Hacp
Lifer
- Jun 8, 2005
- 13,923
- 2
- 81
No one liked the war in Iraq or Afghanistan. It just wasted US taxpayer dollars and reduced American competitiveness. Same thing with this health insurance monstrosity.
No one liked the war in Iraq or Afghanistan. It just wasted US taxpayer dollars and reduced American competitiveness. Same thing with this health insurance monstrosity.
Civil Rights will probably be mired in the courts for years before a single thing is enacted, but the Dems will pay for it with their jobs in and will coin a new term "super-duper majority."
Women's Rights will probably be mired in the courts for years before a single thing is enacted, but the Dems will pay for it with their jobs in and will coin a new term "super-duper majority."
Medicare will probably be mired in the courts for years before a single thing is enacted, but the Dems will pay for it with their jobs in and will coin a new term "super-duper majority."
Just like all of those, in 20 years, the republicans will be defending it, just like they did today with Medicare.
I suspect the HC bill will create a gazillion or more jobs.
Of course, most of them will come from lawyers and legal staffs hired to challenge it in court and find as many loopholes as possible.
--
Of course, most of them will come from lawyers and legal staffs hired to challenge it in court and find as many loopholes as possible.
--
lol.. yeah right.. back in 2003, every right-winger and a majority of the leftist lemmings were screaming "Let's kill Saddam, he blew up the WTC!"
Of course it didn't help that we have a large number of sheep in this country that listen to W say "Terrorist" and "Iraq" in the same sentence, and instantly assume that this was revenge for 9/11.
Some accountability would be nice, but you'll never get any of that. Lewis Black said it best, if you've seen his standup routine.
Pens1566
Lifer
- Oct 11, 2005
- 13,541
- 10,981
- 136
OrByte
Diamond Member
- Jul 21, 2000
- 9,303
- 144
- 106
Op-Ed Columnist
Fear Strikes Out
By PAUL KRUGMAN
The day before Sunday’s health care vote, President Obama gave an unscripted talk to House Democrats. Near the end, he spoke about why his party should pass reform: “Every once in a while a moment comes where you have a chance to vindicate all those best hopes that you had about yourself, about this country, where you have a chance to make good on those promises that you made ... And this is the time to make true on that promise. We are not bound to win, but we are bound to be true. We are not bound to succeed, but we are bound to let whatever light we have shine.”
And on the other side, here’s what Newt Gingrich, the Republican former speaker of the House — a man celebrated by many in his party as an intellectual leader — had to say: If Democrats pass health reform, “They will have destroyed their party much as Lyndon Johnson shattered the Democratic Party for 40 years” by passing civil rights legislation.
I’d argue that Mr. Gingrich is wrong about that: proposals to guarantee health insurance are often controversial before they go into effect — Ronald Reagan famously argued that Medicare would mean the end of American freedom — but always popular once enacted.
But that’s not the point I want to make today. Instead, I want you to consider the contrast: on one side, the closing argument was an appeal to our better angels, urging politicians to do what is right, even if it hurts their careers; on the other side, callous cynicism. Think about what it means to condemn health reform by comparing it to the Civil Rights Act. Who in modern America would say that L.B.J. did the wrong thing by pushing for racial equality? (Actually, we know who: the people at the Tea Party protest who hurled racial epithets at Democratic members of Congress on the eve of the vote.)
And that cynicism has been the hallmark of the whole campaign against reform.
Yes, a few conservative policy intellectuals, after making a show of thinking hard about the issues, claimed to be disturbed by reform’s fiscal implications (but were strangely unmoved by the clean bill of fiscal health from the Congressional Budget Office) or to want stronger action on costs (even though this reform does more to tackle health care costs than any previous legislation). For the most part, however, opponents of reform didn’t even pretend to engage with the reality either of the existing health care system or of the moderate, centrist plan — very close in outline to the reform Mitt Romney introduced in Massachusetts — that Democrats were proposing.
Instead, the emotional core of opposition to reform was blatant fear-mongering, unconstrained either by the facts or by any sense of decency.
It wasn’t just the death panel smear. It was racial hate-mongering, like a piece in Investor’s Business Daily declaring that health reform is “affirmative action on steroids, deciding everything from who becomes a doctor to who gets treatment on the basis of skin color.” It was wild claims about abortion funding. It was the insistence that there is something tyrannical about giving young working Americans the assurance that health care will be available when they need it, an assurance that older Americans have enjoyed ever since Lyndon Johnson — whom Mr. Gingrich considers a failed president — pushed Medicare through over the howls of conservatives.
And let’s be clear: the campaign of fear hasn’t been carried out by a radical fringe, unconnected to the Republican establishment. On the contrary, that establishment has been involved and approving all the way. Politicians like Sarah Palin — who was, let us remember, the G.O.P.’s vice-presidential candidate — eagerly spread the death panel lie, and supposedly reasonable, moderate politicians like Senator Chuck Grassley refused to say that it was untrue. On the eve of the big vote, Republican members of Congress warned that “freedom dies a little bit today” and accused Democrats of “totalitarian tactics,” which I believe means the process known as “voting.”
