GOP says they will agree to meet with Obama over the Health Care bill if he agrees to start over from scratch……good for them.
No more of the typical Dem way. Meaning the backroom deals, the buying off of politicians, no more Obama telling the country what we need. Instead, you listen to us and WE tell you what we need.
In the end, this ain’t gonna happen. If Obama gives in to the Republicans & the American people then he will lose his base even more. This bill is only about votes. It’s no longer about fixing real problems with health care in this country. So he will meet and try to dictate terms. Does the GOP have the spine to say no?
According to this letter it does:
Assuming the President is sincere about moving forward on health care in a bipartisan way, does that mean he will agree to start over so that we can develop a bill that is truly worthy of the support and confidence of the American people? Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said today that the President is “absolutely not” resetting the legislative process for health care. If the starting point for this meeting is the job-killing bills the American people have already soundly rejected, Republicans would rightly be reluctant to participate.
Assuming the President is sincere about moving forward in a bipartisan way, does that mean he has taken off the table the idea of relying solely on Democratic votes and jamming through health care reform by way of reconciliation? As the President has noted recently, Democrats continue to hold large majorities in the House and Senate, which means they can attempt to pass a health care bill at any time through the reconciliation process. Eliminating the possibility of reconciliation would represent an important show of good faith to Republicans and the American people
~~~Will the President be inviting officials and lawmakers from the states to participate in this discussion? As you may know, legislation has been introduced in at least 36 state legislatures, similar to the proposal just passed by the Democratic-controlled Virginia State Senate, providing that no individual may be compelled to purchase health insurance. Additionally, governors of both parties have raised concerns about the additional costs that will be passed along to states under both the House and Senate bills
~~~Finally, as you know, this is the first televised White House health care meeting involving the President since last March. Many health care meetings of the closed-door variety have been held at the White House since then, including one last month where a sweetheart deal was worked out with union leaders. Will the special interest groups that the Obama Administration has cut deals with be included in this televised discussion?
Ok, now it comes down to if the Republicans can show the courage to refuse this invitation if Obama will not support starting over from scratch.
I’m not so sure.
I hope they do since this is obviously just a ploy by Obama to get face time on the networks to say “hey, we invited them to talk to us.” When the only thing that is going to happen is Obama will try and dictate terms to conservatives and the majority of this country.
See author page
I would hope that the Repubs would realize they were taken advantage of last time he televised his meeting with them at their workshop. If they are going to meet with him, they should say no TV.
If the Health Bill had been televised all along, it would be a different story. In fact, if the Health Bill had been televised all along, we wouldn’t be in this pickle.
How is BO going to go back to the beginning? He has his deal with Pharma that is the basis for any legislation and that trumps anything else.
I agree its a sham to get photo-op for Obama to give the “appearance of bipartisanship” one meeting is not how he said , “All of it will be on C-Span” Republicans need to say HELL NO! to this BS, and say we will work in the Senate and forthe Democrats to Open the doors to the back rooms deals that are going on.. these photo-ops are not what the American people what!
Maybe for the fun of it agree provided there is a reasonable moderator namely Newly elected Senator Scott Brown.
As Senator Brown would say, “we can do better”. Simple slogan, include everyone, not just your supporters, Mr. Obama.
@Carl:
Naw, can’t be one of the players. If he would even tolerate a moderator,
Bo would want someone from HIS msm.
I think it’s a bad idea. BO takes over all of the discussion and no one can override anything he says without being considered irreverent of his position.
look, this talking with obummer is just bs. have a few meetings in private and THEN SAY THIS IS WHAT WE WILL DO. LET’S HAVE TOWNHALL MEETINGS ON TV/CSPAN AND LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE. THEN WE BEGIN AGAIN. NOTHING MORE AND NOTHING LESS.
Wouldn’t you love to be a fly on the wall (a “bug”) in Rahm Emanuel’s office when he opens that letter? I bet the string of four letter words will cause his secretary to retreat to the ladies room.
I liked this paragraph too:
Looks like Boehner and Cantor are on to Obama’s game and know this is more likely just another of Obama’s ploys to make it appear he is “listening” when in fact, he’s just posturing.]
I do wonder whether the GOP will get pressured into going to this meeting but I am glad they have at least set down their views in this letter. What a shame that the vast majority of the American people will never hear about this letter. All they will see is a soundbite or two of Obama announcing this meeting.
why spend their time with bo and moderators. huh? this is war and we intend ot win. those who like us will and those who don’t won’t. we are fighting for the hearts and minds of americans and not obummer.
the gop isn’t pressured. it is the dimocrats who are.
This is like a woman turning down a honorable suitor so she can sleep with the town drun, and then, when she is knocked up, infested, and on the street, she asks the original suitor if he wants to get married and pick out the babys name.
