to the Republicans and to insurance industry lobbyists, "bipartisanship" is dead in the Senate Finance committee as Snowe, Grassley and Wyden all declare they won't vote for the bill.

In any sensible world, that would mean taking back all those concessions (which were made in order to get those few Republican votes). I'd actually be OK (not thrilled, but OK) with the plan Max Baucus said he supported back last November. In any sensible world, they'd roll the bill back to that baseline and pass it by the reconciliation method.

But this is the real world, and these are the Democrats, so I don't have a lot of hope. My bet is they keep most of the crap the Republicans foisted on them in their phony "bipartisanship" and as a result this bill, on balance, will be no better than the status quo (and in some respects, i.e. mandates without enforced cost reduction, worse than the status quo.)

What annoys me the most about this is how Obama thinks he can accomplish anything with the support of the Republicans. There is no bi-partisanship, they want him to fail. It boggles my mind that they had all that time in office to try and accomplish something...anything...regarding medical insurance and chose to do nothing. Now, all of a sudden, it has to be their way or throw a tantrum.

Obama should start acting like Bush. Screw you, my way or the highway.

to the Republicans and to insurance industry lobbyists, "bipartisanship" is dead in the Senate Finance committee as Snowe, Grassley and Wyden all declare they won't vote for the bill.

  The Grand Presumption is that *any* solution to problems with the health care industry *must* be addressed as some form of comprehensive federal legislation.  Ptooey...  Republicans had better tread lightly in accepting *anything* if they value their jobs as well.  The best case is the ultimate defeat of whatever bill is presented.

gus.

 

What annoys me the most about this is how Obama thinks he can accomplish anything with the support of the Republicans.

  Oh please, that is pure smoke screen.  Democrats can't seem to decide whether to play tough-guy, and threaten to "ram it through", or play nice-guy, and blather all this bi-partisan crap.  The *reality* is, that if they had enough votes in their *own* frigging party, they would have passed a bill all by themselves before the fall recess!!!  Clearly they have snowed you.

gus.

 

What annoys me the most about this is how Obama thinks he can accomplish anything with the support of the Republicans.

He doesn't need the support of the Reopublicans. The Democrats cn pass anything they want to without a single Republican vote.


There is no bi-partisanship, they want him to fail.

That is your assumption and you are entitled to it. However, there are other reasons the Republicans have that you have not considered nor wouold you consider.


It boggles my mind that they had all that time in office to try and accomplish something...anything...regarding medical insurance and chose to do nothing.

Do you suppose nothing should be done? After all the wheel that gets the grease is the one that squeaks. And, if the private sector were allowed to work the things ourt for themselves, there would be a solution. But the objective is to destroy the insurance industry because they cannot compete with the government when it comes to cost. The government raises taxes to subsidize the Post Office, AMTrack and other entities that lose.
So no competition means no quality.


Now, all of a sudden, it has to be their way or throw a tantrum.

And what did you say about the Democrats during the last eight yers. Well, it had to be their way and GWB let them have their way and we've endeded in a mess.


Obama should start acting like Bush. Screw you, my way or the highway.


In case you haven't noticed, that is exactly what he is doing. Notice GM, the Banks and other enterprises. Get your head our of medical insurance and see the dictator.

=================================

Glenn Beck hates 9/11 survivors. Shocking as Glenn Beck claimed that he hates 9/11 survivors. The Fox news personality and media clown has always been an outrageous demagogue, a pied piper to the illiterate, unwashed masses that make up the Fox news audience. Michael Stone,Examoner.com

Oh please, that is pure smoke screen. Democrats can't seem to decide whether to play tough-guy, and threaten to "ram it through", or play nice-guy, and blather all this bi-partisan crap. The reality is, that if they had enough votes in their own frigging party, they would have passed a bill all by themselves before the fall recess!!! Clearly they have snowed you.


What? When, at least in the last couple of decades, have the Democrats in Washington ever played tough guy? All I ever see them doing is cowering every time the Republicans say "boo." Sure, the base wants them to play tough guy, but they never do. There's no "can't seem to decide" about it - the Democratic "leadership" are consistently rolled by the Republicans and the base is consistently angry at them for being such wimps.

to the Republicans and to insurance industry lobbyists, "bipartisanship" is dead in the Senate Finance committee as Snowe, Grassley and Wyden all declare they won't vote for the bill.

In any sensible world, that would mean taking back all those concessions (which were made in order to get those few Republican votes). I'd actually be OK (not thrilled, but OK) with the plan Max Baucus said he supported back last November. In any sensible world, they'd roll the bill back to that baseline and pass it by the reconciliation method.

But this is the real world, and these are the Democrats, so I don't have a lot of hope. My bet is they keep most of the crap the Republicans foisted on them in their phony "bipartisanship" and as a result this bill, on balance, will be no better than the status quo (and in some respects, i.e. mandates without enforced cost reduction, worse than the status quo.)


I think it's interesting the number of times you use the word "sensible." Does that mean that everyone with a different opinion is not sensible? I personally believe that the sensible thing to do would be to wait to pass the bill.

