Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

The coming war among Dems over health reform

If Republicans take back the House next week, as expected, a war will erupt among Democrats over the wisdom of passing health care reform and over whether it helped doom the Dem majority. People like Doug Schoen, who got lots of attention by predicting health care would destroy Dems, will crow and chortle about the foolishness of liberal overreach.

Today Josh Kraushaar weighed in with a long piece arguing persuasively that Dems who voted for the bill are in the most trouble, while those who voted against it are breathing somewhat easier. There's also new polling out today showing a majority supports repeal in the 92 most competitive House districts.

There's no denying that health reform has proven more of a liability -- perhaps far more of one -- for Dems than many of us predicted. That said, this is a topic that deserves far more nuance than typical standard-issue "you're either a winner or a loser" Beltway analysis.

Here are some other arguments that should also be in the mix. First, as Ezra Klein notes, it's impossible to know whether Dems who voted for health reform would be in as much trouble if the economy were in better shape. Second, the House map isn't even that clear cut: As ABC News has noted, many Dems who voted against reform are also facing difficult races.

Third, it's impossible to know whether Dems would be in better shape now if they'd abruptly shelved reform at the last minute -- as people like Schoen were urging them to do -- after making it a campaign promise and spending months trying to get it done.

Recall that one key factor that turned the public against reform was disgust with the process at a time when some of the initiative's individual provisions remained popular. Who's to say that this disgust wouldn't have remained, had Dems wasted months on legislative wrangling, only to succumb to catastrophic process failure and walk away with nothing?

Republicans would have continued to attack Dems anyway, arguing that they heroically foiled Dems' scheme to jam an unpopular bill down the throats of the American people, bravely rescuing them from creeping socialism. Would things really be any different today for these individual Dems if that had happened? I don't know. But it's fair to suggest the answer may be: Not so much.

Finally, as Igor Volsky notes today, it's also worth considering why health reform is a liablity. Conservative groups spent enormous amounts of money tarring the bill, including at least $100 million on largely mendacious ads since it passed. Dems failed to effectively counter this campaign of misinformation and distortions. This -- not the law itself -- could partly explain why health reform hasn't really gained in popularity.

Would things be that much better for Dems today if they hadn't tried reform at all? Perhaps, but we just can't be sure. And the alternative -- doing nothing -- was too much of a risk. Dems could have very well lost their majority in any case, putting health reform out of reach for perhaps another decade or more. This is an achievement Dems now have in the bank. Some of its provisions are clearly gaining popularity. And it will help untold numbers of people.

There's going to be very a big debate over this. Analysing it as nothing more than an all-out win-or-lose political decision doesn't do justice to the issue's substantive and moral imperatives. It deserves better.

By Greg Sargent  | October 28, 2010; 4:38 PM ET
Categories:  2010 elections, Health reform, House Dems, House GOPers, Political media, Senate Dems, Senate Republicans  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Dems to air ad of Kentucky stomping incident -- but only after 10 p.m.
Next: Happy Hour Roundup

Comments

It's depressing to have to say this, but perhaps we're just going to have to wait for the GOP to regain power, cut Social Security, Medicare, and the VA. After America takes a few bites of that shitsandwich, they'll want HCR, and they'll start noticing that for-profit health care is the problem, not the government's attempts to solve a crisis.

It does not feel like springtime in America.

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 28, 2010 4:46 PM | Report abuse

"There's also new polling out today showing a majority supports repeal in the 92 most competitive House districts."

What's the polling say in the other 343 districts?

Posted by: suekzoo1 | October 28, 2010 4:48 PM | Report abuse

I can hardly wait for Doug Schoen to crow and chortle about the foolishness of liberal overreach : )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 28, 2010 4:52 PM | Report abuse

BGinCHI, you hit the nail on the head, as usual.

HCR had to happen for long-term fiscal stability. It is a trade-off of the short-term political losses for long-term fiscal sanity on health-related policy. And yes, I totally concur, that by the time America sees the undeniable benefit of HCR, we will have experienced yet another round of GOP mismanagement.

Once again, Obama plays the long game, and while it's way way way too early to know for sure, he is almost certainly the winner in the end.

Also, after America realizes the benefits of HCR and the detriments of GOP mismanagement, America will be bluer demographically as well. We may have some dark clouds now, but the future is bright.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 28, 2010 4:52 PM | Report abuse

It's the usual problem. Dems have the ideas and policies more Americans want. But all the good reasons to think in grays the way Dems do lead to fog and fractures.

Republicans will basically do anything they can to screw working people, and say it's for their own good. Not because they wake up wanting to screw people, but their philosophy ends up doing just that. (See: BP and Halliburton knew the cement was faulty, latest example.) They use their authoritarian streak and discipline to frame a focused fearmongering message, sell it with a sledgehammer, and win.

Then they act like the bullies they are. Then people will want the Democrats to clean up the Republican mess. I've been around long enough to see it happen over and over. It doesn't get better.

Posted by: KathleenHusseininMaine | October 28, 2010 4:54 PM | Report abuse


Wait a minute. After the tens of millions of dollars spent to tar and feather HCR *after* it passed, coupled with the hyperbole of the Right over socialism/pickasubject and the folks polled still like individual parts of the bill?

Sounds to me like Democrats did the correct thing. HCR is not a liability *in and of itself*, as you've already pointed out, Greg, when individual parts of the Bill are polled. The liability rests with those who distort the content of the bill.

Now, why Democrats cannot seem to penetrate that or counter it is a whole other question.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | October 28, 2010 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Greg,

If the vast majority of Democrats who voted against the bill are going to lose their seats, and almost all Democrats in the house who voted for the bill get reelected, how is that going to lead to a Democratic civil war over health care? If those who opposed it have been ousted, or if they win; and those who supported it also get reelected; there will be no civil war among Democrats.

I recall, back sometime ago, the claim that Republicans were planning on persuading a number of Blue Dogs to switch sides, and become Republicans, after the election is over.

If the Republicans win back the house, it will be because they ousted almost all those Blue-Dogs, so they would not be around for the Republicans to flip them. On the other hand; why would Blue Dogs who got reelected, despite the all out efforts of Republicans to defeat them, want to switch sides to the party that was not able to attract enough votes to defeat them.

It all sounds counter intuitive, because the Blue Dogs that get reelected, will have the majority with them, in their home districts, and the ones that got defeated will not be around to challenge anything.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 28, 2010 4:54 PM | Report abuse

@Greg: I agree when you write that, "Analysing this as nothing more than an all-out win-or-lose political decision doesn't do justice," to the issue.

But you then go on to claim without qualification that, "This is an achievement... [that]... will help untold numbers of people."

Seems to me that you aren't taking your own advice. This thing has only partially been implemented and there's no way any objective observer could call it an unqualified success. (At the very least you fail to mention anything at all about possible negative impact.)

You also claim that foes of Obamacare spent, "At least $100 million on largely mendacious ads since it passed." Can you back that up? I understand that foes spent $100 million, and that some ads are mendacious, but how do you assert as fact that these particular ads were mendacious?

Posted by: sbj3 | October 28, 2010 4:57 PM | Report abuse

So, if individual parts of the bill are polled separately and lets say 85% of them poll positively, does that mean it's good or bad?

Posted by: mikefromArlington | October 28, 2010 4:58 PM | Report abuse

I'm pretty sure we talked about this yesterday, or was that on some other blog?
No it was here, the leviathan I called it.
The health care industry is not something you get to "reform". After Citizens United, after all that has transpired, you'd better get used to the idea that your role, American citizen, is to create and consume health care. Any questions,NO? Good. Now get to work.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 28, 2010 4:59 PM | Report abuse

Liam, there will be a war among Dem consultants and Beltway hands and Dem-leaning pundits over the legacy of reform and whether Dems punted away their majority by trying to do it.

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 28, 2010 4:59 PM | Report abuse

"It doesn't get better."

It DOES get better. HCR did pass, after all!

It is agonizing, though, that, as you say, the bullies are able to take us back a notch after a couple forward. Incremental progress is a pain, but it's all we've got until Dems figure out a way to educate the American people on progressive policies BEFORE the misinformation hits.

