Edit Preferences
Logout
Edmonsky's Comments (220)
View Comments:
Sort:
1 - 25 of 220
Eyes off the Prize: Liberals Who Want to Kill the Health Care Bill Should Remember History
Commented Jan 01, 2010 at 20:55:21 in Politics
“Some Progressives are very difficult to understand because of fixation on rigid viewpoints. Progressives of the type see those who philosophically disagree with them as corporatists. I do not know why but they seem to be unaware that there are people who believe in free-market economy as a political philosophy. It is these types of intolerance l find very disconcerting among some of these avowed progressives. They view any politician who believes in free-market as bought and paid for by the corporate American. It is analogous to their counterparts in the right who think that any government intervention is a form of socialism.”
Eyes off the Prize: Liberals Who Want to Kill the Health Care Bill Should Remember History
Commented Jan 01, 2010 at 16:43:44 in Politics
“Comparing “No Child Left Behind” legislation to healthcare is like apples and oranges. The former only affects the underclass while the latter has significant influence on all segments in the society and economy.
Reducing the deficit is directly tied to healthcare reform. Being competitive in the global economy is also directly tied to healthcare reform.”
Reducing the deficit is directly tied to healthcare reform. Being competitive in the global economy is also directly tied to healthcare reform.”
Eyes off the Prize: Liberals Who Want to Kill the Health Care Bill Should Remember History
Commented Jan 01, 2010 at 16:16:46 in Politics
“Mandate:
During the campaign, Senator Obama’s healthcare proposal did not include “mandate”. Obama explained that the reason why people do not purchase healthcare insurance is due to cost. He argued that if the cost were substantially reduced many people would purchase healthcare insurance plan.
What changed?
Senator Obama had planned to finance his healthcare proposal by allowing the temporary Bush tax cut for the wealthiest Americans to expire. The estimate from the tax cut revenue will be $300-$400 billion. That was in May 2007.
As President, Obama inherited annual budget deficit of $1.3 trillions. There is no way healthcare legislation will pass through Congress with deficit spending. Hence, other sources of funding have to be found. Consequently, “Mandate” became one of the sources. There are no resources available to the government to substantially subsidize healthcare in order to bring down the cost.”
During the campaign, Senator Obama’s healthcare proposal did not include “mandate”. Obama explained that the reason why people do not purchase healthcare insurance is due to cost. He argued that if the cost were substantially reduced many people would purchase healthcare insurance plan.
What changed?
Senator Obama had planned to finance his healthcare proposal by allowing the temporary Bush tax cut for the wealthiest Americans to expire. The estimate from the tax cut revenue will be $300-$400 billion. That was in May 2007.
As President, Obama inherited annual budget deficit of $1.3 trillions. There is no way healthcare legislation will pass through Congress with deficit spending. Hence, other sources of funding have to be found. Consequently, “Mandate” became one of the sources. There are no resources available to the government to substantially subsidize healthcare in order to bring down the cost.”
Eyes off the Prize: Liberals Who Want to Kill the Health Care Bill Should Remember History
Commented Jan 01, 2010 at 15:53:59 in Politics
“On May 29, 2007 - Senator Obama, campaigning for Democrat Party nomination, laid out his healthcare plan in a speech at University of Iowa. Please see the link below for your reference.
http://www
An excerpt from the Obama’s speech:
“If you are one of the 45 million Americans who don't have health insurance, you will have it after this plan becomes law. No one will be turned away because of a preexisting condition or illness. Everyone will be able buy into a new health insurance plan that's similar to the one that every federal employee - from a postal worker in Iowa to a Congressman in Washington - currently has for themselves. It will cover all essential medical services, including preventive, maternity, disease management, and mental health care. And it will also include high standards for quality and efficiency
Senator Obama never campaigned on creating government run insurance company “known as public option”. He campaigned on creating “Public Exchange” similar to the one that is available to every federal employee. Participants in “Public Exchange” are private healthcare insurance companies. The advent of Public Option took the center stage when Obama became president at the instance of healthcare legislation proposed to the Congress. Public Option was the brainchild of progressives in the Congress rather than Obama’s presidential campaign.”
http://www
An excerpt from the Obama’s speech:
“If you are one of the 45 million Americans who don't have health insurance, you will have it after this plan becomes law. No one will be turned away because of a preexisting condition or illness. Everyone will be able buy into a new health insurance plan that's similar to the one that every federal employee - from a postal worker in Iowa to a Congressman in Washington - currently has for themselves. It will cover all essential medical services, including preventive, maternity, disease management, and mental health care. And it will also include high standards for quality and efficiency
Senator Obama never campaigned on creating government run insurance company “known as public option”. He campaigned on creating “Public Exchange” similar to the one that is available to every federal employee. Participants in “Public Exchange” are private healthcare insurance companies. The advent of Public Option took the center stage when Obama became president at the instance of healthcare legislation proposed to the Congress. Public Option was the brainchild of progressives in the Congress rather than Obama’s presidential campaign.”
Left & Right Agree: Health Care Mandates Are the Road to Neofeudalism
Commented Dec 31, 2009 at 22:52:53 in Politics
“Conservatives favor limited government and lower taxes. They do not believe in universal healthcare vis-à-vis single-payer or public option.
