care reform: Just throw s— at the wall and see what sticks.

    Such as:

    “They’re gonna kill granny!”
    “They’re gonna fund illegals!”
    “They’re gonna pay for abortions!”

    As one TV commentator said, targeting gays will be next.

    Myron (e63c20)

  149. And we therefore must also need more nutheads like Jeremiah “Goddamn America” Wright

    The difference is that Jeremiah Wright is not a member of Congress,spouting his rhetoric. He has the outsider status that flame-throwers deserve. This is the problem with the GOP: They are too often led by their fringe.

    Myron (e63c20)

  150. Let’s see, those three “quotations” are accurate. And they will both ration and go bankrupt. Bankruptcy and rationing are not mutually-exclusive.

    If you have income of 2k a week but your bills are 4k a week and you choose to limit your payments to 3k a week, you still provide less than necessary and go bankrupt at the same time. Even a dullard can figure that one out.

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  151. Myron actually didn’t say, but quoted somebody as saying:

    “They’re gonna kill granny!”
    “They’re gonna fund illegals!”
    “They’re gonna pay for abortions!”

    “They’re” not? Good. That’s a big load off of my mind.

    He also paraphrased someone:

    As one TV commentator said, targeting gays will be next.

    Well, I for one, certainly hope “they” don’t.

    Myron also said this:

    I don’t understand how you folks can say “unlimited care” will bankrupt us on the one hand, then cry that we will be forced to ration care on the other hand. Which is it?

    Well, both. Unlimited care will cause bankruptcy and force rationing.

    What’s the argument?

    Ag80 (dfbb64)

  152. Eric and John – I fully understand that those rankings are hosed. The left just doesn’t seem to acknowledge it.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  153. “What’s the argument?”

    Ag80 – I’m not sure Myron is actually advancing an argument other than conservatives and insurance companies are bad.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  154. If you ever doubted how fundamentally un-serious and overtly partisan Myron is, just bookmark this thread. America was founded on groups, not individuals.

    JD (28f89b)

  155. All: I have had fun here all day, but now I must go. There are three levels of dialog and debate at this site, and I have (mostly) enjoyed reading all three:

    The actual war of ideas,cultivated admirably by DRJ; the name-calling put forth by kids with weak, unoriginal or nonexistent ideas; and of course, the nonsensical “observations” of the blog pet, happyfeet. (happyfeet does have the advantage of being truly original on occasion. One day he may even use “The Google” to look up the word “socialist.” Fingers crossed!)

    I hope all had a good weekend and that maybe some of you could make it out to join your fearful brethren @ the tea party event in D.C.

    Peace.

    Myron (e63c20)

  156. The difference is that Jeremiah Wright is not a member of Congress,spouting his rhetoric.

    And the rhetoric of Joe Wilson was a simple, short retort of “You lie!”

    By contrast, the mentor of the guy now in the White House raved and ranted like a kook for lengthy periods of time, for years and years. Raves and rants apparently not witnessed according to the claims of our truly honest, truly credible president, a member of Wright’s church for almost 20 years.

    Mark (411533)

  157. Did Moron just sneak out the side door, saying “I work here is done”?

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  158. Well, if you look at his arguments (so to speak), you will see that he is just playing games, John.

    But are any of us surprised?

    Eric Blair (721b15)

  159. Hey, Myron, peace to you, too.

    But before you go, you do understand that the whole point of government bureaucracy is to “ration” the income from tax dollars to the “need” of whatever government agency that allocates those dollars?

    And, you also understand that $1 trillion or $2 trillion or $11 trillion of debt essentially means bankruptcy, right?

    Cranking up the printing presses doesn’t create wealth.

    Saying that we’re the richest country on earth, so we should afford health care to all without conditions, when all of that wealth is leveraged to China, doesn’t really mean we’re the richest planet on earth.

    Wealth comes from the productive labor of millions who don’t give two shits about whether Bush was a war criminal or if President Obama is the one to lead us to a new world order.

    They work because that’s what we, as Americans, do, as we’ve always done. They work to create better lives for their children. They work to create machines, hardware and software that makes our lives easier.

    They work so that we don’t have to dig the same ditches in the same spots over and over because they is no other work to do.

    Americans work, not because they’re expected to do so. They work because they know their labor makes their lives better, and more importantly, their labor makes the lives of their neighbors better.

