White house ready to drop public option.

Page 14 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy
Goverment owned or government controlled co-ops whats the difference? Not much!
As long as the rules and priciples stay the same I think its a great comprimise.

But you can bet the repub's will try and derail the underlying principles of the co-op's, so it's anybodys guess what the final house and senate bills will look like. If I where a betting man I would bet that the repubs in the senate will never agree to a comprise bill, and we will get something resembling the house bill passed with less that 60 votes in the senate.

Not going to happen. The people are waking up and poll, after poll show the people don't want the gubment controlling their healthcare. It's only the lunatic fringe that do.
 

Skitzer

Diamond Member
Mar 20, 2000
4,414
3
81
Originally posted by: CallMeJoe
Originally posted by: colonel
Originally posted by: CallMeJoe
Originally posted by: colonel
everybody knew that going Congress away was the end of it, but the sad part is these KKK radicals like Rush Lim call the president "Hitler" and all conservatives love it, they are just full of shit like always did.
Can you translate that into Standard English for those of us who aren't fully fluent in Gibberish?
Can you translate that into Standard English for those of us who aren't fully fluent in Gibberish? if you can understand "go fuc# yourself" you' ll be ok
So you're every bit as eloquent as you are literate!

BwaHaHaHa ........ what a riot!! POWNED.

I don't think it's gibberish ...... more like stupidity?
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: spidey07
Originally posted by: quest55720
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
Originally posted by: quest55720
If Obama would of presented a bill with what he campaigned on it would of been passed by now.

So you are saying that if Obama sent a single payer uhc bill to congress it would of been passed by now? I would argue that the defeat would of been certain as these interests were not about to be pushed to the sidelines. This is just the beginning for the industry. If they won the no public option angle they will move on and try to stop all change of their industry. The longer things sit in limbo the longer they have to attack, lobby and misinform the public.

He campaigned on costs costs costs and pre-existing conditions. He did not say a peep about UHC during the campaign. Only this congress could screw it up this much. The average person cares about 2 things cost and pre-existing conditions. The average person does not want to spend a few trillion to cover 20 million people.

I remember him stating very often that he promised universal health care or a single payer system. Otherwise you're exactly right.

A president campaigning on an issue, trying to get it passed, and compromising when he can't get the votes by passing a watered-down version is not exactly a 'broken promise'.

But note that I'm not defending him on this, other than from excessive attack - I'm angry and disappointed with his not fighitng hard enough for the right bill, it seems to me.
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,562
3
0
Yep, he gets elected and *gasp* he isn't Obalexama The Great anymore. We do live in something resembling a Democracy here, and despite recent wins on the part of the Dems the Repubs still hold a very significant minority. Unity is one thing Republicans have and Democrats don't. As long as that remains the case, Obama's got an uphill battle.

For the record I think we should just nuke congress from orbit and change voting laws to require that all parties in any given election receive equal funding from the government with strict limits on private funding. The original idea as I understand it behind our election process was that the average joe off the street could run for President if he liked. Now being ridiculously rich and/or well connected is everything but an official prerequisite.

But I digress. As far as health care goes, I think a government option could be a good move, but it's a fine line (which congress will squiggle about to no end); and it cracks open the door to a more severe form of the Welfare State down the line, which I vehemently oppose. Thus while I admit our current system needs massive improvement, maybe even more governmental regulation, I don't trust the current government to not slide down the proverbial slope; and it's no secret that this is not a "compromise" in the eyes of Obama or the left. The memo mentioned in the article spells it out "Nothing has changed." Even if this passes, it will probably be intentionally fucked up so the left will have more reason to propose more incremental "compromises".

I know I'm hitting the left hard here, but I do consider myself a moderate independent. I despise moronic conservatives as much as I do moronic liberals, and the Republicans are guilty of practices similar to the ones listed above IMO, but those practices aren't the issue for the moment.
 

alphatarget1

Diamond Member
Dec 9, 2001
5,710
0
76
What are you libs going nuts for? What's wrong with a co-op instead of having the federal government take over healthcare? I have no problem with a carefully crafted proposal that allows co-ops to be formed. It doesn't give the federal government more power to screw things up.
 

alphatarget1

Diamond Member
Dec 9, 2001
5,710
0
76
Originally posted by: quest55720

You are exactly right. The problem is Obama is not a real leader and has never been one. He did the same thing with porkulus and cap/tax. He let the idiots in congress screw things up. If Obama would of presented a bill with what he campaigned on it would of been passed by now. They should have focused on controlling costs and pre-existing conditions like he campaigned on. Instead he let the far left wing change it into a government take over of healthcare costing trillions.