Democrats believe in universal healthcare but various constituents in the Party differ in the methodology to be deployed to achieve the stated goal. Some Democrats do not favor any form of “for profit healthcare insurance”; some believe in combination of non-profit and for profit healthcare insurance; others believe in regulated “for profit healthcare insurance”.
Democrats who believe in “not for profit healthcare insurance” do not have the 60-votes in the senate against filibuster. That is the insurmountable obstacle at the heart of this impasse; hence the negative reaction formations. Joining forces with political foes who do not believe in universal healthcare to undermine the senate healthcare bill is an instance of myopia par excellence. This is a classical case of practicum absurdum.”
Democrats believe in universal healthcare but various constituents in the Party differ in the methodology to be deployed to achieve the stated goal. Some Democrats do not favor any form of “for profit healthcare insurance”; some believe in combination of non-profit and for profit healthcare insurance; others believe in regulated “for profit healthcare insurance”.
Democrats who believe in “not for profit healthcare insurance” do not have the 60-votes in the senate against filibuster. That is the insurmountable obstacle at the heart of this impasse; hence the negative reaction formations. Joining forces with political foes who do not believe in universal healthcare to undermine the senate healthcare bill is an instance of myopia par excellence. This is a classical case of practicum absurdum.”
Lorianne replied on Jan 01, 2010 at 15:16:58
“Democrats are for BIG federal government.
The same big federal government which is in bed with BIG corporations, including insurers.
Go figure.”
The same big federal government which is in bed with BIG corporations, including insurers.
Go figure.”
masher replied on Jan 01, 2010 at 01:22:46
“If conservatives favor limited government then why did Bush and the GOP controlled congress and senate pass Medicare Part D in 2003, the largest entitlement expansion since the 1960's?
Medicare Part D was scheduled to cost over 1.2 trillion over 10 years. Its actaully cost much more.
There is also the fact that the GOP is just as likely pass unemployment benefits as the Dems. The difference is in rhetoric. Its all theatre but there really isn't any difference.
And I'm not trying to say that the GOP cares about helping the poor or expanding medical coverage. On the contrary, Medicare Part D is a boondogle. Its corporate welfare. And the same can be said about the Dems plan.
In both cases, the middle class is taxed disproportionately and the rich get most of the benefits (they own the stock in these corporations). The plan for both the Dems and the GOP is to totally bankrupt the US, the rich move elsewhere, and the rest of us are left to pay back the communist in China.”
Medicare Part D was scheduled to cost over 1.2 trillion over 10 years. Its actaully cost much more.
There is also the fact that the GOP is just as likely pass unemployment benefits as the Dems. The difference is in rhetoric. Its all theatre but there really isn't any difference.
And I'm not trying to say that the GOP cares about helping the poor or expanding medical coverage. On the contrary, Medicare Part D is a boondogle. Its corporate welfare. And the same can be said about the Dems plan.
In both cases, the middle class is taxed disproportionately and the rich get most of the benefits (they own the stock in these corporations). The plan for both the Dems and the GOP is to totally bankrupt the US, the rich move elsewhere, and the rest of us are left to pay back the communist in China.”
CanadianBeef replied on Dec 31, 2009 at 23:29:14
“Conservatives hate taxes, gays, and the teenagers who get pregnant after failing their chastity pledges. I'm not convinced they are actually "for" anything.”
Left & Right Agree: Health Care Mandates Are the Road to Neofeudalism
Commented Dec 30, 2009 at 22:42:48 in Politics
“The Reason For Mandate:
The healthcare legislation expressly stipulates in clear terms that insurance companies cannot deny coverage due to pre-existing medical conditions and cannot drop coverage because of illness and removes lifetime caps on costs. The reason such provision is possible is because the legislation mandates everybody to buy healthcare insurance or pay fine. It is a commonsense view. When you balance the sick and the healthy, they will cancel each other out.
Some progressives do not want for-profit
Furthermore, the profit margin for healthcare insurance companies is between 2.5%-4%. The current legislation mandates insurance companies to spend between 80%-85% on healthcare and when they spend less, they will reimburse the insured.”
The healthcare legislation expressly stipulates in clear terms that insurance companies cannot deny coverage due to pre-existing medical conditions and cannot drop coverage because of illness and removes lifetime caps on costs. The reason such provision is possible is because the legislation mandates everybody to buy healthcare insurance or pay fine. It is a commonsense view. When you balance the sick and the healthy, they will cancel each other out.
Some progressives do not want for-profit
Furthermore, the profit margin for healthcare insurance companies is between 2.5%-4%. The current legislation mandates insurance companies to spend between 80%-85% on healthcare and when they spend less, they will reimburse the insured.”
Awake-and-Sing replied on Dec 31, 2009 at 13:42:58
“Nice try.
3%-4% may to as profit to shareholder dividends, but you are aware that the bloated CEO pay and executive bonuses are considered "administrative overhead".
I'm sure you already know that as you attempt to shill for this bill.”