    I understand that you think that those people in Washington are the dumbest people on Earth. So be it.

    But give me a man or woman who toils and tools for the better of the family and the nation, and I will find a friend.

    So, good night. Don’t forget who you’re friends are.

    Ag80 (dfbb64)

  160. Substitute there for they in this sentence:

    because they is no other work to do.

    Ag80 (dfbb64)

  161. Ag80 – Maybe Myron is a Pete Stark acolyte who equates debt with wealth. The left has some strange ducks over there.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  162. You are wasting you breath, Myron. Except of course with DRJ. She and a few others are the only good things left here. And I say that with sadness. But keep it up. I love to read your comments.

    Comment by The Emperor

    Why don’t you two get your own blog, or a room, where you can thrill each other with brilliant insights. The rest of us have serious concerns.

    Mike K (addb13)

  163. Because it is easier to kvetch at others than make contributions, Dr. K. To be sure, many of us play “whack a mole” with trolls. But the people who simply post contrarian arguments would do better, as you suggest, to find a place to express their politics directly…rather than complain how things are done here.

    Eric Blair (721b15)

  164. I have to say many commenters here have multiple degrees, post-graduate and post-doctoral studies. And they have intelligent things to say, despite all that education.

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  165. Myron,

    Perhaps I should have said universal coverage instead of unlimited care, but I don’t think it makes much difference for my purposes. My point was that with “free” government health care, people will feel like there is an unlimited supply and they will be more prone to use it.

    Regarding:

    I don’t understand how you folks can say “unlimited care” will bankrupt us on the one hand, then cry that we will be forced to ration care on the other hand. Which is it?

    Ultimately, everything in life is rationed. If people view a product like health care as infinitely available, at some point it will have to be rationed.

    Currently, health care is rationed primarily by doctors when they decide what medical treatments patients should receive, and by insurance companies and patients when health care options are limited because of cost or other reasons.

    Government health care makes rationing a governmental decision and IMO that is the worst way to handle this. First, the decisions are removed from the immediate participants, the doctors and patients. Second, insurance companies have an incentive to accommodate patients in order to keep their business, as well as being subject to government regulation and lawsuits/arbitration. What incentive does government have to accommodate patients?

    DRJ (b0cdd4)

  166. folks can say “unlimited care” will bankrupt us on the one hand, then cry that we will be forced to ration care on the other hand. Which is it?

    It’s one of those two.

    Oh, and Myron, you fuck – don’t lie and say I oppose reform, when it’s Obama’s reform that I oppose – you shit stain.

    Apogee (e2dc9b)

  167. I believe that the disconnect here, DRJ, is that folks on the Left view government as their helper, to bail them out whenever they have difficulties. People on the Right tend to view government as a potential problem, due to “one size fits all” inefficiency and agenda driven behavior. It is a group versus individual attitude, it seems to me.

    What continues to baffle me about the Left is how much they detested government power wielded by Republicans, yet how eagerly they beg for such power to be handed to Democrats…never seeming to remember that there is no permanent partisan rule.

    Eric Blair (721b15)

  168. Eric – I think the left is also seriously delusional about how much ObamaCare is really going to cost. When it starts hitting their pocket books in a few years it will be too late to turn back.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  169. Heck, daley, I don’t think that the President’s Boffin Parade of tax cheats know, either. They are just winging what “ought” to work. I mean, turning this kind of thing over to freakin’ Pelosi and company?

    Eric Blair (721b15)

  170. the left is seriously delusional.

    How many leftists have come here with any game? Two? Three? – And those barely qualify as leftists.

    These turds should be worried. People are tired of their delusional, weak horseshit.

    Apogee (e2dc9b)

  171. We need more nuthead, Joe Wilsons.

    You were asked two specific questions previously, both were in direct response to your claims about Rep. Wilson being a liar regarding his outburst claiming that Obama was lying in his speech. Please answer the following:

    Did Barcky tell the truth about this being deficit neutral, Lovie?

    Did Barcky tell the truth about Raddatz’s story, Lovie?

    Let’s hear it, all of it.