Without question, the campaign of fear was effective: health reform went from being highly popular to wide disapproval, although the numbers have been improving lately. But the question was, would it actually be enough to block reform?
And the answer is no. The Democrats have done it. The House has passed the Senate version of health reform, and an improved version will be achieved through reconciliation.
This is, of course, a political victory for President Obama, and a triumph for Nancy Pelosi, the House speaker. But it is also a victory for America’s soul. In the end, a vicious, unprincipled fear offensive failed to block reform. This time, fear struck out.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/22/opinion/22krugman.html?ref=opinion&pagewanted=print
Fear Strikes Out
By PAUL KRUGMAN
The day before Sunday’s health care vote, President Obama gave an unscripted talk to House Democrats. Near the end, he spoke about why his party should pass reform: “Every once in a while a moment comes where you have a chance to vindicate all those best hopes that you had about yourself, about this country, where you have a chance to make good on those promises that you made ... And this is the time to make true on that promise. We are not bound to win, but we are bound to be true. We are not bound to succeed, but we are bound to let whatever light we have shine.”
And on the other side, here’s what Newt Gingrich, the Republican former speaker of the House — a man celebrated by many in his party as an intellectual leader — had to say: If Democrats pass health reform, “They will have destroyed their party much as Lyndon Johnson shattered the Democratic Party for 40 years” by passing civil rights legislation.
I’d argue that Mr. Gingrich is wrong about that: proposals to guarantee health insurance are often controversial before they go into effect — Ronald Reagan famously argued that Medicare would mean the end of American freedom — but always popular once enacted.
But that’s not the point I want to make today. Instead, I want you to consider the contrast: on one side, the closing argument was an appeal to our better angels, urging politicians to do what is right, even if it hurts their careers; on the other side, callous cynicism. Think about what it means to condemn health reform by comparing it to the Civil Rights Act. Who in modern America would say that L.B.J. did the wrong thing by pushing for racial equality? (Actually, we know who: the people at the Tea Party protest who hurled racial epithets at Democratic members of Congress on the eve of the vote.)
And that cynicism has been the hallmark of the whole campaign against reform.
Yes, a few conservative policy intellectuals, after making a show of thinking hard about the issues, claimed to be disturbed by reform’s fiscal implications (but were strangely unmoved by the clean bill of fiscal health from the Congressional Budget Office) or to want stronger action on costs (even though this reform does more to tackle health care costs than any previous legislation). For the most part, however, opponents of reform didn’t even pretend to engage with the reality either of the existing health care system or of the moderate, centrist plan — very close in outline to the reform Mitt Romney introduced in Massachusetts — that Democrats were proposing.
Instead, the emotional core of opposition to reform was blatant fear-mongering, unconstrained either by the facts or by any sense of decency.
It wasn’t just the death panel smear. It was racial hate-mongering, like a piece in Investor’s Business Daily declaring that health reform is “affirmative action on steroids, deciding everything from who becomes a doctor to who gets treatment on the basis of skin color.” It was wild claims about abortion funding. It was the insistence that there is something tyrannical about giving young working Americans the assurance that health care will be available when they need it, an assurance that older Americans have enjoyed ever since Lyndon Johnson — whom Mr. Gingrich considers a failed president — pushed Medicare through over the howls of conservatives.
And let’s be clear: the campaign of fear hasn’t been carried out by a radical fringe, unconnected to the Republican establishment. On the contrary, that establishment has been involved and approving all the way. Politicians like Sarah Palin — who was, let us remember, the G.O.P.’s vice-presidential candidate — eagerly spread the death panel lie, and supposedly reasonable, moderate politicians like Senator Chuck Grassley refused to say that it was untrue. On the eve of the big vote, Republican members of Congress warned that “freedom dies a little bit today” and accused Democrats of “totalitarian tactics,” which I believe means the process known as “voting.”
Without question, the campaign of fear was effective: health reform went from being highly popular to wide disapproval, although the numbers have been improving lately. But the question was, would it actually be enough to block reform?
And the answer is no. The Democrats have done it. The House has passed the Senate version of health reform, and an improved version will be achieved through reconciliation.
This is, of course, a political victory for President Obama, and a triumph for Nancy Pelosi, the House speaker. But it is also a victory for America’s soul. In the end, a vicious, unprincipled fear offensive failed to block reform. This time, fear struck out.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/22/opinion/22krugman.html?ref=opinion&pagewanted=print
that made me laugh.
the argument that Pelosi was making wasn't that this bill was the morally right thing to do, it was that failing to pass it would cost the democrats even more seats than passing it and derail their agenda for the remainder of Obama's presidency.