3%-4% may to as profit to shareholder dividends, but you are aware that the bloated CEO pay and executive bonuses are considered "administrative overhead".
I'm sure you already know that as you attempt to shill for this bill.”
schatsie replied on Dec 31, 2009 at 05:37:39
“I have a really hard time believing that the proft margin is 2.5 to 4%...if it is that low, that means the administrative costs are HUMONGOUS.
Inaru replied on Dec 31, 2009 at 01:29:45
“That 2.5-4% profit margin is bogus. That's AFTER they take their big CEO salaries, their bonuses, pay their PACs and lobbyists million$$, and toss a few pennies to their shareholders. Oh, and don't forget their 10s if not 100s of thousands of stock shares, not counted until cashed out. 2.5-4% - hah! I wish.
"Even things out" - again, I wish. Everyone won't pay the same, older people will pay 3-4X as much, pre-existing must be covered - but not at the same rates as non-pre-existing condition clients. The ins cos will even out their risk, but we won't even out our premiums. And to circumvent the don't exclude pre-existings rule, they'll find one thing you didn't even know was on your medical record that you didn't report, and charge you w/fraud to avoid covering you. Just watch.
Finally, if it doesn't ruffle your feathers to be deemed a criminal for not funding a monopoly, with either your premium$ or taxe$ or both, good for you! If I ever lose my Medicare, I'll go to prison before I pay taxes or premiums to a corporation that's exempt from monopoly laws, especially for mediocre but necessary healthcare. At least my inferior healthcare will be free in prison. I don't even use Microsoft's software, for pity's sake. Bad enough my only choices are one broadband internet provider.”
"Even things out" - again, I wish. Everyone won't pay the same, older people will pay 3-4X as much, pre-existing must be covered - but not at the same rates as non-pre-existing condition clients. The ins cos will even out their risk, but we won't even out our premiums. And to circumvent the don't exclude pre-existings rule, they'll find one thing you didn't even know was on your medical record that you didn't report, and charge you w/fraud to avoid covering you. Just watch.
Finally, if it doesn't ruffle your feathers to be deemed a criminal for not funding a monopoly, with either your premium$ or taxe$ or both, good for you! If I ever lose my Medicare, I'll go to prison before I pay taxes or premiums to a corporation that's exempt from monopoly laws, especially for mediocre but necessary healthcare. At least my inferior healthcare will be free in prison. I don't even use Microsoft's software, for pity's sake. Bad enough my only choices are one broadband internet provider.”
bluebirder replied on Dec 30, 2009 at 23:55:43
“The National Nurses Union issued a very sound statement pointing out numerous loopholes which stand to nullify the controls you have cited here.
http://www
http://www
dancucich replied on Dec 30, 2009 at 23:23:43
“"Furthermore, the profit margin for healthcare insurance companies is between 2.5%-4%. The current legislation mandates insurance companies to spend between 80%-85% on healthcare and when they spend less, they will reimburse the insured."
----------
Yes insurance companies are greedy too, but the *providers* stick it to them
and they stick it to us again...by the way, if your figure of 2 to 4 % is the profit for
insurance companies, then obviously the providers are a major factor in the
costs of care rendered which are not adressed in this 2,000 page stew prepared
by 535 incompetent chefs each insisting on adding his or her own *special seasoning*
( no wonder it has a bad smell.)
.”
----------
Yes insurance companies are greedy too, but the *providers* stick it to them
and they stick it to us again...by the way, if your figure of 2 to 4 % is the profit for
insurance companies, then obviously the providers are a major factor in the
costs of care rendered which are not adressed in this 2,000 page stew prepared
by 535 incompetent chefs each insisting on adding his or her own *special seasoning*
( no wonder it has a bad smell.)
.”
Coastalthinker2 replied on Dec 30, 2009 at 23:18:40
“Here is a side-by-side comparison of the 2008 Presidential Health Care proposals by the Kaiser Family Foundation:
http://pdf
Where in the Barack Obama column does it discuss why mandates are part of his plan? It appears there are a number of references to a "public plan".
As for the 2.5% to 4% profit margin for insurance companies, is that after they take 25% to 27% off the top for "administrative" costs? An industry that denies health care coverage to people with pre-existing conditions and dying is suddenly going to acknowledge they "spent less and will reimburse the insured"???”
http://pdf
Where in the Barack Obama column does it discuss why mandates are part of his plan? It appears there are a number of references to a "public plan".
As for the 2.5% to 4% profit margin for insurance companies, is that after they take 25% to 27% off the top for "administrative" costs? An industry that denies health care coverage to people with pre-existing conditions and dying is suddenly going to acknowledge they "spent less and will reimburse the insured"???”
barbecue replied on Dec 30, 2009 at 23:02:19
“that profit will increase with 30 million new customers. it is also elayed by the fact that its only a few companies receiveing the vast number of patients out there.Rega
The Democrats' Authoritarian Health "Reform" Bill and the Ascendency of Corporatism in the Democratic Party
Commented Dec 23, 2009 at 19:23:39 in Politics
“The mandate is a person buys either health insurance or pay fine in lieu. It is a very reasonable act of citizenship and here is why.