Or like when my liberal daughter insisted on buying the POS car I told her not to, but she called me back two months later to see if I would pay the repair bills.
The answer in all three cases should be NO!
I think the Republicans should go to the meeting.
Celibrate that it is televised.
And offer only one amendment, over and over, to replace the entire bill with one of the Republican previous amendment offerings, – – – one – – – after – – – the – – – other.
The Republicans should make it an excercise in showing how many ideas they had offered, – – – each – – – one – – – at – – – a – – – time.
Citing the dates they were originally offered.
This is clearly an ambush. What do American forces learn to do?
Attack into the ambush.
Can’t wait to see how the media twists this into an Obama victory.
Jimmy Carter Junior – what a complete disaster!
OT, but interesting:
Some unknown entity has put up a billboard asking, “Do you miss me yet?”, beside a picture of Bush. Could be the work of Republicans or Democrats…
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/02/bush_miss_me_yet_billboard_is.html
What’s with the French???
This is a set up, and a good one. Riding high on a perceived “campaign debate win” after Obama’s appearance at the GOP retreat, they’re set to do a rerun – hoping to again show the GOP as inferior (in the media’s eyes…). Basically it was talking points vs talking points. But the POTUS holds the dais, and has the last word. It was structured to fail.
But I’m going to have to disagree, Curt. The GOP are damned if they don’t agree to meet… furthering the “party of NO” label. And they are damned if they do… UNLESS they have their act together this time. Unfortunately, the GOP retreat came off as a bunch of Congress representatives, pretending to be the White House press corps with questions.
The agenda and POTUS talking points are known, and old hat. The GOP would be fools to turn this down, but they’d better be schooled in presenting their alternatives better than they were. They may wish to concentrate on the fact that increasing the size of governmental agencies and mandating everyone purchase healthcare doesn’t do squat for reducing the costs of medical treatments. They may also want to point out that if more and more medical providers are forced into low government payments, there will be less and less medical providers.
They should suggest that we start with legislation that actually curbs costs to the consumers and providers… which may mean breaking their unholy alliance wrought with Pharma, and addressing tort reform. Also figuring a way to encourage an interstate basic policy by private companies that states can use riders as add ons, providing more competition. How about providing the ability for medical providers to bargain with medical equipment and drug suppliers for the best prices? Or giving incentive for a private central clearing house/warehouse that can purchase in bulk, passing on savings to providers. Start with some of the known cost cutters before turning the whole system upside down.
Will they do this? Probably not. But they have no choice. If they want power, they’d better be able to prove they can handle themselves in what is projected to be yet another Obama photo op. Simply refusing is the kiss of death.
I suggest they give Newt and Karl Rove a call, and everyone go in for coaching.
Mata is right: it is a set up. The GOPers will either refuse to attend because Obama will not give into their Hamas-like preconditions, or they will have to attend with their tails between their legs after he calls their bluff. He is treating the GOP like he is treating Iran (or how you deal with a three year old): act solicitously, try to coax them to do the right thing. Then if they don’t, beat the crap out of them, explaining “I tried to reason with them.”
I mean, really, Boehner wants about 1,300 “stakeholders” at the meeting. Why? They will only gum up the works, keep the agenda from focusing on the issues and how to solve them (as each of the 1,300 attendees feels the need to have his/her say on behalf of their constituents). But that is Boehner’s goal — nothing done and no GOPer agenda considered and exposed. Because if we can learn anything from the fiasco of Obama at the GOPer House retreat, it is that he has a unique ability to make merely silly conservative proposals look idiotic. How? By striping off the good con proposals first and making cons stand and fight and lose on their own stupid agenda items. Like opposing the GM bailout that kept who knows how many hundreds of thousands of retirees off the Medicare rolls. Yeah, you are against the “socialism” of a bailout, but your “cure” would send even more people into the socialistic health care welfare system. Duh!
Nope, this is a trap. And you know what? The GOPers asked for it by whining about “the lack of bipartisanship” and how no one was paying attention to them. Well now the world is listening, cons. You have an open mic to spout all kinds of silliness, The God’s punish us by giving us what we want some times
@MataHarley:
I”m glad the GOP is the party of no. I say a vehement no to more government intrusion. I say a vehement no to a larger more powerful central government. I say a vehement no to the marxist ideals of these progressive destroyers of our nations founding principles.
I refuse to accept the premise that our health care system needs to be fixed or even tweaked. We need tort reform, and a major league de-regulation of the insurance industry. Our health care in itself is unparalleled anywhere in the world. There is a reason why people who are sick in other countries will do anything they can to come to the U.S. There is also a reason why Doctors from other nations want to practice here in our country.