    Dmac (a93b13)

  172. Obama: “One man from Illinois lost his coverage in the middle of chemotherapy because his insurer found that he hadn’t reported gallstones that he didn’t even know about.[TRUE; and his sister who is a lawyer had to fight like hell to get it restored. Obama thinks that should never have to happen] They delayed his treatment, and he died because of it.” [False: he did not die from the delay]
    Obama speechwriters got their information about Raddatz in a July 27 story in Slate that said incorrectly that a fight over benefits delayed treatment, “eliminated Raddatz’s chances of recovery, and he died.”
    http://www.slate.com/id/2223680/

    If Raddatz’ sister were not a lawyer he would have died. Anyone here going to defend the insurance company;s death panel in this case?

    Wilson is an old boy southern racist. A protege of Strom Thurmond. Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA says Obama better be sure to show some “humility” Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA) calls Michelle Obama “uppity” Rep. Geoff Davis (R-KY) calls Obama “that boy.”
    MoDo is right, Wilson’s “You lie” is “You lie… boy”
    And Obama didn’t lie.

    Nice to see those confederate flags out on the mall yesterday.
    I’m sure Lincoln would have been proud

    JW Democrat (213e20)

  173. JW Democrat,

    Are you a racist?

    Stashiu3 (ed6467)

  174. Government-provided universal Health-Care:
    1-The Indian Health Service (the oldest health-care provider in the country)….Failure;
    2-The Veteran’s Administration…It has never been able to take care of all vets, and has been only marginally successful at serving those with combat/service disabilities;
    3-Medicare/Medicaid…Does any more have to be said?

    By refusing to clean-up their present messes, and using the smoke-and-mirror of a “comprehensive health-care package” to obfuscate that inability, just demonstrates that this controversy has nothing to do with extending health-care to those who are without (because that condition just does not exist unless you as an individual refuse to ask for care), but has everything to do to with the government (State) accreting power unto itself to the detriment of the Freedoms & Liberties of the citizens of this Republic!

    AD - RtR/OS! (212605)

  175. “And Obama didn’t lie.”

    JWD – Keep telling yourself that. That’s why the White House announced Friday night that they would now insist any House bill include a citizenship verification mechanism currently absent from the legislation to make sure illegal aliens could not take advantage of the program.

    Wilson was right, the Congressional Research Service verified it, but the left refuses to acknowledge it. The White House action of Friday and Senate Finance Committee action verify he was correct. Sorry JWD.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  176. Comment by Stashiu3 — 9/13/2009 @ 9:22 am

    Perhaps not; but he is obviously a Statist Moron!

    AD - RtR/OS! (212605)

  177. JWD – Do you think that forcing insurers to cover people regardless of prexisting conditions will increase the cost of insurance?

    If so, why haven’t the Democrats been talking about that?

    If not, what are they smoking?

    daleyrocks (718861)

  178. Can I get State-Farm to insure me for the pre-existing condition of the car-wreck I had last week?

    AD - RtR/OS! (212605)

  179. AD – Sure. Probably not State Farm, but create a government option for that kind of coverage. It’s not fair for you to have to pay for that. Democrats are the party of no personal responsibility.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  180. Can I get State-Farm to insure me for the pre-existing condition of the car-wreck I had last week?
    Comment by AD – RtR/OS! — 9/13/2009 @ 9:42 am

    You probably could for 25% more than the total cost of the car. Maybe President Obama will pay the premium for you.

    Stashiu3 (ed6467)

  181. JW Dhimmi – So, you admit Barcky flat out lied about Raddatz?

    JD (aecc08)

  182. What? I have to pay State-Farm?
    But..But..Baracky promised that he would take care of me!

    AD - RtR/OS! (212605)

  183. Where did JWD go?

    daleyrocks (718861)

  184. “That’s why the White House announced Friday night that they would now insist any House bill include a citizenship verification mechanism currently absent from the legislation to make sure illegal aliens could not take advantage of the program.”

    Which will cost a lot of money, and pull American citizens off the rolls.
    GAO Report
    http://oversight.house.gov/documents/20070724110408.pdf
    Google: “GETTING AND KEEPING COVERAGE: STATES’ EXPERIENCE WITH CITIZENSHIP DOCUMENTATION RULES” for another report.

    Obama did not lie.
    Stash: “are you a racist?”
    I’m an American mutt. I have German, French, Native American, Black, and Jewish ancestors. The family has been here for awhile (the white branch of it for 300 years)
    And no, I’m not self-hating regarding any part of my multi-ethnic heritage.