When an insured person is run over by a truck, he or she is immediately taken to the emergency and treated. Who then pays for the bill? It is passed unto those with healthcare insurance in the form of increased premium.”
When an insured person is run over by a truck, he or she is immediately taken to the emergency and treated. Who then pays for the bill? It is passed unto those with healthcare insurance in the form of increased premium.”
The Democrats' Authoritarian Health "Reform" Bill and the Ascendency of Corporatism in the Democratic Party
Commented Dec 23, 2009 at 19:11:42 in Politics
“Prof Austan Goolsbee was Obama’s economic adviser from his senate campaign in 2004. Austan Goolsbee is a centrist economist. Please, read what conservative columnist, George F. Will had to say about him in 2007.
http://www
“Economics is the only academic discipline that in recent decades has moved in the direction that America and much of the world has moved, to the right. Goolsbee no doubt has lots of dubious ideas -- he is, after all, a Democrat -- about how government can creatively fiddle with the market's allocation of wealth and opportunity. But he seems to be the sort of person -- amiable, empirical and reasonable -- you would want at the elbow of a Democratic president, if such there must be.” George F. Will (10-04-07)
Larry Summers, Tim Geithner and Austan Goolsbee are centrist economists. These advisors share in Obama’s political and economic worldview. President Obama is not a “lefty progressive” as some people wished him to be. Progressives are disappointed in their projected perception of President Obama. Whose fault is it?”
http://www
“Economics is the only academic discipline that in recent decades has moved in the direction that America and much of the world has moved, to the right. Goolsbee no doubt has lots of dubious ideas -- he is, after all, a Democrat -- about how government can creatively fiddle with the market's allocation of wealth and opportunity. But he seems to be the sort of person -- amiable, empirical and reasonable -- you would want at the elbow of a Democratic president, if such there must be.” George F. Will (10-04-07)
Larry Summers, Tim Geithner and Austan Goolsbee are centrist economists. These advisors share in Obama’s political and economic worldview. President Obama is not a “lefty progressive” as some people wished him to be. Progressives are disappointed in their projected perception of President Obama. Whose fault is it?”
edejan replied on Dec 23, 2009 at 21:12:02
“Maybe the fault of the actor....o
anticon replied on Dec 23, 2009 at 19:52:18
“Replace the word centrist with corporatist may start you in the right direction.
The orwellian language of Frank Luntz is reality only in think tanks.”
The orwellian language of Frank Luntz is reality only in think tanks.”
If Obama Was a Liberal We'd Have a Better Bill
Commented Dec 23, 2009 at 05:30:38 in Politics
“Because of low administrative cost, “Public Option” is supposed to be used as a standard for measuring rising cost in premium of the private insurance companies.
Individual mandate is used for distributing risk if the legislation stipulates that nobody should be denied coverage due to pre-existing medical conditions. It is an issue of commonsense. The aggregation of the sick and healthy will cancel out.
Senator Obama during the campaign wanted to finance his healthcare plan by allowing Bush tax cut for the wealthy to expire. Senator Obama contends that by substantially subsidizing healthcare through the savings from tax cut will make cost of healthcare affordable. Hence, the unsure will willingly buy healthcare coverage without being mandated to do so.
When Obama was elected president, the economy was going south with budget deficit at $1.3 trillion. The only way to finance healthcare under this condition is through deficit spending. Deficit spending for healthcare reform is not feasible under this climate. President Obama has to adapt to new realities.”
Individual mandate is used for distributing risk if the legislation stipulates that nobody should be denied coverage due to pre-existing medical conditions. It is an issue of commonsense. The aggregation of the sick and healthy will cancel out.
Senator Obama during the campaign wanted to finance his healthcare plan by allowing Bush tax cut for the wealthy to expire. Senator Obama contends that by substantially subsidizing healthcare through the savings from tax cut will make cost of healthcare affordable. Hence, the unsure will willingly buy healthcare coverage without being mandated to do so.
When Obama was elected president, the economy was going south with budget deficit at $1.3 trillion. The only way to finance healthcare under this condition is through deficit spending. Deficit spending for healthcare reform is not feasible under this climate. President Obama has to adapt to new realities.”
LeftRight replied on Dec 23, 2009 at 08:18:21
“But the point is that he could HAVE this without ANY deficit spending, provided only that he was willing to tax more and cut spending from useless things like AFGHANISTAN!”
Wishing Won't Make it 60
Commented Dec 23, 2009 at 05:00:49 in Politics
“Why President Obama changed his position on mandate:
“To help pay for this, we will ask all but the smallest businesses who don't make a meaningful contribution today to the health coverage of their employees to do so by supporting this new plan. And we will allow the temporary Bush tax cut for the wealthiest Americans to expire.” Senator Obama (Presidential Candidate)
At the time of campaign, Senator Obama wanted to pay for healthcare reform by using savings that will accrue from allowing Bush tax cut to expire. When Obama was elected president, the economy was going south with budget deficit at $1.3 trillion. The only way to finance healthcare under this condition is through deficit spending. Deficit spending for healthcare reform is not feasible under this climate. President Obama has to adapt to new realities.”