As Chuck said, why they have not figured out how to do so at this stage is anybody's guess, and a key key issue. It may just be that in more conservative areas of the country it takes longer for people to come to grips with the reality that the Republicanism they're trusted for generations has utterly failed them. I think one of the more positive signs is the younger generation's take on race and sex issues. I think it is still the older conservative generations that are keeping us locked in this back and forth. While young conservatives aren't going away, I see progress on LGBT issues and race issues as a very positive sign. We've certainly come a long way since the '60s and '70s and we're moving in the right direction.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 28, 2010 5:01 PM | Report abuse

sbj3:

Greg thinks if you are against Obamacare, that is being mendacious ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 28, 2010 5:03 PM | Report abuse

Greg

Amazingly, you are leaving out one option: bipartisan compromise

A stripped down health care bill, far less expensive which focuses on regulation of the health insurance companies is the key.

Dropping all the subsidies, incentives to dump employees from health plans and penalities is the clear way to go.


Obama never engaged the country in a discussion of the kind of health care bill.

Instead, Obama wanted a far-left bill, costing trillions of dollars - and Obama was deceptive in using the abuses of the insurance companies to justify a far-left bill, when a center bill could have addressed those same abuses.


This is more a question of what the Obama bullies are going to do - will there be compromise or will they continue to bully people?


One thing is clear: if the democrats keep on calling people racists, there will be no avenues for compromise.

Posted by: SolarEnergy | October 28, 2010 5:03 PM | Report abuse

What you're leaving out is the Republican alternative - doing nothing. Republicans like Eric Cantor admit that the health care system is broken. But when asked why they did nothing about it during all the years they were in power, their answer is like that of the kid who is asked why he didn't clean up his room: "We were just about to do it!"

Posted by: continental46@aol.com | October 28, 2010 5:04 PM | Report abuse

Greg,

I don't see how that will be the case. I think it is just some more inside the beltway idle speculation, masquerading as "Conventional Wisdom"

Health care reform is going to grow increasingly popular as people start to actually experience the changes. It will become harder and harder for Republicans to launch an assault on it, just like most of them are now afraid to openly wage war on Social Security.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 28, 2010 5:07 PM | Report abuse

Love this "moral imperative" nonsense. Here's a moral imperative for the ruling Party: Don't destroy the dollar. Too bad Queen Nancy didn't understand that.

Posted by: PS7900 | October 28, 2010 5:08 PM | Report abuse

"there will be a war among Dem consultants and Beltway hands and Dem-leaning pundits over the legacy of reform"

No, Greg, that isn't a war. We have two real wars right now. What you are talking about is a tug-of-egos among the nerds from the debate club.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 28, 2010 5:09 PM | Report abuse

Mike from Arlington

"parts of the health care bill poll 85%"


Yea, but the costs are not polled. The costs are in the trillions.

The health care bill is not paid for, and soon we will start hearing about the deficits which Obama created in State health care programs.

The bill is financially irresponsible.


Even worse, if you give free stuff to people, they will say yes. If you tell them that they have to pay for that free stuff, many will not want to pay for it.

Then you have the people who have to pay for their free stuff, and the free stuff for 5 other people. They will definitely say no.

Obama and the left wing would rather bully people by calling them racists - rather than be reasonable.

.

Posted by: SolarEnergy | October 28, 2010 5:10 PM | Report abuse

"We've certainly come a long way since the '60s and '70s and we're moving in the right direction."

Right you are Ethan. Human progress moves slowly - two steps forward, one back, etc. etc. The Right Wing is incapable of taking an historical perspective on any subject. They will, by their very nature, always be on the wrong side of history. Of course, when you try to convince them of this they reach for their guns.

Posted by: filmnoia | October 28, 2010 5:10 PM | Report abuse

"Would things be that much better for Dems today if they hadn't tried reform at all?"

Yes, obviously.

"Perhaps, but we just can't be sure. And the alternative -- doing nothing -- was too much of a risk."

Huh? The alternative was to do lots and lots of other things, or anything but this. You think the choice was this or doing nothing? Seriously? I remember screeding about jobs jobs jobs at the time. This was not health care reform, this was a massive give-away to the health care industry, my industry. You don't help "untold numbers of people" by padding the wallets of Pharma stockholders and the managed care CEOs.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 28, 2010 5:13 PM | Report abuse

This is the perfect time for to have The Onion put things in perspective:

"Democrats: 'If We're Gonna Lose, Let's Go Down Running Away From Every Legislative Accomplishment We've Made'

Use the link to read the complete article.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/democrats-if-were-gonna-lose-lets-go-down-running,18333/


Excerpt:

"WASHINGTON—Conceding almost certain Republican gains in next month's crucial midterm elections, Democratic lawmakers vowed Tuesday not to give up without making one final push to ensure their party runs away from every major legislative victory of the past two years.

Party leaders told reporters that regardless of the ultimate outcome, they would do everything in their power from now until the polls closed to distance themselves from their hard-won passage of a historic health care overhaul, the toughest financial regulations since the 1930s, and a stimulus package most economists now credit with preventing a second Great Depression.

"There's a great deal on the line, and we know it isn't going to be easy for us," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), speaking from the steps of the Capitol. "But if we suffer defeat, we will do so knowing we cowered away from absolutely anything we produced that was even remotely progressive or valuable in any way."

"And we will keep cowering right up until Election Day," Reid continued. "From Maine to Hawaii, in big cities and small towns, we will collapse into a fetal position and refuse to take credit for our successes anywhere voters could conceivably be swayed by learning what we have achieved on their behalf."'

Posted by: Liam-still | October 28, 2010 5:14 PM | Report abuse

There's also no way to know how many of those voters opposing it are opposing it from the left because it wasnt good enough or don't like the mandate. also unknown how the numbers might have changed if a public option was included or if they passed the pared down no mandate version after scott brown.

it seems like you're leaving a huge part of the dissatisfaction with the bill out of it. it's silly to pretend that only conservatives had issues with the bill. seems to me that the enthusiasm gap is the main issue and a lot of that enthusiasm gap can be traced back to dumping the public option (in a secret backroom deal) while ramming through the mandate and trading drug reimportation for an ad campaign.

they aren't losing because they tried to pass a bill. they are losing because they passed a poor bill. the worst possible outcome (politically) which has driven away the left, drove the libertarians back to the conservatives and turned off independents.

Posted by: PindarPushkin | October 28, 2010 5:15 PM | Report abuse

At the very least, this battle is just more proof that the US is a left of center nation. If the country were center-right, Republicans could just sit back and let the Dems hang themselves with their own progressive policies. The fact that the GOP resorts to lies like death panels and deficit increases just proves that they don't think that pointing out the actual progressive policies in the law will be a political winning point.

And why is that?

Because Americans LIKE progressive policies.

Posted by: DDAWD | October 28, 2010 5:17 PM | Report abuse

all of you are raising another debate, which is, could Dems have gotten a BETTER bill. That is a fair debate, but one that has been litigated endlessly.

There is another coming debate over whether what Dems DID do cost them their majority.

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 28, 2010 5:19 PM | Report abuse

Greg, you cast the issue as this or nothing, we didn't.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 28, 2010 5:21 PM | Report abuse

West Virginia and Washington State will determine the control of the US Senate.

Watch those States.

My feeling is the wave will pull over the Republicans. Everyone wants to send a message to Obama.

Did Obama get the message yet?


Obama is incredibly defensive.

Posted by: SolarEnergy | October 28, 2010 5:23 PM | Report abuse

When the healthcare bill passed, while Dems were celebrating their "victory," I posted:

The resistance has begun.
The resistance will prevail.

Dems unleashed greater power than they knew existed when they pushed the healthcare bill through against the will of a majority of Americans.

The healthcare bill doesn't just give a benefit to some people like Medicare and Social Security did.

The Healthcare bill instead took rights away from some people to give benefits to others.

Americans are not a people who put up with that type of government. We've shown that before and we'll do it again.

On November 2nd "put a pick upon your shoulder at the rising of the moon" and watch the Dem power structure crumble at the hands of the resistance.