I say we need the GOP to continue to be the party of no. These bad ideas need to be defeated out right, and not negotiated into a more palletable bad ideas.
And why don’t the Republicans just say “my constituents don’t want this un-Constitutional government takeover of health care.” …
And Pharoah hardened his heart and would not repent of all he had purposed to do.
Rush is right. Hussein is trying to “set up” any republican stupid enough to believe all of the glad hand, bipartisan nonsense. Here’s hoping McCain and Co. do not return to their “sell-out” ways in return for more drooling NY Times puff pieces.
G.O.P. Campaign Slogan 2010-2012. “The Party of No and damn proud of it” May work.
@rich wheeler:
Considering that over half of those polled agree with the GOP’s opposition of ObamaCare, you may be right.
I read Boehner’s asking for all the stakeholders to be present to simply point out the obvious that Obama has struck a lot of backroom deals that would not stand in the light of day. The other way of looking at it is that until those backroom deals are nullified, there is no way to move forward for a bill that is good for America instead of for the special interests. Actually I agree doing nothing is the best option for all of us.
@rich wheeler:
From your mouth to God’s ear!
A.C. and Delh Good posts The Do Nothing Party is reborn. A mascot is needed. Any ideas?
F.O.C. Onboard We got a movement.Who else is in?
@rich wheeler:
Actually the only movement here is you.
@Flyovercountry, I have no problems with saying “no” to bad legislation. But that’s not the strategic thrust of the political extremists, i.e. as rich wheeler, b-rob have seized upon. Their mentality is quite predictable, and simply stepping into the bear trap isn’t the bright way of waging political debate. The label they are counting on for the 2010 – “the party of NO” – provides the puppet media with the obvious message that the GOP says “no”, and offers up no other solutions. It’s rather like telling a joke without the punchline.
I recognize they have put forth ideas that have either been rejected outright, and not given enough press coverage. However there are ways for a minority party to obtain attention… and a prime example of that would be Newt’s Contract with America in the 90s. It was a brilliant presentation, complete with links to proposed legislation. There has been nothing that extensive thru this GOP leadership, and a deplorable campaign thru the grassroots to spread the message. Let’s face it, the GOP is not the Alinsky devotees the Dems are. They are superior at distraction, spreading mistruths via select talking points, and preying on fears of citizens.
“No” isn’t enough for me either. I’m fully aware that medical services are skyrocketing. My problem with the O’healthcare, as written by Pelosi/Reid, is that there is very little in there that reduces the costs of drugs, equipment and supplies to medical providers. Instead it’s a hodgepodge of increased federal agencies, forced mandates, increased taxes merely so it can keep up with the medical costs inflation. This is self defeating, and no snake oil salesman in the world can sell me that this will prove to be cost cutting. It will end up being benefit cutting, and driving private medical providers… from doctors to hospital facilities… out of the private sector and into the control of the government. This is, after all, the Dem ultimate goal. They are very patient with step by step destruction of capitalistic industries.
The notion that you can force underpayment to medical providers, or cap insurance premiums does zip, nada, nothing for the actual costs. This would be the same if Lexus were selling me a car that had a $40K price tag for the necessary profit structure margin, but they were forced to accept only $29,200 because that’s all Daddy would pay. Enuf “Daddys” like that, and how long would Lexus be around?
The solution is to address the way to reduce the cost of the Lexus manuf bottom line so that the product can be purchased for less. This may entail different regulations and tax structures, streamlining their operations, as well as eliminating their overhead that may result from union demands. Health care is no different.
@billy bob describes his ideal scenario… either the GOP refusing to participate (a perceived Dem win), or performing badly before the cameras (another perceived Dem win). The former is not an option. Politically they cannot afford to reject even a sham “summit”. The latter is the best option, and can prove beneficial…. provided they handle it correctly.
Since the majority of the nation is not happy with what is structured now, the wind is at the backs of a “start over” mentality. The script for the summit talking points is already out… it will be Obama and the Dems pushing an unpopular agenda, using the same ol’ fuzzy math and BS misrepresentation done for months now. It should be simple to counter with some facts… ala “pre’existing conditions” is solved by allowing more creation of group insurance, thereby rendering the more expensive and restrictive individual policies obsolete. The CBO estimates are also useful when presented well… the collection of spending before providing the product, the dependence on higher business taxes and premium taxes. Combine that with a struggling, and slow recovering economy, and their projected revenue levels are based on pipe dreams. What’s going on in the US economy, which often piggy backs on whether the EU economy is worse, plays heavily into the “figures lie, and liars figure” game Obama seeks to play.