“To help pay for this, we will ask all but the smallest businesses who don't make a meaningful contribution today to the health coverage of their employees to do so by supporting this new plan. And we will allow the temporary Bush tax cut for the wealthiest Americans to expire.” Senator Obama (Presidential Candidate)
At the time of campaign, Senator Obama wanted to pay for healthcare reform by using savings that will accrue from allowing Bush tax cut to expire. When Obama was elected president, the economy was going south with budget deficit at $1.3 trillion. The only way to finance healthcare under this condition is through deficit spending. Deficit spending for healthcare reform is not feasible under this climate. President Obama has to adapt to new realities.”
Wishing Won't Make it 60
Commented Dec 23, 2009 at 01:27:19 in Politics
“"The Senate-passed version of 1997 budget reconciliation legislation relating to Medicare (H.R. 2015) included a provision raising the Medicare age of eligibility to 67, gradually, in tandem with the Social Security normal retirement age, as shown in Figure 7. By a vote of 62-38, the Senate agreed to include this provision by overriding a procedural objection (" a point of order") that had been raised against it, after heated debate. This outcome on the Senate vote was very different from what occurred previously, in 1995, when the Senate Committee on Finance had included the same provision in its version of the then-pending budget reconciliation bill. In 1995, however, this provision was easily removed on the Senate floor by a successful procedural objection, without serious floor debate of the merits of the provision or a roll-call vote on a motion to waive the point of order."”
Fire Robert Gibbs...Or At Least Make Him Apologize to Howard Dean
Commented Dec 18, 2009 at 01:53:35 in Politics
“Progressives should rally around Dr. Dean all they want, but in the end, the former DNC Chairman has committed unforgivable political malpractice. In effect, what Dr. Dean was attempting to do was to engineer open civil war within the Democrat Party and he got what he bargained for. If Dr. Dean does not understand what his station in the Party is - as former governor, presidential candidate and DNC chair, he is very irrational to go public in his criticism of healthcare legislation.
It is very disgraceful that an informed person like Dr. Dean is suggesting using budget reconciliation to pass healthcare legislation. How many senate Democrats are ready to go on record in support of using reconciliation to pass healthcare legislation without committing political suicide? It is equivalent of senate Republicans trying to privatize Social Security using budget reconciliation. The outcome will be to destroy senate institution if they were to succeed in passing such legislation. Howard Dean ought to know better.”
It is very disgraceful that an informed person like Dr. Dean is suggesting using budget reconciliation to pass healthcare legislation. How many senate Democrats are ready to go on record in support of using reconciliation to pass healthcare legislation without committing political suicide? It is equivalent of senate Republicans trying to privatize Social Security using budget reconciliation. The outcome will be to destroy senate institution if they were to succeed in passing such legislation. Howard Dean ought to know better.”
ramblin jack replied on Dec 18, 2009 at 14:25:26
“Nonsense your comment is only situational morality Go Dean”
ThePeacemakers replied on Dec 18, 2009 at 12:28:54
“In approximately the last 30 years, no one has loved reconciliation more than Repubs.
Bush's tax cuts were done through reconciliation AND Newt Gingrich's BS "contract for america" - nothing budgetary about it - was done through reconciliation.
A TOTAL of 23 F'in times the Repubs have used reconciliation for their BS.
No - the DEMS should have used reconcilation YESTERDAY if it would have brought about true healthcare reform.”
Bush's tax cuts were done through reconciliation AND Newt Gingrich's BS "contract for america" - nothing budgetary about it - was done through reconciliation.
A TOTAL of 23 F'in times the Repubs have used reconciliation for their BS.
No - the DEMS should have used reconcilation YESTERDAY if it would have brought about true healthcare reform.”
tompoe replied on Dec 18, 2009 at 10:01:32
“Dean spoke truth to power. Thank you Dean. Gibbs simply formally announced Obama's unmasking, blurring the image until it is indistinguishable from the 8 years of Republican rule. Reconciliation, a standard operating procedure for the last 15 years of legislation has been ruled out of bounds by Obama. Gibbs has drunk the Kool-Aid. Dean hasn't.”
Slouching Toward Health Care Reform
Commented Dec 17, 2009 at 20:54:30 in Politics
“It is not politically feasible to pass major legislation such as healthcare through reconciliation. If such route were chosen, the “parliamentarian” determines what items in the healthcare legislation should go through budgetary reconciliation.
If budgetary reconciliation were to be an option for major legislation, former President Bush would have used the process to privatize social security. President Bush used reconciliation for passing tax-cut legislation.
Former Republican Majority Leader, Bill Frist, threatened to use nuclear option to appoint stalled judiciary appointees to the courts if Democrats were to use filibuster procedure to deny such appointments. Group of bipartisan Senators intervened and resolved the impasse. An aside, it was not Supreme Court nominees, but Federal District and Appeal Courts.”
If budgetary reconciliation were to be an option for major legislation, former President Bush would have used the process to privatize social security. President Bush used reconciliation for passing tax-cut legislation.
Former Republican Majority Leader, Bill Frist, threatened to use nuclear option to appoint stalled judiciary appointees to the courts if Democrats were to use filibuster procedure to deny such appointments. Group of bipartisan Senators intervened and resolved the impasse. An aside, it was not Supreme Court nominees, but Federal District and Appeal Courts.”