Posted by: jfv123 | October 28, 2010 5:27 PM | Report abuse

Again;

In the newest NY Times poll that Greg posted on a previous thread;

Self Identified:

Liberals 19%

Moderates 37%

Conservatives 38%

Do the math liberals. There are not enough of us to be entitled to get it all our way.

We need the moderates, far more than they need us, because they are double our numbers.

Be glad for what we managed to pass, and get up off of your sulking arses, and work to turn out the votes, in order to keep The Right Wing Totalitarians at bay.

"Politics is the art of the possible". JFK

We got almost all that was possible, considering that we are one fifth of registered voters, at best.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 28, 2010 5:27 PM | Report abuse

IF the Dems do what you think they will do then they deserve to get sent back to Iowa or whatever rat hole they crawled out of..

If REPUBLICANS TRY to repeal ANY of the health care bill, AFTER a succession of Presidential VETOS, there should be recall campaigns launched in every state where one of the repeal folks lives and represents.

These clowns DESERVE to be sent home, recalled and banned from ever serving in ANY office for anything - EVER.

Posted by: rbaldwin2 | October 28, 2010 5:27 PM | Report abuse

When I said, this or nothing, I was discussing whether Dems should have tried NOT to reform HCR at all. See last grafs

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 28, 2010 5:28 PM | Report abuse

Greg

It is not just a debate over health care reform - Obama refused to press through the gay agenda in over two years.

Those people are angry.

And the immigration amnesty people - they are upset as well.


They start to bring up those issues next year, it will not be good for Obama.

Posted by: SolarEnergy | October 28, 2010 5:29 PM | Report abuse

If REPUBLICANS TRY to repeal ANY of the health care bill, AFTER a succession of Presidential VETOS, there should be recall campaigns launched in every state where one of the repeal folks lives and represents.

Posted by: rbaldwin2
++++++++++

Recall? Of Congresscritters? That sounds as silly coming from you as when it comes from the tea-talitarians. Precisely where in the Constitution does it provide for recall by the voters of a sitting member of Congress?

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 28, 2010 5:32 PM | Report abuse

Another useless article from sarge.

All about what we don't know.

What we do know... democratic leadership lead democrats to vote for obama care (leading, threatening... what's the diff?).

democratic leadership was wrong on their predictions.

This, we know.

Posted by: docwhocuts | October 28, 2010 5:33 PM | Report abuse

Another useless article from sarge.

All about what we don't know.

What we do know... democratic leadership lead democrats to vote for obama care (leading, threatening... what's the diff?).

democratic leadership was wrong on their predictions.

This, we know.

Posted by: docwhocuts | October 28, 2010 5:33 PM | Report abuse

"Would things be that much better for Dems today if they hadn't tried reform at all? Perhaps, but we just can't be sure."
-Greg Sargent, 2010

"Would things be that much better for Germany if I hadn't invaded Russia? Perhaps, but we just can't be sure."
- Adolf Hitler, 1945

Posted by: pmendez | October 28, 2010 5:34 PM | Report abuse

What is clear is the democrats are set to have an internal fight - however the Obama people are set to start calling their fellow democrats RACIST.

If you don't support Obama, you are racist, clear and simple.

This is how the Obama people bully people - they have done it time and time again.


.

Posted by: SolarEnergy | October 28, 2010 5:34 PM | Report abuse

all of you are raising another debate, which is, could Dems have gotten a BETTER bill. That is a fair debate, but one that has been litigated endlessly.

There is another coming debate over whether what Dems DID do cost them their majority.

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 28, 2010 5:19 PM |

......................
Nonsense. It is the unemployment figures, and the despair among the working class, that they will never be prosperous again, that is driving this election.

I meet those people on a daily basis, and I feel their pain, desperation, and feeling of helplessness. With almost all the good production jobs, now in other lands, America has become a hollowed out nation, both from a factory production stand point, and in the sense of despair that is palpable through out the once prosperous and optimistic middle class.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 28, 2010 5:35 PM | Report abuse

A fight over whether HC bill killed Dems in midterms? I guess someone with an IQ<20 MIGHT not realize that this was the case...

Posted by: illogicbuster | October 28, 2010 5:38 PM | Report abuse

Greg at 5:28

Health care was never an all or nothing proposition.


Obama could have hauled McCain in - an hammered out a compromise health care bill in - one far less expensive.

Obama should have called McCain and McConnell on their statements that they would support 80% of the bill - Obama should have taken it.


Obama didn't want to SHARE CREDIT for anything - the talk in Baltimore was a disgrace. The summit which was supposed to be bipartisan was ridiculous.

Obama failed to listen.


Obama is a disgrace to the nation.

Health care was never an all or nothing proposition.

The nation does not need a trillion dollar bill - that much is clear.

Posted by: SolarEnergy | October 28, 2010 5:40 PM | Report abuse

THE WHOLE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM, DOCTORS, HOSPITALS, HEALTH INSURANCE SHOULD BE SCRAPED EVERYONE IS SO DAMNED CORRUPTED BEYOND COMPREHENSION. AMERICA HEALTH CARE IS ABOUT BEING SICK. NOT PREVENTION. ASS BACKWARDS. I KNOW FIRST HAND. I WORKED IN HEALTH MOST OF MY LIFE AGAINST MY OWN BELEIVES AS BEING ALL NATURAL MEDICINE.

Posted by: JWTX | October 28, 2010 5:41 PM | Report abuse

THE WHOLE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM, DOCTORS, HOSPITALS, HEALTH INSURANCE SHOULD BE SCRAPED EVERYONE IS SO DAMNED CORRUPTED BEYOND COMPREHENSION. AMERICA HEALTH CARE IS ABOUT BEING SICK. NOT PREVENTION. ASS BACKWARDS. I KNOW FIRST HAND. I WORKED IN HEALTH MOST OF MY LIFE AGAINST MY OWN BELEIVES AS BEING ALL NATURAL MEDICINE.

Posted by: JWTX | October 28, 2010 5:42 PM | Report abuse

Greg,

Almost all the recent national polls that asked people to rank the most important issues for them;

Showed Jobs/The Economy to be the biggest issue on voters minds.

Health Care Reform was way down the list.

You posted it, on Plumline. Go back and dig it up, and you will set that those poll results contradict the point you are attempting to make now.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 28, 2010 5:43 PM | Report abuse

THE WHOLE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM, DOCTORS, HOSPITALS, HEALTH INSURANCE SHOULD BE SCRAPED EVERYONE IS SO DAMNED CORRUPTED BEYOND COMPREHENSION. AMERICA HEALTH CARE IS ABOUT BEING SICK. NOT PREVENTION. ASS BACKWARDS. I KNOW FIRST HAND. I WORKED IN HEALTH MOST OF MY LIFE AGAINST MY OWN BELEIVES AS BEING ALL NATURAL MEDICINE.

Posted by: JWTX | October 28, 2010 5:45 PM | Report abuse

THE WHOLE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM, DOCTORS, HOSPITALS, HEALTH INSURANCE SHOULD BE SCRAPED EVERYONE IS SO DAMNED CORRUPTED BEYOND COMPREHENSION. OVERHAUL ALL OF THEM!

Posted by: JWTX | October 28, 2010 5:46 PM | Report abuse

Greg, when Obama couldn't appoint so he hired tax dodger Tom Daschle in from his fake advisor/consulting job (an obvious skirting of the laughable one year cooling off period for ex-legislators becoming lobbyist/pay to play porkers, just watch the "retiring" Gregg play the same game next year), the Howard Dean wing of the Democratic party, the people who actually got Obama elected (it sure wasn't the Clinton people), recoiled in horror.

Health industry flak Tom Daschle was going to be the architect of the Obama health reform effort!?

That is like Carly Fiorina saying she outsourced so many jobs at HP she knows exactly how to keep it from happening. That is what the fox said in his job interview for guarding the chicken coop. Tom Daschle is going to reform health care...[must not screed] Point is, the answer to your question, if the only choice was this bill or nothing, nothing would have been the correct choice, but that was not the choice Obama faced.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 28, 2010 5:48 PM | Report abuse

KathleenHusseininMaine,
"I've been around long enough to see it happen over and over. It doesn't get better."