ProfJohn
Lifer
- Jul 28, 2006
- 18,161
- 7
- 0
Quit lying about the cost of the wars.
Both wars combined have yet to hit the 1 trillion mark.
1 trillion if we ended today. We will be there for the next 40 years. It is 3 trillion at least.
100,000 civilian deaths in Iraq is what we got for it.
1 trillion to help millions upon millions of americans? HOW DARE WE!
GuitarDaddy
Lifer
- Nov 9, 2004
- 11,465
- 1
- 0
By the end of the week if not sooner, your cash we be useless the only valid currency will be obamacare vouchers 
Hacp
Lifer
- Jun 8, 2005
- 13,923
- 2
- 81
Thats cause we thought we would go in there, take down the government, suck the oil out, then leave. For some reason, they never did that and wanted to partake in nation building. That never works.
DesiPower
Lifer
- Nov 22, 2008
- 15,299
- 740
- 126
By the end of the week if not sooner, your cash we be useless the only valid currency will be obamacare vouchers
+1
werepossum
Elite Member
- Jul 10, 2006
- 29,873
- 463
- 126
The health care bill is just another (albeit large) drop in the bucket of destroying the country as we know it. As others have said, it will accelerate the flight of jobs and capital from this country, but as Skoorb said the lack of financial regulation, and the hijacking of TARP from a mission of fixing the toxic assets to a mission of seizing control of the companies with the toxic assets, are a much more immediate threat.
Corn, you're forgetting the Democrats' idea of imputed income. True, the Pubbies are about to take Congress, but I see little to indicate that they have the stones to kill this thing or any agreed-upon idea of how to replace it and solve the problems it purports to address. My guess is that sometime around 2016 - 2020 the Dems will sweep back into power, replace the failing health insurance companies with a French-style single payer socialized health care system, and enjoy another forty years of largely uninterrupted rule. Granted, two thirds of the country was against this particular bill, but our entitlement mentality hasn't changed. In the long run the Republicans can't compete with the Democrats in handing out entitlements without becoming the Democrats.
Corn, you're forgetting the Democrats' idea of imputed income. True, the Pubbies are about to take Congress, but I see little to indicate that they have the stones to kill this thing or any agreed-upon idea of how to replace it and solve the problems it purports to address. My guess is that sometime around 2016 - 2020 the Dems will sweep back into power, replace the failing health insurance companies with a French-style single payer socialized health care system, and enjoy another forty years of largely uninterrupted rule. Granted, two thirds of the country was against this particular bill, but our entitlement mentality hasn't changed. In the long run the Republicans can't compete with the Democrats in handing out entitlements without becoming the Democrats.
Modelworks
Lifer
- Feb 22, 2007
- 16,240
- 7
- 76
It isn't intended to crash the economy, only insurance companies so the government can complete the takeover of health care.
GuitarDaddy
Lifer
- Nov 9, 2004
- 11,465
- 1
- 0
Waaaa! You guys have had over a year and you still haven't gotten the black guy removed from the whitehouse, whats the holdup?
You couldn't repel your last bad temper tantrum, good look turning back the clock on healthcare
IndyColtsFan
Lifer
- Sep 22, 2007
- 33,655
- 687
- 126
Waaaa! You guys have had over a year and you still haven't gotten the black guy removed from the whitehouse, whats the holdup?
You couldn't repel your last bad temper tantrum, good look turning back the clock on healthcare
Seriously, WTF?
I'm going with this as a greater threat to the economy. It's almost like we are returning to business as usual.
I'm not 100% behind the Dodd Bill yet .... probably based upon my man-love for Paul Volker and his proposed 'Rule'
--
LTC8K6
Lifer
- Mar 10, 2004
- 28,520
- 1,575
- 126
Waaaa! You guys have had over a year and you still haven't gotten the black guy removed from the whitehouse, whats the holdup?
You couldn't repel your last bad temper tantrum, good look turning back the clock on healthcare
What in the world are you talking about?
The health care reforms actually don't start for several years, unless everything I have heard is wrong.
That gives plenty of time for change to happen, so there's no need for anyone to panic yet.
The Dems have big changes in mind for health care. The goal is government provided, taxpayer paid, health care. The NHS for America. That's where the Dems are going. This was just the first step. It will be the Dems requesting and making the big changes to this health care bill. They do not like the bill at all and want a public option in the worst way.
There is no comparison between the bill being worked on now and where the Dems intend to take health care, imo.
Assuming they don't lose big in november, that is.
Hacp
Lifer
- Jun 8, 2005
- 13,923
- 2
- 81
LTC8K6
Lifer
- Mar 10, 2004
- 28,520
- 1,575
- 126
Yes, the new taxes start soon, and there are quite a few of them, apparently.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=ake7tOWwUT6E
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=ake7tOWwUT6E
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter