garcohsf's Comments (89)

“I'm afraid that national polls that show support for the public option are meaningless--how were the polls running in Nebraska, and Louisiana and the other states whose Senators killed it? Do you honestly think that if Obama could have gotten 60 votes for a public option he wouldn't have. "Oh, but he didn't try hard enough, you say.". Please tell me specifically what Obama could have done to change Ben Nelson's mind when 62% in Nebraska say if he votes for "the Obama health care plan" that will make them less likely to vote for him. This was a tough vote for Nelson and others without the public option.

And tell me-- do you really believe that 40% of Democrats will stay home in 2010? Because I sure don't. Suppose by next November unemployment us between 7-8% and falling; health care reform and financial regulatory reform have passed, maybe even an energy bill, do you think 40% of Democrats will stay home? I sure don't.

Obama may be cautious, but one thing ge is for sure is a winner. While you support Dean or Kucinich and the like, he's getting elected and getting things done.

The health care bill doesn't look the way you or I would like it to because our views dint command 60 votes in the US Senate. Period, end of story.

Making Obama "hurt" is precisely the wrong thing to do. Work to elect more progressives to Congress and things will look a lot different. Don't”

“What she or he said”

“Tell me, specifically and in detail, how this bully pulpit whips Nelson and Lieberman into line.”

“Excuse me, do you happen to know when Senator Lieberman is up for reelection? It's 2014. Oh, oh, threaten to have someone run against me, I'm scared. Wait a minute, they did that last time, I lost the Democratic primary and then I beat the guy running as an independent--I guess I'm ok then.
Do you happen to know that according to a poll published in the Weekly Standard, http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/12/more_trouble_for_nelson.asp, 61% say that they would be more likely to vote against Senator Nelson if he votes for the health care bill? Did you know that all the members of Congress and the other Senator from Nebraska are Republicans (NO on any health reform bill)? That the Governor of Nebraska, who only got 73% of the vote the last time he ran, publicly called for Nelson to vote against the bill, thereby killing it? Can you tell me what President Obama was supposed to do about those ... can we call them facts?
If you're unhappy with the way things are going, and I agree that there are lots of reasons to be unhappy, stop whining about how disappointed you are in the President and go to Nebraska, or Connecticut, or Louisiana, or Maine, and work to elect progressive candidates.
Remember Pogo? We have seen the enemy and it is us.”

“When your 16 year old son, who is driving drunk (no laws on how old you have to be to drink, right?) and is not wearing a seat belt and doesn't believe in speed limits, runs a red light (more government regulation, dammit) and smashes into my wife's car, trapping her in the vehicle, while he goes through the windshield--should an ambulance show up? Who pays for it? Oops, he hasn't got health care insurance--shall we leave him to die by the side of the road? Ok, let's say she is saved but is paralyzed for life, but he dies and doesn't have any auto insurance. Who pays for her care for the rest of her life? You gonna do it because you raised your kid to lack any sense of responsibility for others, not just for himself, any sense of obligation to his community, any sense that we all have to live in society together and help take care of each other?”

“Yes, but I wish he'd acknowledged that the US has at times been the perpetrator of evil--and not just during George W Bush's Presidency. In Lyndon Johnson's during Vietnam, in Ronald Reagan's in El Salvador, in our numerous interventions in Latin America throughout the 20th century, in our conquest of the Philippines in the late 19th.”

“When Al Qaeda has conquered half a dozen or more countries and exterminated six million people, you can compare it to Hitler. I thought President Obama's use of that comparison was one of the worst parts of what was overall a good speech, albeit one with a number of egregious errors of historical fact. Such as his saying that the United States doesn't engage in war to impose its own will--he should study the history of our involvement in the Philippines and Latin America. Or when he said we've never gone to war against a democracy--I guess he doesn't count our overthrow of Allende in Chile.
The United States is hardly exempt from the "evil" that the President justly wants to combat.”

“Ditto”

“One reason that you don't see millions of Americans protesting for single payer health care is that most Americans don't favor single payer health care--in fact, only 32% do, according to a Rassmussen survey in August. 57% are opposed, and 52% think that it would lead to lower quality care. Only 19% rate the American health care system as poor, while 48% say it is good or excellent. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/august_2009/32_favor_single_payer_health_care_57_oppose.

Now you and I may think that the people opposed are wrong, but there you have it. While there are many without health insurance, most Americans have it and are more afraid of losing what they have than they are interested in helping those that don't. The overriding problem in almost all of these debates is that Americans lack class consciousness, and are excessively nationalistic. Could a person get elected President who did not say that "America is the greatest country in the world"?”

“In fact, far fewer than half the public identifies itself as liberal. According to Gallup in June of this year, 40% identify their political views as conservative, 35% as moderate, and only 21% as liberal. http://www.gallup.com/poll/120857/conservatives-single-largest-ideological-group.aspx.

I think the breakdown in the Senate tilts even further away from liberal, since a number of the states that are over-represented there due to their low populations, such as Utah, Montana, and Wyoming, are conservative.

I think the answer to Mr. Kuttner's quiz is "all of the above," but I think you have to add that Obama is determined to have a Presidency that appears to be a success, and not to lose the majority he has in Congress during the mid-term elections. The calculus he and his advisers have made, it appears, is that if health care passes, he doesn't "lose" Afghanistan, and unemployment is coming down by next November, he can limit those losses. He may be wrong, but this isn't a crazy strategy.”

“It is really quite simple. When Senator McCain asked Ms Palin to be his running mate, she should have said, "Thank you, John, I'm flattered and honored to be asked. But I have to decline because I'm simply not qualified to be President in the event that we are elected and something were to happen to you." The fact that she didn't do this, but instead "didn't blink," tells us much of what we need to know about her. She was not a serious candidate in 2008. Whether she can become one in 2012 remains to be seen, although quitting her job as Governor certainly wasn't a good sign of her seriousness.”

“Harry, why this obsession to bash the media? Front page story in the New York Times, quoting the judge: “It is the court’s opinion that the negligence of the corps, in this instance by failing to maintain the MR-GO properly, was not policy, but insouciance, myopia and shortsightedness,” wrote Judge Stanwood R. Duval Jr. of Federal District Court. Major story on NPR this morning, with clips from two of the plaintiffs' lawyers. I don't understand this unreasoning and unreasonable need to wage war against an institution that tries (albeit imperfectly) to bring news to the public.”

“I think the "guy" referred to is the President, not the poster.

It is clearly too soon to condemn Obama's presidency to the dustbin of history. He came into office faced with the worst financial crisis in, well, you know, a problem that was not at all of his making. Including, by the way, the initial Wall Street bailouts, which people forget happened before he took office.

The Obama team is taking the same approach to governing as they took to the campaign--it is a long distance race, not a sprint. They did not panic during the summer when all of the bloggers were saying that health care reform was doomed. Let's wait and see whether the strategy they decided to follow is successful. If he ends his first year with a health care bill (even if imperfect), an economy that is at least recovering, and a new direction in Iraq, I'd say that was a good start.

Let's also be clear: we won't have single payer because the American people will not support it. We may think that they are stupid, but that's the reality. The left's obsession with the public option is therefore misplaced; it is not going to affect enough people to have a meaningful impact on costs. But if we end up with health insurance reform that results in more people being covered, no exception for pre-existing conditions, and portability, those will be major accomplishments.”

“Everyone seemed to think that by saying he was for "change," Obama meant "precisely the sort of change that I favor." It is absolutely correct to say that Obama is a centrist Democrat, although I would say he is a bit left of center for the Party. He is certainly not a Blue Dog. Face it people--he does not support gay marriage, among other things.

But it is way too soon to be condemning his presidency to the dustbin of history. I believe that Obama and his staff are carrying out a plan which they believe is going to enable them to accomplish things, not just stand for the right principles and fail to enact them into law. In the face of ruinous economic conditions.

Let's wait and see. Even a centrist Democrat is a huge change from 8 years of George W Bush, and change is happening throughout the federal government, even if it isn't always so easy to see.”

“What Polanski did was despicable. End of story. If you've seen the documentary "Wanted and Desired," however, you might also conclude that the criminal justice system, and in particular the trial judge, treated him unfairly as well, which explains why he fled the country -- after pleading guilty -- before his sentencing.

The question now, it seems to me, is what is the appropriate additional punishment for what he did, which includes both the original crime and the crime of fleeing the jurisdiction. It's impossible to say that he should be treated like others in similar situations, because it's clear that his celebrity was a factor in every aspect of what happened.

I personally believe that the principal question that should be asked is whether Polanski represents a danger to other young girls, such that he should be locked up. If not, I have a hard time seeing what purpose would be served by sending him to prison now, after all these years and under the circumstances of this case.

What Polanski did was despicable. I personally have no problem with his being held accountable. But for the record, I think the main reason that film people are objecting to his arrest is that it was done in connection with Polanski's appearance at a film festival.”