I've been around long enough, too. You must be feeling as pessimistic today as I am. About tomorrow, I keep trying for a Scarlett O'Hara, but it's not easy :)

Posted by: carolanne528 | October 28, 2010 5:50 PM | Report abuse

All the Obama have to do is start calling everyone a racist again - and bully them into voting for Obama's people.

That will work.

The false charges of racism which came from the Obama people after the passage of health care reform are still fresh on everyone's minds.

It was disgraceful and disrespectful.

Well Mr. Obama - the American People are preparing their response to your false charges of racism. You will get the response on Tuesday evening.


.

Posted by: SolarEnergy | October 28, 2010 5:50 PM | Report abuse

Liam,

I agree with you that the economy is the determining factor in this election. The economy sucks, it is a midterm, the Democrats control the White House and Congress, and the rest is as predictable as sunrise.

But I agree with Greg that the "inside the Beltway" folks will want to debate whether the Democrats in Congress would have been better off if only they had acted like Republicans. That is always the debate they want to have.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 28, 2010 5:50 PM | Report abuse

Leave it to a pundit to decide that taking care of our citizens health care will provoke war. Where do I go to vote you all off the island? I mean it, get your sorry a$$ an honest job!

Posted by: michael5 | October 28, 2010 5:53 PM | Report abuse

jfv123:

In Jesus's Name, AMEN!

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 28, 2010 5:57 PM | Report abuse

Greg writes

"This is an achievement Dems now have in the bank."


The American People say:


NO.

Posted by: SolarEnergy | October 28, 2010 5:58 PM | Report abuse

JWTX:

While we are building all new medical schools and training a million new doctors, can we at least keep the old ones around for a few more years?

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 28, 2010 6:01 PM | Report abuse

The alternative was not "doing nothing" but Clinton style triangulation and incremental reforms - catastrophic care for the poor perhaps, paired with ability to sell insurance across state lines. The Dems took a "Comprehensive Plan" approach with the idea that ANY plan however flawed would still be the "foot in the door" like Social Security and Medicare were when first passed. Obama said as much on Jon Stewart the other night.

The problem with that is that we're no longer living in the shadow of the New Deal. We're living in the era of incrementalism, instant feedback, trial and error, Intrade and the Wisdom of Crowds.

We see this over and over in polls. The country likes "some elements" of the plan, but is deeply scared by the idea of any "comprehensive plan" no matter what it does.

Posted by: vimrich | October 28, 2010 6:04 PM | Report abuse

Greg writes

"This is an achievement Dems now have in the bank."


The American People say:


NO.

Posted by: SolarEnergy | October 28, 2010 6:04 PM | Report abuse

Greg,

Who is incentivized to pay for these so called "mendacious" ads?  The insurance companies get customers because of the mandate, plus, we all know they make bazillions of dollars on the backs of dying orphans, so they have no incentive to denigrate this beast, right?  It's the force of government and sweet, sweet taxpayer provided subsidies that will pay for these new suckers/insured.

Evil big Pharma also gets a ton of new customers to buy what they're hocking, and the so called penalties on business to provide insurance is quite a bit less than what it actually costs to pay for their employee's insurance so they are now able to drop it and let their employees jump into the "exchanges".  Again, it's in their interest, financially, not to oppose Obamacare, right?

So I ask again, who but the lowly taxpayer actually has a reason to oppose this horror?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 28, 2010 6:06 PM | Report abuse

SolarEnergy:

Hopefully, that message is heard loud and clear Tuesday evening.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 28, 2010 6:07 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Liam-still | October 28, 2010 5:35 PM "...Nonsense..."
= = = = = = = = = = =
Not so fast there Liam, the charge against the host's assertions does not prove the validity of a whole new assertion, dude (ette, or?) -still. Where is your proof of the driving mechanism again? Given, thanks to the transparent in-effectiveness of Odd-Jobs Czar Joe Robin(a v)ette Biden, and his candor and in-advertent (or intended) honesty, we know for a fact that those 8 Million households with maybe 16-20 Million affected Voters in the family, all feeling the change in employment prospects, are not going to go out and have anything to do with a Senator or Congress-person 'Blank' from the Great State full of morons and stupid people that were told this Cycle of Mayhem is for your own good, sit down, shut up, then get up and move to the back of the crowd. That's a given, but this is what is driving this wave of distrust (really and deserved), is this...WE are S 'n D'ned 'T' off about being told BY OUR OWN LEADERS, among others, to tolerate the intolerable, to understand the inscrutable, defend the indefensible, to suck it up and ask for more in OUR own Nation. Now that is FREE SPEECH, and it isn't for sale, compromise, or negotiation. WE have turned OUR last cheek and it's about time WE smacked a few keisters for the Gipper, man. No disrespect, No anger you understand?

Posted by: SpendNomore | October 28, 2010 6:10 PM | Report abuse

Is it mere coincidence that the Republicans share the essential vocabulary of a 2-year old: "no" and "mine"?

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 28, 2010 6:10 PM | Report abuse

"Health care reform is going to grow increasingly popular as people start to actually experience the changes."

No, it won't. Because Obama is counting on a combination of a mandate to purchase with government subsidies to make people feel better about it.

The budget reality is that you'll be forced to buy it, but there will be no government subsidy. You'll have to pay the entire amount out of your pocket.

Then the penalties will kick in courtesy of the IRS because you won't be able to afford it. But that's okay, because from my standpoint, you'll be spending money to pay off the federal debt with your $1,500 penalty. Its a win-win for me. Don't know how its going to work out for you.

Posted by: Ombudsman1 | October 28, 2010 6:13 PM | Report abuse

America is a center right country.

Liberals dragged it to the left and are now going to pay the price.

Pile on another entitlement that we have no idea how to pay for.

Then after the public gets used to the new goodies tax the "rich" or borrow more from China.

That's the Dem plan, which responsible adults will reject on Tuesday.

10 years of revenues to pay for 6 years of benefits...thet's how health care "pays for itself" in 10 years.

After that, who cares?

Reduce doctors Medicare reimbursement by 25%.

Sure, that will happen.

The whole thing was a scam from the start, a Trojan horse for higher taxes and massive gov't. control.

The only 2 things Liberals really want.

Bye, bye.

You can have power back when you figure out how to get the illegal alien robot vote in 40 years.

Posted by: buddy2105 | October 28, 2010 6:15 PM | Report abuse

Obama'a appearance on the Daily Show was completely void of all direction.

Obama has no plan.

OR does Obama have a hidden agenda he is not telling us about???

The one thing Obama said is he wants to get rid of the filibuster.


Curious, we haven't heard any of this all year. All of a sudden in the last week we hear Harry Reid and Obama mentioning this.


It is unclear whether a new Senate can change this rule at the beginning of a session - without 60 votes.

The House Republicans will certainly respond to block Obama - so changing the filibuster rule will certainly not really help Obama.

What it will do - is hurt the democrats after 2012, not very wise. The other democratic Senators would be wise to halt Obama on this one.

____________


Oh, wait, maybe Obama and his crew can try to bully people by calling them racist. Maybe that will work.

.

Posted by: SolarEnergy | October 28, 2010 6:15 PM | Report abuse

Troll:

Maybe I am missing what you are asking for. A group called "American Action Network" (Norm Coleman and Rob Collins) has run some of those ads attacking Rep. Chris Murphy (D-CT) for voting to JAIL people who don't sign up / pay for ObamaCare.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 28, 2010 6:16 PM | Report abuse

@Greg: "all of you are raising another debate, which is, could Dems have gotten a BETTER bill. That is a fair debate, but one that has been litigated endlessly."

Not me.

I didn't say that.

"We're living in the era of incrementalism, instant feedback, trial and error, Intrade and the Wisdom of Crowds. "

Yeah, and incremental reform has worked out SO well in the health care arena! HCR -- that is, Comprehensive Health Care Reform -- needed to happen, imho. And I'm glad it did.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 28, 2010 6:16 PM | Report abuse

"America is a center right country."