Look at the sinsible bills that were [passed without having been read. Gee, how sensible can you be when it comnes to Democrats and their rush to legislate?





=================================

Glenn Beck hates 9/11 survivors. Shocking as Glenn Beck claimed that he hates 9/11 survivors. The Fox news personality and media clown has always been an outrageous demagogue, a pied piper to the illiterate, unwashed masses that make up the Fox news audience. Michael Stone,Examoner.com

And what did you say about the Democrats during the last eight yers. Well, it had to be their way and GWB let them have their way and we've endeded in a mess.

What a total re-write of history! You're delusional.

What a total re-write of history! You're delusional.

I'm not rewriting history. I am remembering how the Democrats fought Bush on the war, and everything else he want to do. the only thing the Democrats did was the prescription drug bill, and that was the worst legislation passed by the congress.

And to speak of a very cooperative Congress, why do you suppose the Democrats are wanting to prosecute the Bush administration for all kinds of crimes. Rewriting history is more like your style.



=================================

Glenn Beck hates 9/11 survivors. Shocking as Glenn Beck claimed that he hates 9/11 survivors. The Fox news personality and media clown has always been an outrageous demagogue, a pied piper to the illiterate, unwashed masses that make up the Fox news audience. Michael Stone,Examoner.com

I think it's interesting the number of times you use the word "sensible." Does that mean that everyone with a different opinion is not sensible? I personally believe that the sensible thing to do would be to wait to pass the bill.

Sensible from a political (or for that matter any kind on negotiation) point of view, poetse.

It's simply common sense that if one has made a concession (i.e. agreed to something one doesn't want) in order to get another party to make a deal and then that other party backs out of the deal, that there is no reason any longer to leave that concession standing. Just think of it from a business standpoint: Suppose you negotiate with one company and in the course of that negotiation they demand something you really don't want to give but you agree in order to get the deal. Then they back out. Do you offer that concession right off the bat in your next negotiation? Of course not!

I'm not rewriting history. I am remembering how the Democrats fought Bush on the war, and everything else he want to do. the only thing the Democrats did was the prescription drug bill, and that was the worst legislation passed by the congress.


WHAT??? The Democrats fought Bush on the war? Have you forgotten the war powers resolution? Have you forgotten the Patriot Act etc.? Have you forgotten retroactive immunity? Have you forgotten that they voted for every "emergency" appropriation he asked for? That's fighting?

You have got to be kidding.

WHAT??? The Democrats fought Bush on the war? Have you forgotten the war powers resolution? Have you forgotten the Patriot Act etc.? Have you forgotten retroactive immunity? Have you forgotten that they voted for every "emergency" appropriation he asked for? That's fighting?

You have got to be kidding.


I haven't forgotten those at all. they were all passed unanimously with the blessings of the Democrats. ROTFLMAO

=================================

Glenn Beck hates 9/11 survivors. Shocking as Glenn Beck claimed that he hates 9/11 survivors. The Fox news personality and media clown has always been an outrageous demagogue, a pied piper to the illiterate, unwashed masses that make up the Fox news audience. Michael Stone,Examoner.com

What? When, at least in the last couple of decades, have the Democrats in Washington ever played tough guy? All I ever see them doing is cowering every time the Republicans say "boo." Sure, the base wants them to play tough guy, but they never do. There's no "can't seem to decide" about it - the Democratic "leadership" are consistently rolled by the Republicans and the base is consistently angry at them for being such wimps.

  I'm talking about their public threats.  Any number of leaders have at some time, threatened to "go nuclear", among other sound-bytes.  Of course it's all bullshit!  The *fact* remains that if the Democrats had the votes in their *own* party, this would all be old news.  In the main, like most Liberals, they only snow their own.

gus.

 

I think you have to expect this as all there has been is a muddled up mess of proposals and nothing that I have seen does squat to lower health care or health insurance costs. So how are any of our senators or congressmen really able to stand behind any of the proposals...


One minute it is health care costs, the next is health insurance costs so who can keep up. I have seen no proposals that reduce the costs of medical care providers cost of doing business. And for health insurance the only villian is profit and overhead costs charged by insurance providers. The libs want dare discuss Tort reform because Obama and company are all connected at the hip with the trail lawyers.....

The only thing I have seen really is the liberal idea of government paid health insurance that will drive all the others out of business....

So, how do you expect any majority support for such a goofy bunch of plans?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Jan:



"to the Republicans and to insurance industry lobbyists, "bipartisanship" is dead in the Senate Finance committee as Snowe, Grassley and Wyden all declare they won't vote for the bill.

In any sensible world, that would mean taking back all those concessions (which were made in order to get those few Republican votes). I'd actually be OK (not thrilled, but OK) with the plan Max Baucus said he supported back last November. In any sensible world, they'd roll the bill back to that baseline and pass it by the reconciliation method.

But this is the real world, and these are the Democrats, so I don't have a lot of hope. My bet is they keep most of the crap the Republicans foisted on them in their phony "bipartisanship" and as a result this bill, on balance, will be no better than the status quo (and in some respects, i.e. mandates without enforced cost reduction, worse than the status quo.)"