In this vein, one of the best places to start for compromise… depending upon how it’s structured… is the Health Insurance Exchange portal concept, and the possibility it creates a one stop comparison site for policy shopping. Individual state riders can do the same thru a State portal, showing the companies that offer state specific riders. All companies should be private… no government single payer “public option”. It worked for Lending Tree and several on line loan portals, and it can work for premium competiton. It can also reduce the costs to the insurer.
But even this doesn’t work if someone doesn’t rein in “how much it costs to build a Lexus”, so to speak. This is the most glaring flaw in the O’healthcare, and a large part of the reason that the costs will become so mammoth over the years as to be fiscally unsustainable…. whether government or private controlled.
Therefore, what should be done first is reducing costs of the “Lexus”, while simultaneously opening the marketplace intrastate/interstate – still preserving state’s rights. Tort reform. Even competition with the portal itself by having even more discount group policies. With federal laws in place that do not allow for denial of pre’existing conditions for more than a 12 month period, there is no reason anyone should have to get an individual policy. It’s a simple cure…. and it takes away one of their biggest talking point lies.
Yes, the GOP should participate… and they’d better get their presentation chops down before they do. If they want power returned to them, they need to earn it by showing they are capable of handling the opposition and providing better ideas.
@MataHarley:
How about, reversing the damage done by liberal intervention into the free market system.
Well now, Flyover… that’s a huge cache of topics there. But, INRE health care, I’d say I was addressing that by saying they needed to reduce the costs to manuf a Lexus… I repeat, that would entail regulations, taxation and union overhead. It would also mean taking a close look at patents, R&D costs and a middle ground for the original company with the breakthru to make it worthwhile, but not holding back so long that competitors can’t also help lower the cost.
I believe the pharma latest deal was 12 years iron grip. I know they were trying to negotiate for 7-8 years. That’s still a long time for hefty prices. So perhaps there is a better way to make up for the R&D expenses lost if you introduce shorter patents and competition sooner than that.
@MataHarley:
Forgive my previous simplistic response to such a well written comment. I guess for me, the idea of doing something is not always the best answer. Are halth care costs inflating at a quicker rate than general inflation, yes. Is that in itself a scary thing, yes. The problem I have, is that those solutions proffered by our national leaders are to do more of what caused the mess in the first place. Like all solutions to perceived problems which go awry, they started out with the best of intentions. I am darned happy that this bill was stopped. I want nothing to do with it. If you want health care costs to come down, undo the damage of free market intervention. Charles Krauthammer wrote a teriffic piece on what he termed, “jackpot justice.” When a doctor goes into practice in our nation, he/she has a $60,000 insurance expense to cover before the office is even opened. That is not the peanuts in added expense that the liberals among us are pretending that it is. Insurance companies were at one time free to do business in this country. Now, with the increased authority given to State Insurance Commisioners, (these are single individuals appointed,) competition has been stifled. Drug companies not only have to front the tabs for research and development, but congress has seen fit to stick them with the bill for government approval on those drugs which they wish to bring to market. Over the past 10 years, the average time for increased scruitiny has increased to seven years of trials, and paperwork. It costs drug companies an average of $2billion to bring a new drug to market. People are under the mistaken impression that the cost of a pill is limited to its materials and manufacture process. The problem I see, is that our national leaders, most of whom have never managed anything as chalanging as a lemonaide stand are completely ignorant of these facts. So yes, I have nary a problem with putting the brakes on these dolts. Frankly, I am more than a little tired of the political gamesmanship which has led us all to this end.
I see that Mr. ParaLegal2 dropped by for the morning drool session.
Let’s look through his latest guttural utterances and see what we can find shall we?
Hmmmm….comparing political opponents to terror organizations. How classy.
Nothing quite so classy as speaking favorably of violence against a three year old.
Er…..Considering that if a person wishes to receive their Social Security they are required to enroll in Medicare, how, precisely, would opposition to a GM bailout add more people to the enrollment lists?
Oh, that’s right, that wouldn’t happen because the entire mythical influx of people you’ve got your panties in a twist over are already going to be enrolling except, of course, for the very, very few that plan to forego the Social Security they have been compelled to pay into.
Straw man torched.
Er….Again, reality doesn’t match your premise. The alternative to bailing out GM and Chrysler would have been for them to go through the normal bankruptcy proceedings, restructure, and emerge stronger on the other side.
Few workers would have been displaced through that process and, given their skills, they would have no problems finding alternative employment.
You silly, silly little man.
Next you’ll be telling us that there were “no US citizens in harms way” when the earthquake struck Haiti.
Oh…wait!
The beautiful thing about all of this is that Obie is playing right into the hands of the GOP.
The GOP has been trying since last March to get some sort of display of bi-partisanship on this, and other issues, only to be rebuffed by locked doors and proclamations of “I won”.
The GOP responded to the White House yesterday by saying that they want a commitment from the Precedent to start over. Considering that the American People have resoundingly rejected the plans presented by House and Senate Dims on this issue it is only reasonable that a clean slate be the starting point.