Gosh, I've never heard that before. ;)

Try this experiment: wade into a crowd of those "center right" teabaggers and ask for volunteers who are willing to surrender their social security and medicare in order to balance the federal budget. Then tell me about a "center right country."

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 28, 2010 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Liam,

I agree with you that the economy is the determining factor in this election. The economy sucks, it is a midterm, the Democrats control the White House and Congress, and the rest is as predictable as sunrise.

But I agree with Greg that the "inside the Beltway" folks will want to debate whether the Democrats in Congress would have been better off if only they had acted like Republicans. That is always the debate they want to have.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 28, 2010 5:50 PM |

........................

A lot of people were hoping for a miraculous instant recovery, once they threw out the Republicans. That was never going to happen, because the previous manufacturing strength of America , that provided good paying jobs to all those people who were not college material, but were good with their hands, has been shipped over seas, and the housing industry will remain comatose for some time to come. It is almost impossible for homeowners to sell their homes, and relocate to where some jobs are available.

This is actually a Jobs Great Depression. Democrats historically have been better at avoiding such crashes, and also at pulling us out of them. Unfortunately, as soon as the working class, get a jingle back in their pockets, they start to think that they should be Republicans, and they tend to vote for them, until they destroy the economy once more.

"If you want to live like a Republican, vote like a Democrat." Harry S. Truman. It is as true today, as it was when Harry first said it.

A nice win for your Giants last night. Tonight could be a pivotal game for them. Win it and they are in good shape. Lose it and Texas has done what it needed to do, in the first two road games. The Giants will need to keep on scoring, because Texas is a run producing machine.

I was trying to decide who I wanted to root for, since I have no real allegiance to either team, so I decided to go the Blue State V. Red State rout; and root for The Giants. Besides; you have a couple of players from my beloved 2005 White Sox on the team. I hope that they win another World Series ring.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 28, 2010 6:23 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 28, 2010 6:10 PM "...a 2-year old..."
= = = = = = = =

I wasn't born yesterday, you have nearly nailed the whole fifteen rules in Uncle Saul's Hand-Book, will I do? Let's see if you are indeed capable of a reasonable exchange of views on the current election cycle at a level somewhere above day-care.

Quid Pro Quo, claw

What would you prefer for a second party, oh yeh we all know about the 't' that's got your shorts all in a knot, but really what would you want in it's place, and be careful what you wish for...we need a robust Capitalist Revival to put a stop to the Economic and Social Mayhem brought to US by Progressive-zilla now handing out @ 1600 'is this DC?' Ave...so what will it be bear?

Posted by: SpendNomore | October 28, 2010 6:23 PM | Report abuse

Bearclaw,
A huge amount of the center right people you're denigrating know that they will never see the money they paid into Social Security. That money is gone. Perhaps declining to give you something they no longer have to pay off a debt is, in fact, the honorable thing to do.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 28, 2010 6:23 PM | Report abuse

bearclaw1:

Probably no more than if you went into a crowded bank, waived a gun around, and asked for volunteers who are willing to surrender their life savings in order for you to balance the roulette wheel in Atlantic City.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 28, 2010 6:26 PM | Report abuse

Pmendez raised the Hitler card.

/fail.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | October 28, 2010 6:28 PM | Report abuse

Many of them will also never see the money or pension funds that The Wall St. Casino Banks pissed away, but that does not stop The Republicans from trying to steer Social Security accounts into the hands of their Robber Baron masters.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 28, 2010 6:28 PM | Report abuse

I still cannot conceive of how health care -- HEALTH CARE! - was tuned into the equivalent of torture, starting unprovoked wars, or exposing national secrets in the person of an active CIA agent. Go to any other country in the civilized world and people just laugh at the defeatist, self-destcitive Americans who don't just assume health care is something they are entitled to by virtue citizenship in a supposedly advanced country. They all have it and love it. Have Americans' aspirations for themselves and their once-leading nation sunk so low that we have given up on making our country a light among nations? Have we given up and settled for second-class status? What has happened to our people, and what is happening to our country?

Posted by: mylesgordon | October 28, 2010 6:32 PM | Report abuse

if one thing is certain, its that one can't be sure about anything. except that it isn't that voters don't like the bill, that you do know for sure.

that's why you're losing independents.

Posted by: batigol85 | October 28, 2010 6:32 PM | Report abuse

Well Liam, instead of letting the government piss it away on the military industrial complex, or handing it over to those Robber Barons so they can buy a new yacht, how about not taking it away from us in the first place so we can, you know, manage it ourselves?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 28, 2010 6:33 PM | Report abuse

batigol-

One-sided explanations for midterm elections are lame.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | October 28, 2010 6:36 PM | Report abuse

this is the problem with communism, it never works. when the latest iteration inevitably busts, its defenders get lost in a futile search for the reason. We're witnessing a much less severe replay of Mao's china or Stalin's USSR that left millions dead. Thank god obama's not a marxist or thats where we would have been. it wouldn't have been a volt, it would have been a whole revamping/destruction of the manufacturing sector. And that pesky opposition would have been jailed or killed if it were marx/mao/stalin/castro, but all Obama can do is abuse the bully pulpit. Obama's no communist but he's cut from the same cloth as chavez and the likes

Posted by: batigol85 | October 28, 2010 6:40 PM | Report abuse

buddy at 6:15

Brings up really important points

If Obama and the democrats really wanted their version of the health care bill to be accepted, they should have answered questions just like these.


Instead, Obama and crew decided to start calling everyone racist -


That worked.

Posted by: SolarEnergy | October 28, 2010 6:40 PM | Report abuse

Liam,

The Giants have a couple of players from just about every team in MLB. It is so much easier for me to root for them with Bonds retired (talented yes, likeable no). But it isn't like when I was growing up, and could root for the same core group of players year after year (especially Willie McCovey).

Last night just proved, once again, why they actually play the games. I never would have imagined 18 runs in a game billed as a pitching duel.

And there were very few political ads during the broadcast last night, at least in my area. No sightings of the Clydesdales, though. Kind of miss them.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 28, 2010 6:40 PM | Report abuse

All, Happy Hour Roundup:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/10/happy_hour_roundup_118.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 28, 2010 6:40 PM | Report abuse

A huge amount of the center right people you're denigrating know that they will never see the money they paid into Social Security. That money is gone. Perhaps declining to give you something they no longer have to pay off a debt is, in fact, the honorable thing to do.
--------------------------------------
To paraphrase Rick Santelli:

"Anyone willing to give up their social security that they've paid into all their lives, RAISE YOUR HANDS!"

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 28, 2010 6:41 PM | Report abuse

Liam-still, Harry also said: "Write one more word about my daughter, her personal abilities, and characteristics and you'll not only need a new nose, you'll be wearing a cup support the rest of your life", and "the buck stops here". How have we gone from that to "all you bi-'s from the other side, go sit down in back", and "the bucks have already stopped somewhere out there"?

Posted by: SpendNomore | October 28, 2010 6:45 PM | Report abuse

TMWN

You can't manage yourselves. History has already proven that. Your party keeps crashing the economy, and leaving the masses destitute.

Democrats have a far better record of creating jobs, and at avoiding Economic and jobs recessions and Depressions. Fat Cats did just fine under Bill Clinton, and we still added 22 million jobs to the economy. Remind me again; how many net jobs Bush/Cheney, with their unpaid for Tax Cuts For Fat Cats added during their two terms?

Doing the same stupid things again, that Bush/Cheney did, and expecting different results is Vodoo Economics.

You had your Fat Cat Tax Cuts. You still have them to this very day, and no jobs were created. Where's The Beef?

I take it that you are a libertarian? Good luck with that. It might be fine for hermits, but it is no way to form and keep a cohesive society.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 28, 2010 6:46 PM | Report abuse

What was the last piece of monumental legislation of historic precedence, the Republicans passed for the American people, not counting tax cuts? When did it happen and under which President?

Posted by: denise4925 | October 28, 2010 6:50 PM | Report abuse

12bar,

Again, what is there that I can give up? There is no money left in SS. How's this: I happily give the money I paid into Social Security that was then used for other spending to hide the true debt, to help protect the gay baby whales for Jesus.