It's Not Lieberman, It's Obama
Commented Dec 16, 2009 at 14:27:28 in Politics
“I have a question for Ms Taylor Marsh.
What leverage does President Obama has over Senator Lieberman to compel him to support public option or Medicare buy-in?”
What leverage does President Obama has over Senator Lieberman to compel him to support public option or Medicare buy-in?”
Citizen54 replied on Dec 16, 2009 at 16:08:49
“Maybe Obama could do some real arm-twisting, a la LBJ or Truman or FDR. Maybe he could go on TV, with photos of Lieberman and the other liars, and say to the American people: Hey, here are the dudes who are screwing you. Here are the people who are blocking progress. Here are the culprits who are in the pockets of the insurance companies. Here are the enemies of what is right and good. You know, stir it up a little bit. Put the corrupt ones and the do-nothings on the hot seat.
Instead, he has a tea party at the White House.
Today we all revile Andrew Jackson, but the man believed his job as president was to represent the common folk. Many senators -- and especially the bankers -- hated him. That can sometimes be a good sign.”
Instead, he has a tea party at the White House.
Today we all revile Andrew Jackson, but the man believed his job as president was to represent the common folk. Many senators -- and especially the bankers -- hated him. That can sometimes be a good sign.”
Eris23 replied on Dec 16, 2009 at 15:10:22
“Have you honestly thought about it? Assuming Obama wanted a better billhere's what he needed to do.
1.) Frame the debate from the outset. There was a reason Cheney took to Meet the Press on issues before they were being discussed by the legislature. Not only do you get the ability to frame the positive side, but you get to state what the opposition supposedly believes before they make a true stance and peg it on them.
2.) Inform people like Lieberman that, if they do filibuster under such a circumstance, video footage from their filibuster will be used in political ads against them that will be supported by Obama's massive fund raising machine. In addition, you let him know that the White House office is no longer accepting his calls or visits, his valued committee chair is going to be yanked, and that any bill that manages to make it to the White House desk that is either sponsored by Lieberman, or results in anything that would be even a modest win for Lieberman, will be vetoed.
Lieberman would have merely gotten right in line, as would a number of others if given a similar threat under the circumstances, which makes the lack of a 60 vote majority nothing but a triviality.”
1.) Frame the debate from the outset. There was a reason Cheney took to Meet the Press on issues before they were being discussed by the legislature. Not only do you get the ability to frame the positive side, but you get to state what the opposition supposedly believes before they make a true stance and peg it on them.
2.) Inform people like Lieberman that, if they do filibuster under such a circumstance, video footage from their filibuster will be used in political ads against them that will be supported by Obama's massive fund raising machine. In addition, you let him know that the White House office is no longer accepting his calls or visits, his valued committee chair is going to be yanked, and that any bill that manages to make it to the White House desk that is either sponsored by Lieberman, or results in anything that would be even a modest win for Lieberman, will be vetoed.
Lieberman would have merely gotten right in line, as would a number of others if given a similar threat under the circumstances, which makes the lack of a 60 vote majority nothing but a triviality.”
It's Not Lieberman, It's Obama
Commented Dec 16, 2009 at 14:16:59 in Politics
“Maybe if some people were to read and digest Nate Silver’s analysis of the benefits of the proposed healthcare legislation some of erroneous conclusions being bandied around here would be avoided. Please read below.
http://www
”Why Progressives Are Batshit Crazy to Oppose the Senate Bill”
Nate Silver”
http://www
”Why Progressives Are Batshit Crazy to Oppose the Senate Bill”
Nate Silver”
It's Not Lieberman, It's Obama
Commented Dec 16, 2009 at 13:55:44 in Politics
“President Obama has said many times that “seven presidents” have tried and failed to get healthcare legislation. That is statement of fact.
People interpret other people’s statements based on where they sit in relation to the subject. Here is how l interpret President Obama’s statement on this subject.
President Obama was reminding many opposing parties the need to show sense of accomodation due to the complexities of healthcare legislation at many levels. If healthcare legislation were that easy it would have been solved before now. This is indisputable statement of historic fact.”
People interpret other people’s statements based on where they sit in relation to the subject. Here is how l interpret President Obama’s statement on this subject.
President Obama was reminding many opposing parties the need to show sense of accomodation due to the complexities of healthcare legislation at many levels. If healthcare legislation were that easy it would have been solved before now. This is indisputable statement of historic fact.”
hp blogger Taylor Marsh replied on Dec 16, 2009 at 14:05:11
“Any president willing to sell out to corporate interests above what's best for the majority of Americans can get a victory, Edmonsky.
Pres. Obama could have easily have said that he was "building on what seven other presidents had begun." He didn't. Their failures were meant to be seen in the light of his "success."
Nobody knows rhetorical flourishes better than our current president, who couched his rhetoric to highlight other presidential failures. It is naked egotism.”
Pres. Obama could have easily have said that he was "building on what seven other presidents had begun." He didn't. Their failures were meant to be seen in the light of his "success."