Obie and the Dim Congress had the votes to pass this thing. They dilly-dallied and dawdled around. They didn’t need any votes from the opposition. They didn’t need any support from the opposition.
They wanted to hurry this thing through and get it done before the American People became aware of what was in it and what those 2,000 plus pages meant.
They had the votes all by themselves.
Yet, they dawdled about.
Then Kennedy died and things began to go downhill because the election in MA held the potential to be a game changing event.
Yet, even with 60 votes in the Senate, a solid majority in the House, and the looming possibility of a game changer from MA, the Dims could not get their act together.
Obie, Harry, and Nancy couldn’t herd their cats in the right direction.
The American People are now awake and aware of what ObieCare means and they have resoundingly rejected it.
Independent voters, the people who put Obie in the White House, are now abandoning him.
Obies’ approval numbers are now in the mid 40’s in every poll.
The super-majority in the Senate is but a fleeting memory.
Dilly-dallying and squandered opportunities.
November 2010 is right around the corner and the Dims seem to have no clue as to what is about to happen to them.
Aye Chi, it’s almost a gift you addressed billy bob’s Iran statement. ‘Twas such an absurd statement, it wasn’t worthy of acknowledgement. My instinct to respond lasted but a fleeting moment.. and that was to laugh and ask “what Iranian policy”?? You mean the three prong, idiot approach to sanctions by a deadline that sailed past with nary a media blip in December?
Then again, it was a gift you addressed other parts of his “skip-trod” meandering BS. LOL Talk about grasping at straw men around every corner.
But since you did comment on billy bob’s obvious diversion tactic off topic, and his apparent ignorance of ME foreign policy, I’ll just say I pretty much agree with Barry Rubin’s assessment of Obama on Iran, and leave it at that. The post subject is the issue here, and how the GOP decides to handle this obvious attempt at a political trap is important. They have the chance at a public debate that can be beneficial for the public.
If it is structured as a level playing field, and not a POTUS at dais/Congress playing the press “corpse” (heh), we shall see how cogently they can express their suggested paths in comparison. If the Dems continue to just force opposition into compliance, they lose. The nation can see arrogant bully tactics first hand. If the GOP does present their ideas well, and they are slapped down on C-SPAN, the Dems lose again.
But one thing is certain… you do not win political debates by not showing up at the venue.
If the G.O.P. are to avoid any form of “trap” that consists of a C-SPAN debate with Obama and Democrat Congress members over Healthcare then the G.O.P. should carry forth the various demands and suggestions from Tea Party groups (now over 4 million strong) and Independent groups in the debate and give full credit of these ideas from the orginal sources. The Democrats, much to Bob’s chagrin, are acting out of pure arrogance and on their own personal agendas instead of following what the people from their districts are physicaly yelling at them to do and if the Democratic group at the C-SPAN session dismisses and tosses away The People’s suggestions then it will seal their defeats in the upcoming Nov elections this year. Most polls have Democratic Encumbent Democrats losing against their Tea Party/Conservative Republican canidate by at least 30 points minimal, and by dismissing the People’s suggestions will only widen this gap further.
I’m gettting a bit tired of this “Party of NO” B.S.
How many times do I have to run this video:
How many times do we need to link to:
http://www.gop.gov/download?folder=misc&file=better-solutions-1-10.pdf
Is it that people like Rich are Stupid or just lying? Or both?
Maybe the best choice for the GOP is for one member to show up with his/her grandchild. When Obama is done with his oration. the GOP member introduce his grandchild as someone to aid Obama in understanding the big words in the February 8th letter.
1. It fits Mata’s argument that the GOP get their act in order.
2. It should force the MSM to actually report the contents of the February 8th letter.
3. It is a slap in the face for the Dem leadership.
Mike, most people have subscribed to the half-truths and lies the MSM pushes against Fiscal Conservative groups because this is their only source of information and they are encouraged to never question the sources of news. The Congress and Senate Republicans proposed a 14 page bill for each chamber and it was tossed to the trashbin by the Democrats of both chambers, yet the media ignores this and still hammers that disturbing message. It would be politicaly smart of the G.O.P. in a C-SPAN debate to bring back up that 14 page bill, it’s date of introduction, and ask why the Democrats trashed the proposed bill and yet went in favor of something bloated with private property evictions, jail time, and family dissovling tactics.
Mike No mas.Without your support the movement is dead.When you’re really ready to support your gal let me know.I did real well betting BHO against Hillary and then against Mac. The Saints won for me and so will Obama.I’ve enjoyed F.A. and if you’re ever in San Clemente I’ll buy you a beer by the Marine Corps Monument.