What have I truly given? Or is it the thought that counts?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 28, 2010 6:50 PM | Report abuse

Dear Mr McWingnut, or can I just call you Troll?

The problem with the health care industry, is that you can't manage your own relationship to the health care industry.

Yeah. It is bigger than you. You use it and you pay what it tells you to pay, unless you don't need a house or a credit rating.

In fact, the industry just showed it was bigger than the Democrats and their "reform". The industry dictated the terms of the reform and no part of the industry is backing the silly Republican posers grandstanding the "repeal" effort. There was no reform, only expansion.

So don't get the idea "going bare" is a good idea. You are going to pay and pay, one way or another, until health industry reform actually happens.



Posted by: shrink2 | October 28, 2010 6:51 PM | Report abuse

Here's dilemma and a prediction.

Dilemma: To avoid further political damage in 2012 the Democrats will find they are going to have to amend the health care bill - probably by at least removing the universal mandates - but trying to save the rest.

Prediction: It will be the Democrats who end up revoking the entire health care bill because the the Republican House won't agree to partial rmodifications - it will be all or nothing. Otherwise, the Republicans are more than content to have the Democrats carry the individual mandate albatross around their necks throughout the next election cycle.

Posted by: ktktk | October 28, 2010 6:52 PM | Report abuse

Obama's health care reform is a mess. Its 700 pages shoved thru the house and senate with many lawmakers admitting "they dont know whats in there" how can anyone pass such major legislation just for the sake of passing it ? its idiotic. Give the repubs some of what they want, give the dems some of what they want, both sides have good ideas. But no, Obama thought he had a mandate and a majority so he rams it thru....thats what hubris and ego will get you ...garbage divisive legislation. Wasted 2 years because he had a fat head along with all the other dems.Now its back to the drawing board....

Posted by: snapplecat07 | October 28, 2010 6:53 PM | Report abuse

How's this: I happily give the money I paid into Social Security
---------------------------
Ok, Troll, you are volunteer #1 to give up your benefits. Don't look at the line of folks behind you. Just pretend you're heading that army of volunteers for Wall Street.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 28, 2010 6:54 PM | Report abuse

Liam,

I didn't say we should turn over The SS money to the Republican party, LBJ and the Democrats started that ball rolling. What I said, obviously in a confusing way, was that citizens should keep their own money for their own retirement rather than letting the government or robber barons blow it on hookers and tootskie.

Shrink2, no you may not, you may call me Mr. McWingnut. Plus, I do not understand your comment. Can you please clarify?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 28, 2010 6:57 PM | Report abuse

TrollMcWingnut,

So if people are angry, it is because they want (but think they won't receive) Social Security and Medicare?

In other words, their objection isn't to a taxpayer-financed retirement system, or single (government) payer health care, their objection is they think they won't get it. Doesn't sound very "center right."

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 28, 2010 7:00 PM | Report abuse

@shrink,

Some evening when the roar is down, you'll have to share your predictions for the healthcare industry. How big will it get? Where will the major expansions occur? What will cause the "bubble" (because that's what you really mean) to burst. I got a glimpse on the Fix, but always wanted to have to you expound on your views. Not argumentatively, of course.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 28, 2010 7:00 PM | Report abuse

12B Rick Santelli is a one trick pony. Yeah, I know: obviously.

Still I keep hoping he will say something different in those Squawk Box/Before the Bell debates set up for him...but it is always the same.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 28, 2010 7:01 PM | Report abuse

Liam,

The Giants have a couple of players from just about every team in MLB. It is so much easier for me to root for them with Bonds retired (talented yes, likeable no). But it isn't like when I was growing up, and could root for the same core group of players year after year (especially Willie McCovey).

Last night just proved, once again, why they actually play the games. I never would have imagined 18 runs in a game billed as a pitching duel.

And there were very few political ads during the broadcast last night, at least in my area. No sightings of the Clydesdales, though. Kind of miss them.

Posted by: bearclaw1 |

......................

Bonds had a terrible personality. Ron Kettle once asked him to sign a few shirts that would be raffled off for Ron's Charity, Bonds said to him, I am not going to sign anything for white people.

Now Bonds is talking about wanting to be a batting coach?!

I am glad that the steroid era is almost over. Now they need to get rid of HGH, and purge all of the Steroid era records from the books. No hall of fame for Bond Mark Mcgwire, or Sammy Sosa.

I wish someone one with deep pockets would establish a profession sports Hall Of Shame.

I think it might have a deterrent effect on young athletes, if they were taken to visit such a place, and see how past cheaters are publically disgraced for all future generations to see.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 28, 2010 7:01 PM | Report abuse

12bar,

Again. What benefits? They don't exist. Ok, I give you my Ferrari and Malibu beach house. Tell what the difference is?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 28, 2010 7:04 PM | Report abuse

So Liam, what mass are you from, is it the cancerous collectivist-activist\ACORN\SEIU\AFL-CIO\ACLU\Hollywood-Berkley alliance of anti-american pro-masses coalition (look out France we need assylum)...or are you still a mass of one?

Think there's something massive going on here, but it appears it is the density between your ears, if you think you fool the good forum with the Serial Seminar (SS) DNCNN assault blogging coalition posts.

Stupid is as Stupid does the same transparent routine everywhere it can.

Posted by: SpendNomore | October 28, 2010 7:04 PM | Report abuse

12B Rick Santelli is a one trick pony. Yeah, I know: obviously.

Still I keep hoping he will say something different in those Squawk Box/Before the Bell debates set up for him...but it is always the same.

Posted by: shrink2
-------------------------------------
Santelli had his finger on the pulse of America in his "rant heard round the world". I could criticize him for his superficial understanding of the crisis (but then he's a trader), but one can't fault him for shouting something memorable.

I used to watch CNBC all the time. Then I got this hunch I was overtrading, and CNBC was part of the overstimulus. In order to make more money, I had cable shut off so I could NOT watch CNBC. So, if it isn't on the internet somewhere, I don't see it. So far, so good.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 28, 2010 7:07 PM | Report abuse

denise4925:

Partial Birth Abortion Ban, signed by President George W. Bush (November 5, 2003).

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 28, 2010 7:10 PM | Report abuse

"In other words, their objection isn't to a taxpayer-financed retirement system, or single (government) payer health care, their objection is they think they won't get it. Doesn't sound very "center right.""

Fair question. I don't know of they wanted a benefit or not originally.  But they know it's gone never to return. 

And you called them "center right". You cannot give what you do not and never will have. 

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 28, 2010 7:10 PM | Report abuse

Well if you paint it like a moral imperative, than you could just about justify anything.

Maybe the question should be,"Would the Democrats have suffered less egregious losses, if they had perused more limited reforms?"

Posted by: moebius22 | October 28, 2010 7:11 PM | Report abuse

"There is no money left in SS."

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut

O.K. I get it. I thought there might be rioting in the streets if all those teabaggers, including Jake, weren't getting their monthly checks from Social Security. But you are saying the checks have stopped, or the checks are bouncing for insufficient funds, and everybody is fine with that. I guess I'll admit to being surprised.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 28, 2010 7:12 PM | Report abuse

Mr. McWingnut (you can call me shrink, the 2 is just too formal)

I am not sure what part was not clear. The industry is already 1/6 of the American gdp and its ongoing growth is inevitable. It was growing before "reform" and "reform" will continue to grow it. As 12B mentioned, it is our next bubble.

We will all pay more and more for health care, no matter what, unless comprehensive reform occurs and neither party is capable of doing that on its own, the industry is that big.

It will have to be a bipartisan, whole country effort, or it will not happen. But the idea of keeping your money and managing your relationship with the health care industry on your own (what we call going bare, a sort of, pay as you go cash basis) is a terrible idea. I don't have to explain why, right?