Nobody knows rhetorical flourishes better than our current president, who couched his rhetoric to highlight other presidential failures. It is naked egotism.”
It's Not Lieberman, It's Obama
Commented Dec 16, 2009 at 13:43:19 in Politics
“I respect Howard Dean and appreciate his passion on many issues. Having served as DNC chairman and former presidential candidate, he has a responsible and honorable position in Democratic Party and institutions. I expected Dr. Dean to speak with restrained voice on matters that are fluid and controversial. I feel so disappointed that he spoke in categorical terms that cast him as a loose cannon. Is it any wonder that his presidential campaign flamed out overnight due to being unsteady hand.”
nilotic replied on Dec 16, 2009 at 14:14:53
“I'm glad that Dean expressed his views, as he is a true advocate and he knows what he is talking about. I don't understand this business of trying to silence dissent. You also bought that MSM nonsense about Dr. Dean being "unsteady.
antaeus replied on Dec 16, 2009 at 13:52:20
“Is he incorrect in his understanding of the facts?”
Awake-and-Sing replied on Dec 16, 2009 at 13:49:14
“Yeah, blame Dean for daring to speak the truth to power and not our corporate shill President for selling us down the river without a fight.
The remaining Obamabots are headed for a rude awakening over the next two election cycles.”
The remaining Obamabots are headed for a rude awakening over the next two election cycles.”
Arianna On "The Ed Show": It Is Absurd To Cede Control Of Health Care Reform To Joe Lieberman
Commented Dec 16, 2009 at 01:43:50 in Media
“First sentence should read "President Bush".”
Sandmanj replied on Dec 16, 2009 at 02:09:36
“You mean "According to President Bush" or "According to Ed Schultz, President Bush"?”
Arianna On "The Ed Show": It Is Absurd To Cede Control Of Health Care Reform To Joe Lieberman
Commented Dec 16, 2009 at 01:42:30 in Media
“Senator Joe Lieberman has voting history of being hawk on national security issues, fiscal conservative on spending and social liberal on domestic issues. Hence, it was no surprise to any independent observer to see Lieberman cheerleading the war in Iraq.
However, anti-war liberals and progressives decided to single him out and humiliate him from the senate as a lesson to others who share in his hawkish national security philosophies. He left the Party, ran as independent, and won his senate seat.
From Lieberman’s perspective, it is payback time for the liberals and progressives who joined forces and wanted to oust from the senate.
This is a teachable moment for consequences of political malpractice.”
However, anti-war liberals and progressives decided to single him out and humiliate him from the senate as a lesson to others who share in his hawkish national security philosophies. He left the Party, ran as independent, and won his senate seat.
From Lieberman’s perspective, it is payback time for the liberals and progressives who joined forces and wanted to oust from the senate.
This is a teachable moment for consequences of political malpractice.”
tnlcallen replied on Dec 16, 2009 at 02:09:59
“Very interesting perspective.”
mikesw replied on Dec 16, 2009 at 02:08:56
“All Lieberman is doing is confirming that the liberals were right to try to run him out in the first place.
The one who must feel pretty lousy now is Reid who stumped for him and Obama who pushed for his chairmanships to be retained. They are the ones Lieberman is playing; not the liberals.”
The one who must feel pretty lousy now is Reid who stumped for him and Obama who pushed for his chairmanships to be retained. They are the ones Lieberman is playing; not the liberals.”
Arianna On "The Ed Show": It Is Absurd To Cede Control Of Health Care Reform To Joe Lieberman
Commented Dec 16, 2009 at 01:20:29 in Media
“According to Ed Shultz, President always has his legislations passed in the Congress. This is not entirely correct. Here are few contradictions.
President Bush wanted to privatize Social Security and campaigned for it and it never saw the light of day in the Congress.
President Bush proposed comprehensive immigration reforms in the Congress and the bill failed. In fact, President Bush wanted to use immigration reforms as a springboard for boasting permanent Republican majority.
President Bush nominated Whitehouse Counsel, Harriet Miers, to Supreme Court and she was forced to withdraw her candidacy with ignominy due to opposition from both liberals and conservatives.
It is always next to impossible to pass major legislation in peacetime. Major legislations are passed in the midst of existential crisis.”
President Bush wanted to privatize Social Security and campaigned for it and it never saw the light of day in the Congress.
President Bush proposed comprehensive immigration reforms in the Congress and the bill failed. In fact, President Bush wanted to use immigration reforms as a springboard for boasting permanent Republican majority.
President Bush nominated Whitehouse Counsel, Harriet Miers, to Supreme Court and she was forced to withdraw her candidacy with ignominy due to opposition from both liberals and conservatives.
It is always next to impossible to pass major legislation in peacetime. Major legislations are passed in the midst of existential crisis.”
scottowego replied on Dec 16, 2009 at 02:55:05
“Are you calling this peacetime? It certainly is not.”
Edmonsky replied on Dec 16, 2009 at 01:43:50
“First sentence should read "President Bush".”