What comes around .. goes around …
@Neo:
Obie should take some of his own advice.
Roll the tape:
This is just a photo op for our dear sinking(in the polls) reader. I heard his coments this morning on Rush’s show.. He will never give in to anything. He is clueless he still thinks it is the process that everyone is agains’t.. Hey that is something we are mad at .. They just don’t get it we do not want it at all.. NOthing he or his bunch wants is good for America. They all must be voted out!
Mata —
I know that the preferred conservative approach to Iran, per your leader Sarah Palin, would be to go to war with Iran. But the reality is that, due to the dumb Iraq war, we simply are not in a position to invade a country with a population in the range of 70 million people (more than twice the population of California) in search of nuclear weapons labs that could be 500 feet under ground for all we know. In addition, I remember you geniuses were claiming that Obama should have gotten more involved in the Green Revolution. Again, the big brain prevailed and, because we stayed the hell out of it, it is still going on. Like I said, you treat the GOPers like the Iranian government: give them the rope they ask for, then just let them hang themselves.
The GOP, after whining about being ignored, simply cannot set ridiculous conditions and not show up when they are invited to share their approach to solving the problems with the health care system. But this is what I see happening: Obama says to the GOPers
“You oppose any mandate and you also don’t want government to provide stopgap safety net coverage. OK. Gotcha. So what is your plan on the pre-existing conditions problem, which makes in very difficult for people to buy health insurance coverage on the open market?”
Boehner: “A cut in the capital gains tax rate.”
O: “Not sure how that answers the question, John.” At which point it all becomes very clear: the “anti-socialized medicine but also against any cuts in Medicare” GOPers simply are not serious about dealing with the problems. Why? Because they just don’t think there IS a problem. My proof? During the six years of total GOPer control, the only thing they did was to make matters WORSE by passing a not-paid-for Medicare drug bill. As if the Magic Tax Cut Revenue Fairie was going to fly out of a cave and make the drug bill costs disappear using magic dust.
@billy bob, I do not have “a leader”…. Palin or otherwise. That would be *your* zombie flaw… stay focused, and do not cast your failings onto me as common personality traits.
So now.. you of the party that proclaimed that Bush would be “invading” Iran the entire last year of his term… are now suggesting that we shouldn’t have gone into Iraq because we should have been going into Iran??
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA The irony of this makes me laugh so hard my sides split.
Excuse me, but if you think you see a big “L” on my forehead, it’s because you are gazing into a mirror.
Iran was never on Bush’s agenda for “invasion” since Bush knows… as most of us do.. that Iran will fall from within by their majority young, more modernized youth. That is if they are given the least bit of encouragement from the free world. That has always been the preferred method of regime change by the legally sane, and politically unencumbered.
Under YOUR POTUS, however, evidently not. Instead, he’s paralyzed between worlds. And for the record, Iran has been “going on” since the 80s… in varying degrees. Or perhaps you are suggesting that Iran somehow became a new enemy in 2001? You know, the day the world as you know it began?
doh!
But let’s address your more interesting statement:
Let me point out the obvious to the oblivious…. You have a supermajority, and have had that, or close to it, for a year. Get a clue, bubba… your problem isn’t the GOP. They are powerless to stop anything unless backed by overwhelming public opinion. YOUR POTUS and YOUR CONGRESS can pass anything they agree upon, sans even a single GOP vote.
To put this in simple “O’bonics” for you, this means your problem lies not with the GOP, but with members of your own party. Why? Because they don’t want to go against public opinion which disagrees with them.
insert another “doh!” here….
If I were you, I’d quit while you were ahead. You and I agree this is a political trap, and that the GOP has no recourse of honor but to appear. After that, we sever agreement. Then it all depends on how each side – trapper or prey – fields their lot. I’m content to wait it out and see who performs. You… Mr. Confidence… says the eunuch in chief can’t lose.
But then, the last time you predicted was Massachusetts. I see that humility and arrogance is a hard habit for you to kick.
Chihuahua —
You realize, of course, that a failed GM would have meant that the only source of health insurance coverage for retirees would be Medicare, right? No private plan paying for their hip replacements, bypass surgeries, doctors visits, etc. You understand that, don’t you? And use of the Medicare drug plan and not the private UAW negotiated drug plan. So why is it that you cons who opposed the bailout had no plan to deal with the ADDED COST TO THE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM of retirees with no private insurance coverage all of a sudden having Medicare as the only alternative? Did you just think they were going to disappear or something? No, genius, they would have become users of the system.
And I was not talking about Social Security payments to retireees; I was talking about the added Medicare expenses that would have come. But now that you mentioned Social Security, what would have happened to Social Security revenues if GM disappeared? That’s right: they would have decreased, since both the company paying in and the employees paying in (who pay for today’s retirees). And property tax payments; think they would have gone up or down? What ripple effect on the localities who do not receive those payments? Unemployment insurance payments: think they would have added more stress to the already taxed state coffers or less?