Posted by: shrink2 | October 28, 2010 7:14 PM | Report abuse

@troll,

Your explanation that SS is "out of money" is a bookkeeping construct only. The U.S. has an obligation to its retirees and ostensibly to those who paid in for years, and do not have the time left to invest. IMO, that obligation is backed by the full faith of the U.S. government. Similar to a bond. If the U.S. defaults to its OWN citizens, what affect do you think that might have on interest paid to non citizens. Something to think about.

If younger people, who have the time to invest want to invest outside social security, they can do so under present laws. If they want to change the laws to put their retirement funds in the hands of Wall Street, well, I hope you have an appetite for risk. You might want to think it all the way through: would you mandate (that awful word again) that people set aside a set amount of money (to then give it to Wall Street brokers). Or would you just trust that people would do the right thing and not spend every dime on flat screen televisions?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 28, 2010 7:16 PM | Report abuse

80% of Americans do not approve of the GOPs performance.Yet people want to repeal Health Care why? Americans need to look to Europe and how they laugh at us for our lousy Health care programs. We have a horrible standing in the world regarding Infant Mortality. We work more hours for less pay and no Health care. We live on the average 8 to 10 years less than the Europeans. We pay 300 to 1000 percent more for the same prescriptions that they receive from the same drug companies. Wake up America. Stop believing the GOP propaganda. Let us build on the new Health Care Initiatives to create better lives for all of us not just the Wealthy.

Posted by: Americacares | October 28, 2010 7:16 PM | Report abuse

Well, Greg, this is a brawl that should have happened before the law was strong-armed through congress. Yes. We need healthcare reform, but not this ugly bill. But, then, it was never about middle Americans, to whom Obama continues to direct his speeches. It has always been a plan to cover citizens, illegal and legal, who pay little to no taxes.

Posted by: bethg1841 | October 28, 2010 7:16 PM | Report abuse

Being a Democrat is very frustrating. They are mostly good people, trying to do good most of the time, excluding Blue Dog Democrats. But, they are so frightened all of the time of the Republicans.

The Republicans were a shell of a party after '08, until Dick Army and Jim DeMint coalesced the angry white people on the right side. All of the extreme right wing factions, the religious, the racists, the gun people, the libertarians, the Neo-cons, the militia, you name the extreme, they are the Teabaggers co-opted by the Republicans. The Republicans couldn't survive in the progressive climate as just Republicans. People were not even wanting to be identified as Republicans. They lost their message. That's not surprising if you look at their leaders, McCain, McConnell and Boner. But they rebounded politically at rapid speed, albeit with lies, fear and prostituting themselves.

Instead of standing up to the extremists and dumping cold water on their manufactured lies financed by big oil, big insurance and big banks, the Dems starting in-fighting as usual. Everyone lost focus and the message got lost in the roar of the extreme right's rampage of guns and violence at townhall meetings intimidating people from civil discourse and debate about the merits of HCR.

Now, here we are again. The bill has been passed and instead of running on their accomplishments in Congress and there have been many, they run away and pretend they are Republicans in disguise. The way they act makes me ashamed to be a Democrat. It's a major and historic accomplishment, but they are so afraid of looking like a Democrat, they are backing away from it.

The media is trying to get the infighting started again after the deed is done, beginning with this article. The more fuel the media gives it, the more prevalent it will get until it doesn't even matter what the Dems are fighting about anymore. It's so destructive. I have to give it to the Republicans. They don't do anything for the American public and they don't govern because they are all about politics, winning and money (not necessary in that order), but they do stick together and stay on message. They are great at politics. They know exactly what to say and how to say it to get Americans in a frenzied enough state to vote for people who do not have their best interest at heart and who have ulterior motives for getting elected (MONEY AND POWER). That's a talent that the Dems have never possessed it seems in the 20th and 21st century. Even when the Dems are smarter politically than the Republicans, it soon falls apart because they refuse stick together for the greater cause. They'd rather fight. They used to fight for policy issues. Now, they are fighting each other on political issues and that makes this article even more depressing. I think I could tolerate it better if it were just a difference on policy, but what you're predicting Greg is politics and that is never good for the American public.

Posted by: denise4925 | October 28, 2010 7:19 PM | Report abuse

12bar,
I'm saying that SS pays out more than it takes in. There is no trust fund. Checks are not bouncing because fiat currency is being created. How long will those checks have any value? The party's over.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 28, 2010 7:21 PM | Report abuse

People who say that there is a cheaper way to do health care reform than what was done in HCR are either thinking of a large single-payer system, a cost-containment system with a public option to put a brake on costs, or haven't thought the problem through. Health insurance covers (or should cover) both the unforeseen high-cost catastrophic episodes, and the ordinary, fairly predictable visits to providers for routine care. People without insurance, either pay for the routine care they get, or they don't bother with it; people w/o insurance who experience a high cost event pass the cost on to everyone else, because that's how the system must socialize un-reimbursed care. That's why insurers didnt want to insure people with chronic conditions, dangerous activities, or other expected medical needs beyond the very nearly average expected experience.

Posted by: dkdenze | October 28, 2010 7:21 PM | Report abuse

TMWN.

Letting people keep their own money, was already tried by you guys, and it led to the Great Depression. Like I said before; you Libertarians should just go live out your Hermit fantasy lives.

FDR created the safety net, so that when you guys returned to power, you would be prevented form destroying the fabric of our economy and society once more.

Well you guys almost pulled it off again. Had you gotten your wishes and removed the Social Security safety net, you now would have millions of old people living in tent cities, without a pot to pee in, or a window to empty it out off.

Social Security is not the problem. Idiots who keep electing reckless Republicans is the problem. Bill Clinton collected for the Social Security funds; and yet the Economy prospered; 22 million jobs were added and the Fat Cats grew wealthy enough to even qualify for Bush's unfunded Tax Cuts, which have never created any jobs. Clinton ended up having an annual budget surplus. Along came the Voodoo Economics Eejits, and did to our economy what they did abroad to Iraq.

Find yourself a cabin in the woods, and bury your money in a tin can. Take all the rest of your fellow crackpot libertarians with you.

You guys are just a bunch of anti-social loners, trying to convince yourselves that you are doing so, in the service of a noble cause. You are not. You are just a bunch of social misfits.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 28, 2010 7:22 PM | Report abuse

denise4925:

Partial Birth Abortion Ban, signed by President George W. Bush (November 5, 2003).

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 28, 2010 7:10 PM | Report abuse
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Jake, that is not historic, precedent setting legislation that helps the American people. LOL It's a wedge social issue that helps men feel in control of women.

Posted by: denise4925 | October 28, 2010 7:23 PM | Report abuse

shrink2:

If ObamaCare was repealed and replaced with a system that allowed private health insurance to be sold across State lines, wouldn't that decrease costs?

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 28, 2010 7:24 PM | Report abuse

denise4925:

Partial Birth Abortion Ban, signed by President George W. Bush (November 5, 2003).

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 28, 2010 7:10 PM | Report abuse
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Jake, that is not historic, precedent setting legislation that helps the American people. LOL It's a wedge social issue that helps men feel in control of women.

Posted by: denise4925 | October 28, 2010 7:25 PM | Report abuse

So Liam-Still, if you were a Senator, Congress-person (Blank) from the Great State of (Blank), full of morons and selfish idiots, that can't count to six without using one foot, and the good but stupid sheople of your Great State of, oh say, Nevada (just for instance), saw fit, or didn't realize that the SEIU Voter Machine already knows who to vote for, to send you back the Hill and Halls of Shame and Greid, what gesture of gratitude would be at the top of your to do (to 'em) list? Maybe a new entitlement program with only, say another $15 Trillion bill for posterity hanging over OUR already Rabid Recovery of Morbidity? What say you Liam? We are holding your breath...

Posted by: SpendNomore | October 28, 2010 7:27 PM | Report abuse

'm saying that SS pays out more than it takes in. There is no trust fund. Checks are not bouncing because fiat currency is being created. How long will those checks have any value? The party's over.
------------------------------------
You better pray that no check written on the U.S. Treasury bounces. Don't be silly--that is not going to happen. If you seriously think that is going to happen (and you can't be serious, can you?), think about how the Federal Reserve easing is "somehow" getting intermingled with Social Security funds.