“Dylan, I mostly agree with your post. Yes, there are some things that President Obama has done which disappoint me -- especially in the national security area -- but on the whole I think he has moved wisely and pragmatically to achieve the goals he set out to achieve during the campaign. A couple of things I think people should remember:

President Obama came into office with two wars, an unprecedented financial meltdown, and with America's reputation in the world at an all time low. He has proceeded to take on health care reform, a huge issue. It is unreasonable to expect that he would have accomplished significantly more than he has in the short time he's been in office.

President Obama never portrayed himself as some kind of radical--I am not at all surprised that many on the left are disappointed with him. When he says, for example, that he wants insurance companies to make money, people whose hero is Michael Moore must cringe. But I think he shows a keen sense for what is possible in America and what is not.

I think that when people heard President Obama say that he would bring change that they could believe in, they assumed this meant the kind of change they would choose. It just doesn't work that way. Things are changing, even if not as fast or as far as some would like.”

“It will be interesting to see how the posters on the left who are criticising President Obama so much will react if he is able to get a health care bill passed that has a public option, if he is able to get financial regulatory reform passed, including a consumer protection agency, if he is able to get an energy policy adopted next year . . . . It amazes me what a short memory people seem to have. It took decades for basic civil rights legislation, including voting rights, to be passed by Congress, and it only happened because one President was assassinated and the next President was from the South. It wasn't very long ago that people were talking about a permanent Repubican majority in Presidential politics. Give the man time and judge him based on the results he achieves, not some assessment of his character or his style.”

“I think women are simply more honest about whether they are happy or not. Men have a greater stake in believing that they are happy, successful, powerful, etc. It causes them greater cognitive dissonance to admit that they are not. I think women are more willing to acknowledge, after having achieved what they thought they wanted (which made them satisfied when they were younger), that it's not really all that they thought it would be.

I realize that the survey results don't depend on whether women have children, but I also think that the age when women are saying they are less happy corresponds to the age when their children are leaving the home.”

“I think this is exactly right. For those who are saying that what Ms Williams did is the same as what Connors, McEnroe or Nastase did in the past, I want to see the tape of them walking toward a linesman, shaking an expletive deleted ball and saying that they would like to shove it down her expletive deleted throat. If it exists, then you'll have made your point. And I believe that they used to have points awarded against them as well.

I don't think that the chair umpire had any choice under the circumstances. The problem was the point in the match this occurred. No question that the linesman's call was -- take your pick -- wrong, ill-advised, unfortunate. But Serena (and her Mom) know as well as anyone that she simply can't respond the way she did and expect not to be penalized for it.

Interestingly, Mary Carillo was very strong in saying during the Federer-Djocavic match that Serena should have been suspended from the Doubles final. It will be interesting to see whether any further action will be taken against her. Does anyone want to speculate as to what would happen to an unseeded player ranked 200 in the world who did something similar?”

“I understand your points, and I think there is some validity to them.

But have you never met a rigid, insensitive, rule-bound government bureaucrat? I have (I worked in state government for 6 1/2 years).

When there is competition, the doctor, hospital, insurance company at least has to have some concern that you'll take your business down the street. When the government is the only game in town, there's nowhere down the street to go.”

“Please explain how you think any of the bills making their way through the House or Senate affect your health care. I don't think that they do.

Reform should affect all of us in one way, though. The health care system should provide incentives for people to live more healthy lives.”

“Medicare's adminstrative costs are lower as a percentage of total costs because the cost of benefits is higher (due to the age of the covered population). This argument is a red herring.”

“You are correct, we need to distinguish between health insurance reform (getting everyone covered, making it possible for poor people to pay for it, doing away with pre-existing conditions, rescission, etc.) and health care reform. The distinction is getting lost in this debate. Cost savings are going to come primarily from health care reform, not health insurance reform, which is going to cost money.”

“We have rationing now. Based on the employment status and wealth of the patient. Please let's not pretend that we don't.”

“I agree that I stated my point too categorically. I don't think that profit is the only motivation for institutions to innovate or to reduce costs. But it is a powerful one. I have been a state employee for a significant portion of my career, and I just don't think that government bureaucracies necessarily tend to be more efficient, more humane, provide better service, etc. than private bureaucracies do.

My central point, however, is that by mixing up the crisis we have regarding the availability and affordability of health insurance with the crisis we have with the availability and cost of health care, we are making it more difficult to solve either problem.”