Oh, by the way. The parts suppliers who would not get paid their debts and would lose future business, the other businesses that are farther down the food chain, like the diners, etc.: think they would have more business or less business if GM disappeared? Think they will layoff people, close shops, and drop health insurance? Yeah. And their people will move to Medicaid, or maybe just lose benefits altogether and ride butt naked, hoping they don’t need any health care. More food stamps, more unemployment insurance payments, too. All because we listened to the conservatives and let GM implode.
Think there might be some layoffs in the health insurance industry as that source of premiums disappeared and those former customers’ employees moved on the dole?
Not to mention the underlying lunacy of adding a few million people to the unemployment rolls during a bad recession when you did not absolutely have to.
Nope, son, those who opposed the GM bailout simply did not think things through. Whatever you claim you are, the past of least destruction was to do the bailout and BUY SOME TIME.
On the health care debate now, those who want no bill are basically saying things should stay the way they are for another five years. Well a California insurance company just raised rates 39%. You think that might get mentioned during the President’s meeting with the GOPers? Think he might ask them
“Congressman Cantor, Congressman Boehner, do you have a problem with health insurance premiums increasing more than a third in one year? Any ideas from the GOP what we should do about that?”
Cantor: “I think a capital gains tax cut is the way to deal with that issue, don’t you agree, John?”
Boehner: “Yep.”
Bozo…. federal law… look it up. Group insurance cannot deny pre’existing conditions but for a 12 month exemption period max. Don’t want pre’existing as an issue? Go for group policies. Therefore, form more “groups” and eliminate the need for individual insurance.
Next question? Try to make it challenging this time.
The fact you practice in any court of law is terrifying, billy bob.
EVERYONE is mandated to enroll in Medicare at the age of 65. Period. If you do not wish to be a Medicare patient, and you wish private insurance instead, you must forfeit your Social Security retirement fund. And oh, BTW, Medicare is the primary pay…. primary means “first”, BTW. So your private insurance will NOT cover a treatment that is superior to Medicare if Medicare offers an inferior treatment.
Yo… big time lawyer. If you stopped running your keyboard mouth long enough, and clicked on the link Aye gave you which referenced my post about Hall vs Sebelius, you might not appear the doofus legal loser you are.
Read up… get back to us someday when you catch up.
Mata, not sure if you knew this, but the entire “Iran and nukes” thingy is fairly new. No, what I was talking about is the total morons on the right (and there are none on the left) who think it would be a good idea to start a war with Iran over their nuke program when when we remain tied down in Iraq, with more than 100,000 men in that desert.
And I know you agree with Palin that we should go to war with Iran, don’t you? That Obama should invade Iran to show how tough he is, and not wimpy? You agree with that “thinking”? Or do you think it is not such a great idea?
Iraq was simply an unnecessary mess that Bush blundered into. It has cost us lives, cost us hundreds of billions of dollars, led to higher oil prices, decreased our ability to handle other military problems, and created a training ground for al Queda. But other than that, you cons did a fine job of managing it.
But back to the subject at hand: health care. You tried to change the subject from the GOPs whining to the Dems supposedly having problems managing. See, here is the problem: the Senate requires one or two of the GOPers to actually want to address a problem, otherwise it can’t get done. The GOP now has 41 votes and they refuse to do anything about health care. So most likely, in this month when a California private health insurance plan just raised premiums 39% — 39 friggin per cent? What is this, a shake down on “The Sopranos”? — the GOP is going to kill health insurance reform. And gues what? NOTHING will be done at all. Why? Because the GOP has 41 votes and they simply does not want ANY PROGRESS on ANYTHING under Obama. You can see that is their approach from the fact that, when the Senate took a vote on having a deficit reduction commission, GOPer sponsors of the bill DID NOT VOTE FOR THEIR OWN FRIGGIN BILL! They don’t even support an effort to decrease the deficit, for God’s sake! That is not leadership; that is wholesale sabotage.
Finally, you mentioned the phrase “eunuch in chief”. Now do you see why no one takes you cons seriously? You are great at coming up with catchy phrases like “death panels” but when it comes to actually managing a problem, well . . . you come up with catchy phrases. And nice charts . . . yeah, y’all can make some charts, too. But actually solve a problem? Nahhhhhhh!
@BRob:
Boy, we can obviously add business to the long list of things that you don’t understand.
A General Motors reorganization under bankruptcy is not in any way equivalent to a GM disappearance. Nor would the reorganization of GM lead to the sudden demise and unemployment of every portion of their supply chain.