Jan can you show us any consessions granted to the republicans? If I'm not mistaken there is "no bill" so how can there be consessions. The only hint of one is the one about leaving out single payer. That cat is pacing for nothing right now so give it a rest. It is detracting from your post.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Jan:



"to the Republicans and to insurance industry lobbyists, "bipartisanship" is dead in the Senate Finance committee as Snowe, Grassley and Wyden all declare they won't vote for the bill.

In any sensible world, that would mean taking back all those concessions (which were made in order to get those few Republican votes). I'd actually be OK (not thrilled, but OK) with the plan Max Baucus said he supported back last November. In any sensible world, they'd roll the bill back to that baseline and pass it by the reconciliation method.

But this is the real world, and these are the Democrats, so I don't have a lot of hope. My bet is they keep most of the crap the Republicans foisted on them in their phony "bipartisanship" and as a result this bill, on balance, will be no better than the status quo (and in some respects, i.e. mandates without enforced cost reduction, worse than the status quo.)"







Jan can you show us any consessions granted to the republicans? If I'm not mistaken there is "no bill" so how can there be consessions. The only hint of one is the one about leaving out public option. That cat is pacing for nothing right now so give it a rest. It is detracting from your post.

The republicans will never agree with anything that the democrats with Obama set forth. They dare not! They have publicly called him so many vile filthy names how could they now take a chance on seeming to agree with him even if it is for the betterment of America. They would have to worry about losing the votes of their beloved teabag consortium ... I think their numbers are now estimated to be about one gazillion. Give or take a few hundred million.

The republicans will never agree with anything that the democrats with Obama set forth.

    It doesn't matter!!!  Their problem is NOT the Republicans!!!  They DO NOT have the votes in their own MAJORITY in both houses, to pass their own bills!!!  Cap & Tax *barely* passed!  Why is that?  Obama pushed hard for a health bill before the fall recess.  He *didn't* get it!!!  Why is that?  "You can't handle the truth!".  And *that* is why we have all this whining about the mean ol' Republicans.  Gheezuz!

gus.

 

since the Democrats have gained control, they have only shown us all that they make a Chinese cluster-fuck look organized.....

"...What? When, at least in the last couple of decades, have the Democrats in Washington ever played tough guy...?"

Let's start with what they did to Bork, and let's talk about what they did to Alberto, and let's talk about what they did to SS reform.... etc. etc.

I must admit, though, that when they want to fool their voters, they cower behind the Republicans and vote for war and then come out crying that it's all the Republicans' fault. 

Typical liberals.

*****
To no one will we sell, to no one will we refuse or delay, right or justice.
-- Magna Carta

Jan can you show us any consessions granted to the republicans? If I'm not mistaken there is "no bill" so how can there be consessions. The only hint of one is the one about leaving out single payer. That cat is pacing for nothing right now so give it a rest. It is detracting from your post.

I'm talking about the Senate Finance Committee bill (pdf document), which Max Baucus wrote in conjunction with Grassley, Snowe and Wyden. The thing is full of concessions to them - just contrast it with what Baucus was saying he supported back last November (linked in my original post).

Let's start with what they did to Bork,

Well, I did say "in the last couple of decades" and you're outside that timeframe, but even so - rejecting one SCOTUS nominee is hardly that monumental an example of toughness.


and let's talk about what they did to Alberto,

Let's talk about what the didn't do to Alberto Gonzalez - the guy committed numerous felonies and got off scott free.


and let's talk about what they did to SS reform.... etc. etc.


The Democratic members of Congress were all set to cave on Social Security - in fact it was the grass-roots and a few prominent pundits like Paul Krugman who saved the day on that one.

I'm talking about their public threats. Any number of leaders have at some time, threatened to "go nuclear", among other sound-bytes. Of course it's all bullshit! The fact remains that if the Democrats had the votes in their own party, this would all be old news. In the main, like most Liberals, they only snow their own.

Well then, Gus, you're just proving my point. The Democratic "leadership" makes noise, but they're wimps. They don't ever carry through. That's precisely why the base is so pissed off.

"...The Democratic "leadership" makes noise, but they're wimps..."

Sounds like the Democratic base and Republican base have feelings in common on that issue.

Screw them. Dump them all and start fresh. Start fresh with Democratic and Republican leaders who don't have 20 years of close personal relationships with each other.

It's a freaking dance club in Washington DC.

*****
To no one will we sell, to no one will we refuse or delay, right or justice.
-- Magna Carta

Well then, Gus, you're just proving my point. The Democratic "leadership" makes noise, but they're wimps. They don't ever carry through. That's precisely why the base is so pissed off.


The Republicans have been wimps for the last eight years, and the last nominee proved they haven't changed..

=================================

Glenn Beck hates 9/11 survivors. Shocking as Glenn Beck claimed that he hates 9/11 survivors. The Fox news personality and media clown has always been an outrageous demagogue, a pied piper to the illiterate, unwashed masses that make up the Fox news audience. Michael Stone,Examoner.com