Obama's Biggest Mistake
Commented Dec 11, 2009 at 01:08:41 in Home
“Sen. Max Baucus is not and has never been against public option. Baucus says that he has not enough votes to pass healthcare with public option from his finance committee. He took a pragmatic position to prevent the legislation from dying in his committee chambers.”
AnotherMcIntosh replied on Dec 11, 2009 at 09:13:14
“Truer words were never spoken.
You could substitute Obama's name for what you said and it would still be true.”
You could substitute Obama's name for what you said and it would still be true.”
Health Care Reform: The End Is Nigh
Commented Dec 08, 2009 at 19:16:29 in Politics
“Senator Obama never campaigned on public plan but National Health Insurance Exchange. Progressives introduced “public plan” as a stepping-stone to “single-payer system”. From get-go, Obama knew that “public option” is a fool’s errand because there is no vote for it in the senate.
• National Health Insurance Exchange: The Obama plan will create a National Health Insurance Exchange to help individuals who wish to purchase a private insurance plan. The Exchange will act as a watchdog group and help reform the private insurance market by creating rules and standards for participating insurance plans to ensure fairness and to make individual coverage more affordable and accessible. Insurers would have to issue every applicant a policy, and charge fair and stable premiums that will not depend upon health status. The Exchange will require that all the plans offered are at least as generous as the new public plan and have the same standards for quality and efficiency. The Exchange would evaluate plans and make the differences among the plans, including cost of services, public.”
• National Health Insurance Exchange: The Obama plan will create a National Health Insurance Exchange to help individuals who wish to purchase a private insurance plan. The Exchange will act as a watchdog group and help reform the private insurance market by creating rules and standards for participating insurance plans to ensure fairness and to make individual coverage more affordable and accessible. Insurers would have to issue every applicant a policy, and charge fair and stable premiums that will not depend upon health status. The Exchange will require that all the plans offered are at least as generous as the new public plan and have the same standards for quality and efficiency. The Exchange would evaluate plans and make the differences among the plans, including cost of services, public.”
pickshin replied on Dec 10, 2009 at 15:56:24
“Senator Obama DID campaign on the "public plan" The material on his health plan provided to those of us who worked for his election clearly shows that he and Joe Biden were advocates of a "public plan" and that it would be the reference against which all other plans would be judged. You can find the complete text of the plan he proposed during his campaign at: www.barack
Health Care Reform: The End Is Nigh
Commented Dec 08, 2009 at 19:12:03 in Politics
“Part-2
• Affordable premiums, co-pays and deductibles.
• Subsidies. Individuals and families who do not qualify for Medicaid or SCHIP but still need financial assistance will receive an income-related federal subsidy to buy into the new public plan or purchase a private health care plan.
• Simplified paperwork and reined in health costs.
• Easy enrollment. The new public plan will be simple to enroll in and provide ready access to coverage.
• Portability and choice. Participants in the new public plan and the National Health Insurance Exchange (see below) will be able to move from job to job without changing or jeopardizing their health care coverage.
• Quality and efficiency. Participating insurance companies in the new public program will be required to report data to ensure that standards for quality, health information technology and administration are being met.”
• Affordable premiums, co-pays and deductibles.
• Subsidies. Individuals and families who do not qualify for Medicaid or SCHIP but still need financial assistance will receive an income-related federal subsidy to buy into the new public plan or purchase a private health care plan.
• Simplified paperwork and reined in health costs.
• Easy enrollment. The new public plan will be simple to enroll in and provide ready access to coverage.
• Portability and choice. Participants in the new public plan and the National Health Insurance Exchange (see below) will be able to move from job to job without changing or jeopardizing their health care coverage.
• Quality and efficiency. Participating insurance companies in the new public program will be required to report data to ensure that standards for quality, health information technology and administration are being met.”
Health Care Reform: The End Is Nigh
Commented Dec 08, 2009 at 19:11:36 in Politics
“This is what Senator Obama promised during the 2008 campaign.
Part-1
Obama's Plan to Cover Uninsured Americans: Obama will make available a new national health plan to all Americans, including the self-employed and small businesses, to buy affordable health coverage that is similar to the plan available to members of Congress. The Obama plan will have the following features:
• Guaranteed eligibility. No American will be turned away from any insurance plan because of illness or pre-existing conditions.
• Comprehensive benefits. The benefit package will be similar to that offered through Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP), the plan members of Congress have. The plan will cover all essential medical services, including preventive, maternity and mental health care.”
Part-1
Obama's Plan to Cover Uninsured Americans: Obama will make available a new national health plan to all Americans, including the self-employed and small businesses, to buy affordable health coverage that is similar to the plan available to members of Congress. The Obama plan will have the following features:
• Guaranteed eligibility. No American will be turned away from any insurance plan because of illness or pre-existing conditions.
• Comprehensive benefits. The benefit package will be similar to that offered through Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP), the plan members of Congress have. The plan will cover all essential medical services, including preventive, maternity and mental health care.”
Is the President Really in Charge?
Commented Nov 04, 2009 at 20:05:46 in Politics
“Professor Christina Romer serves as Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers to the President. Professors Austan Goolsbee and Cecilia Rouse assist Prof. Romer. Women are playing critical roles in Obama’s presidency.”
1 - 25 of 220