The rest of your dribbling is based on that same straw man premise. Thus, it is not worthy of being addressed.
I will note that you failed to address the basic point that I was making about these supposed throngs of people going on Medicare….they’re gonna be there anyway.
They’re required to enroll in order to collect their Social Security. Are you foolish enough to attempt to make the argument that people who are required to be on the Medicare rolls won’t take advantage of what they are forced to pay for and participate in?
You silly, silly little man.
Mata, you twit, are you trying to tell me that there would be NO DIFFERENCE in Medicare expenditures if the private insurance that covered the GM retirees disappeared? Are you trying to say that? I hope not. Just because you are a GOPer doesn’t mean you have to be THAT ill-informed.
I notice you did not even try to address the other increased government expenditures that I noted would flow naturally from a GM implosion . . . the unemployment insurance, the lack of coverage for non-Medicaid eligible people, the increase in Medicaid expenditures, the food stamps, the use of the drug plan (instead of the private plan), etc. Or the decreased Social Security revenues, the decrease property tax revenues. I did not even mention the payroll tax revenues, or the negative effects on home values as the decrease in employment trickles down into a dead real estate market, more foreclosures, etc.
The only morons who were claiming we’d go to war was your side, billy bob. They were doing a political fear mongering campaign for the presidential elections. Bush had no intentions of bombing Iran.
Iran’s been an enemy since the 80s. And only a military strategy moron, such as yourself, can consider an ally in Iraq… ensconced smack dab in the middle of Iran and Syria… as a strategic error. We don’t need to go into Iraq. Iran/Iraq denizens have relations that cross borders, trade that crosses borders, and with Iraq being an Arab democracy, and Iran being a majority youth craving an Arab democracy, there was never a need for US military force.
Which rather makes your ASSumption of… And I know you agree with Palin that we should go to war with Iran, don’t you? embarrassingly stupid. Really, billy bob… do you have paralegals come into the court to translate their research for you? Because you are unbelievably reading challenged. Must be that Chicago education you got…
Is if you can manage to stumble thru a bit more O’bonics, I’d say you might have a clue on what I believe with Iran. or not…. that you enter the “having a clue” status isn’t high on my life’s priorities. I would just be happy as a clam to see you as the attorney on the other side of the aisle. Can you say slam dunk?
And now… after all this “skip trod” shit, you have the balls to say:
BWAHAHAHAHAHA
I swear, billy bob… put that mirror down because that big “L” your looking at is creating a a permament scar, dude.
You say GOP is obstructionist. I point out they are powerless to be obstructionist. But of course, this has nothing to do with the health care subject at hand. uh huh…
And BTW… don’t you dare be crediting anyone else for the eunuch-in-chief title. To my knowledge, that’s mine, and I lay claim for an apt description of a POTUS paralyzed to do anything effective militarily, or diplomatically on the foreign front. This “you con”… speaking of catchy phrases that supposedly affect credibility… is unanimous in that.
@BRob… until you read about Hall v Sebelius, and have had some personal experience in Medicare primary care that renders secondary insurance refused, I suggest you retain the “twit” title yourself. You are, and remain, an embarrassingly ignorant attorney.
We’ll try O’bonics one more time, and after that, you’re on your own for playing the fool. I repeat:
Therefore if you have a GM private insurance policy, and you are over 65 and mandated as a Medicare patient, what Medicare covers is what you get, and your GM private care refuses the alternative treatment. So… in O’bonics… you’ve saved nothing in Medicare expenses. And to boot, you’ve denied a patient the right to superior care.
Read it and weep, big shot lawyer. Hall v Sebelius. And STFU until you do. Your spin don’t work here.
Mata, I did not think this was possible, but you are even less intelligent than I feared.
“Group insurance cannot deny pre’existing conditions but for a 12 month exemption period max. Don’t want pre’existing as an issue? Go for group policies. Therefore, form more ‘groups’ and eliminate the need for individual insurance.”
Ok, here is the problem (besides you not being smart) — You mention the 12 month exclusion under “group policies.” Do I really have to go any further? A lot can happen in 12 months! Which is why the pre-existing condition thing is such a big friggin deal! But let’s continue:
Say you had insurance through your job,. but lost it because . . . oh, the GOPers were successful at blocking the auto bailout and GM went under. You don’t have the $1,200 a month to buy COBRA (because the GOPers were successful in blocking the Obama stimulus package and the COBRA subsidy did not happen). So you try to find health insurance, but you have a touch of diabetes, or you are just fat.
We know what Obama would propose to solve this problem: a mandate on coverage for all in exchange for insurance companies dropping the pre-existing condition, with some subsidies for those who can’t afford the premiums.
What is the GOPer approach to solving this? You told me what you are against, now tell me how you would solve the problem.