    JW Democrat (105b91)

  185. So Dhimmi created an alternate reality where he can claim Barcky did not lie, and then proceeds to continue to lie.

    Racists

    JD (870a39)

  186. And no, I’m not self-hating regarding any part of my multi-ethnic heritage.
    Comment by JW Democrat — 9/13/2009 @ 10:23 am

    Can someone who is not white be racist?

    Stashiu3 (ed6467)

  187. JW Dhimmi is a racist, to be sure. It is fixated on it. And Barcky apparently does not agree with you about verification. Shocka.

    JD (870a39)

  188. Stashiu3 – You probably could for 25% more than the total cost of the car. Maybe President Obama will pay the premium for you.

    Funny that there’s no attention paid to back room deals with the ‘evil corporations’ and lobbyists who seem to be on board with this bill. Once all the payoffs are made to the associates and the concessions given to the major players, there won’t be anything left over for the sick.

    All so our leaders can pretend to ‘do something.’

    Apogee (e2dc9b)

  189. I have German, French, Native American, Black, and Jewish ancestors.

    Which tells us nothing. Some of your ancestors were from certain nations, others from geographic areas, some with certain skin pigments and some from certain religions. The fact that you find this descriptive is telling.

    You know, that whole ‘content of their character’ thing.

    Apogee (e2dc9b)

  190. “GAO Report”

    JWD – What does a 2007 report have to do with Friday’s White House announcement or the difference between the Senate and House bills or the Congressional Research Service conclusion that HR3200 will cover illegal immigrants? The answer is nothing.

    Keep spinning. Obama lied, and lied brazenly.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  191. JW – Previously people have posted exhaustive comments about the Raddatz issue. Suffice it to say that your barely superficial understand of your copy & paste talking points is an epic fail at being an accurate representation of what happened. Your spitting out death panel shows how shallow your understanding of the topic is.

    JD (3d1db9)

  192. Stashiu3 #174: actually, I doubt he is a racist.

    He just plays one while trolling on the Internet.

    What he is, is a knee jerk, no error, stars in his eyes Obamapologist. And calling people “racist” (see Alinsky) allows him to personalize his politics and ignore those uncomfortable facts, like his unthinking support of an essentially dishonest inexperienced Chicago hack politician. It must bother him immensely, so he needs to lash out at opponents and call them “racist.”

    Probably, under a different name, he was one of those “Concerned Christian Republicans Who Have Never Voted Democratic Until Now…” trolls.

    Teh Narrative™ must be served.

    Eric Blair (721b15)

  193. Oh, drat: I meant #173.

    Eric Blair (721b15)

  194. Hmmmm…

    “…The family has been here for awhile (the white branch of it for 300 years)..”

    Well, if you have white ancestry here that long, I’m betting many of them were slaveholders. You should pay reparations, immediately, and personally. Your income resulted from the sweat and labor of oppressed slaves. You must make it right, now.

    JW DEMOCRAT NEEDS TO PAY REPARATIONS NOW!

    Descendant of racists!

    Eric Blair (721b15)

  195. On the other hand, maybe we should consider judging people on what they do, rather than who their ancestors were.

    Crazy idea, I know. It doesn’t fit the aristocracy that the Left loves so much—a philosophy that who your parents were matters more than who you are and what you do.

    Eric Blair (721b15)

  196. Wilson is an old boy southern racist.

    And if Obama shared the ideology of a rightwinger — better yet, of a black conservative like Clarence Thomas, Shelby Steele, Thomas Sowell or certainly an Alan Keyes — and some white guy (better yet, a white liberal registered to the Democrat Party) had shouted not just “You lie!” but something like “You’re a goddamn Oreo!!”, you’d be averting your gaze right now, and looking up, looking down, whistling a few tunes, checking your watch, and pretending nothing unpleasant had happened in the House of Representatives the other night.

    Mark (411533)

  197. I’m an American mutt.

    I got some breaking news for you, Poindexter – most of us are all mutts to one degree or another. Do you even understand how this country came into being in the first place? Man, what a Ponce.

    Dmac (a93b13)

  198. Dmac – Again, a Leftist demonstrates that they value identity groups over individuals. Hell, yesterday we had one tell us that our country was founded on that idea.

    JD (648c77)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3618 secs.