QFT. Grammatical mistakes noted :p

 

CallMeJoe

Diamond Member
Jul 30, 2004
6,938
5
81
Originally posted by: alphatarget1
What are you libs going nuts for? What's wrong with a co-op instead of having the federal government take over healthcare? I have no problem with a carefully crafted proposal that allows co-ops to be formed. It doesn't give the federal government more power to screw things up.
Now co-ops are being derided as a Trojan Horse for the Public Option. Hannity went off on that last night. Count on any idea from this administration, no matter how good, being trashed by Talk Radio, Fox News and the Jim DeMented branch of Congressional Republicans.
 

alphatarget1

Diamond Member
Dec 9, 2001
5,710
0
76
Originally posted by: CallMeJoe
Originally posted by: alphatarget1
What are you libs going nuts for? What's wrong with a co-op instead of having the federal government take over healthcare? I have no problem with a carefully crafted proposal that allows co-ops to be formed. It doesn't give the federal government more power to screw things up.
Now co-ops are being derided as a Trojan Horse for the Public Option. Hannity went off on that last night. Count on any idea from this administration, no matter how good, being trashed by Talk Radio, Fox News and the Jim DeMented branch of Congressional Republicans.

What did you expect the pundits to do? Go along with it?

Let's face it. The original proposal is just a piece of sh!t that they couldn't sell. If Obama is the leader he really wants people to believe he is, he would've worked with congress and not produce the original form of UHC that the non-partisan CBO crapped on. They missed the August deadline, and Obama shares most of the blame for it. The fact is that after crap like the bailous, "stimulus", and cap and trade, moderates now see Obama as just another inner-city liberal who has nothing new to offer (more of the same).
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
I think they should take all that money they wanted to spend on health insurance and just set up public clinics/hospitals in each city. The government can run it like they want and charge what they want. The people that want to go elsewhere can do so. Insurance companies can stay as they are if people want to use them . If the government really can manage health care cost like they claim then other providers will have to lower cost to stay competitive. Similar to the way the school system works, use the public system or if you think you can do better for more money you can put kids in private school.

 

shadow9d9

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2004
8,132
2
0
Originally posted by: spidey07
Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy
Goverment owned or government controlled co-ops whats the difference? Not much!
As long as the rules and priciples stay the same I think its a great comprimise.

But you can bet the repub's will try and derail the underlying principles of the co-op's, so it's anybodys guess what the final house and senate bills will look like. If I where a betting man I would bet that the repubs in the senate will never agree to a comprise bill, and we will get something resembling the house bill passed with less that 60 votes in the senate.

Not going to happen. The people are waking up and poll, after poll show the people don't want the gubment controlling their healthcare. It's only the lunatic fringe that do.

The lunatic fringe showing obama as hitler or bringing guns to rallies? Or the ones saying they don't want government in their medicare?
 

CallMeJoe

Diamond Member
Jul 30, 2004
6,938
5
81
Originally posted by: alphatarget1
Originally posted by: CallMeJoe
Originally posted by: alphatarget1
What are you libs going nuts for? What's wrong with a co-op instead of having the federal government take over healthcare? I have no problem with a carefully crafted proposal that allows co-ops to be formed. It doesn't give the federal government more power to screw things up.
Now co-ops are being derided as a Trojan Horse for the Public Option. Hannity went off on that last night. Count on any idea from this administration, no matter how good, being trashed by Talk Radio, Fox News and the Jim DeMented branch of Congressional Republicans.
What did you expect the pundits to do? Go along with it?
Let's face it. The original proposal is just a piece of sh!t that they couldn't sell. If Obama is the leader he really wants people to believe he is, he would've worked with congress and not produce the original form of UHC that the non-partisan CBO crapped on. They missed the August deadline, and Obama shares most of the blame for it. The fact is that after crap like the bailous, "stimulus", and cap and trade, moderates now see Obama as just another inner-city liberal who has nothing new to offer (more of the same).
It would be nice if the Anything But Loyal Opposition would discuss any of these issues on the merits rather than misrepresentations.