If this is what you think, I'm sorry. I can't help you.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 28, 2010 7:27 PM | Report abuse

Liam, you forgot to tell me to move to Somalia. That's the latest lefty meme for Libertarianism.

I'm just here to help.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 28, 2010 7:29 PM | Report abuse

Jake, I have so many ideas for industry reform it'd make your head spin. But all those dead sacred cows...the price of beef would crash. And after all, there are so many parasites and hangers on, the industry employs millions of people who have nothing to do with preventing illness and treating the sick. What would all those "care managers" (the real party of no) do for a living?

Posted by: shrink2 | October 28, 2010 7:34 PM | Report abuse

denise4925:

You are excluding all of those now-born infants in your definition of "American people" (I would also argue that it was the turning point in saving the souls of many more BORN American people too ; )

Look, you asked a question, and I gave you my answer. If that answer is not acceptable to you -- without admitting such as being true and correct, expressly reserving all rights and remedies thereto -- then my answer is: Homeland Security Act, signed by President George W. Bush (November 25, 2002)

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 28, 2010 7:35 PM | Report abuse

UNDER OBAMA:

1. Ordered all federal agencies to undertake a study and make recommendations for ways to cut spending.

2. Negotiated deal with Swiss banks to permit US government to gain access to records of tax evaders.

3. Shut down offshore tax safe havens.

4. Ended the previous policy of offering tax benefits to corporations who outsource American jobs.

5. Ended the practice of protecting credit card cos; in place of it are new consumer and small business protections from credit card industry’s predatory practices and excessive surcharges.

6. Made more loans available to small businesses through community banks.

7. Ended the previous practice of forbidding Medicare from negotiating with drug manufacturers for less expensive drugs, thus bringing the medicare expenses down and lowering prescription drug costs for senior citizens.

8. Phased out the expensive F-22 war plane and other outmoded weapons systems that weren’t even used or needed in Iraq/Afghanistan, thereby saving the country billions. The cost of production of ONLY ONE F-22 was around $138 MILLION.

9. Ended the previous stop-loss policy that kept soldiers doing tour after tour after tour of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan longer than their enlistment date.

10. Cover expenses of families of fallen soldiers so they may be on hand when the body arrives at Dover AFB.

11. Improved housing for military personnel and initiated a new policy to promote federal hiring of military spouses.

12. Improved conditions at Walter Reed Military Hospital and other military hospitals.

13. Initiated a housing rescue plan, thereby keeping thousands upon thousands of families from losing their homes.

14. Returned money authorized for refurbishment of White House offices and private living quarters and paid for redecoration of the White House living quarters out of his own pocket.

15. Lowered federal income tax for the middle class. (was at its lowest in 60 years when the Tea Party decided it would be a "brilliant idea" to rally on April 15.)

16. The USA is once again in compliance with the Geneva Convention - which not only restored our integrity and standing worldwide but also helped our soldiers.

17. Visited more countries & met with more world leaders than any president in his first 6 months in office.

18. Signed the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Bill.

19. Brought high-speed broadband internet to K-12 schools.

20. Expanded the SCHIP program to cover health care to 4 million more kids.

21. Appointed Michael R. Bromwich, former Assistant US Atty and Justice Department Inspector General, to head the MMS, to reorganize it, and to eliminate conflicts.

22. Expanded the National Youth Service Program.

23. Ended previous policy of awarding "no-bid" contracts.

24. Signed the Omnibus Public Lands Protection Act, protecting 200 million acres of wilderness and a thousand miles of rivers.

http://www.nature.org/pressroom/press/press3952.html

Posted by: camera_eye_11 | October 28, 2010 7:37 PM | Report abuse

I don't see any reason to brawl over HCR.

The President has the veto pen, so, we'll listen to the GOP and if their suggestions have any teeth fine.

If not, then no.

If they try to repeal HCR altogether, bam.

Veto.


Posted by: lindalovejones | October 28, 2010 7:39 PM | Report abuse

25. Steered us from the brink of a free-falling economic disaster.

26. Restricted the hiring of lobbyists and moved to bar lobbyists from serving on advisory boards.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/01/good-government-groups-give-ob.html?wprss=44

27. Restarted the nuclear nonproliferation talks and building back up the nuclear inspection infrastructure/protocols, including ending production of weapons-grade materials that create nuclear weapons.

http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/04/06/06greenwire-obamas-nonproliferation-plan-heralds-changes-f-10439.html

28. Increased jobs for improving infrastructure (roads, bridges, power plants) after years of neglect.

http://roadsbridges.com/Most-in-transportation-industry-supports-Obama%E2%80%99s-latest-move-newsPiece2147

29. Established a National Performance Officer charged with saving the federal government money and making federal operations more efficient.

Comment on: Obama faces up to history at 10/27/2010 2:00 PM EDT
30. Provided the middle class with the following tax breaks last year:

Provided the middle class with the following tax breaks last year:
*An increase in the Earned Income Tax Credit.
*Expanded the Child Tax Credit.
*For those who work, the Making Work Pay tax credit gave $400/indiv & $800/couple.
*For those who lost their job, a 65% tax credit to help cover the cost of health care. The first $2,400 in unemployment benefits was tax-free.
*Up to $2,500 under the American Opportunity Credit for students & parents paying college tuition.
*$8,000 for 1st-time homebuyers.
*state & local deductions for taxes paid on a new car.
*Up to $1,500 for home improvements to increase energy efficiency.

*An increase in the Earned Income Tax Credit.

*Expanded the Child Tax Credit.

*For those who work, the Making Work Pay tax credit gave $400/indiv & $800/couple.

*For those who lost their job, a 65% tax credit to help cover the cost of health care. The first $2,400 in unemployment benefits was tax-free.

*Up to $2,500 under the American Opportunity Credit for students & parents paying college tuition.

*$8,000 for 1st-time homebuyers.

*state & local deductions for taxes paid on a new car.

*Up to $1,500 for home improvements to increase energy efficiency.

(Go check your federal tax return paperwork before you reply that this isn't true & if you don't want to look like an ignorant moron, then stop watching a fake "news" station run by Roger Ailes, president of Fox "News" who used to be Nixon's campaign manager and ran campaign ads for Bush Sr. as well. ALL TRUE.

And if you vote Republican, all of this goes away and they'll give us the following:

1) Shoulder the American taxpayer with the burden of the gulf cleanup.
2) Allow companies to outsource MORE American jobs to other countries.
3) Extend the Bush tax cuts to the rich, which will increase the deficit to $4 trillion.
4) Privatize Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare.

Posted by: camera_eye_11 | October 28, 2010 7:40 PM | Report abuse

IRAQ and AFGHANISTAN:

President George W. Bush helping the American People, whether they liked it our not ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 28, 2010 7:41 PM | Report abuse

Liam, you forgot to tell me to move to Somalia. That's the latest lefty meme for Libertarianism.

I'm just here to help.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 28, 2010 7:29 PM

................

Stay the hell out of Somalia. They already have more than enough Anti-Social Misfits tearing their society asunder. A cabin in the deep woods somewhere, is what you need; and you can devote all your time to writing your manifesto; with the working title:

Greed Is Good, Because I Am Greedy.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 28, 2010 7:42 PM | Report abuse

25. Steered us from the brink of a free-falling economic disaster.

26. Restricted the hiring of lobbyists and moved to bar lobbyists from serving on advisory boards.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/01/good-government-groups-give-ob.html?wprss=44

27. Restarted the nuclear nonproliferation talks and building back up the nuclear inspection infrastructure/protocols, including ending production of weapons-grade materials that create nuclear weapons.

http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/04/06/06greenwire-obamas-nonproliferation-plan-heralds-changes-f-10439.html

28. Increased jobs for improving infrastructure (roads, bridges, power plants) after years of neglect.

http://roadsbridges.com/Most-in-transportation-industry-supports-Obama%E2%80%99s-latest-move-newsPiece2147

29. Established a National Performance Officer charged with saving the federal government money and making federal operations more efficient.

30. Provided the middle class with the following tax breaks last year:

Provided the middle class with the following tax breaks last year:
*An increase in the Earned Income Tax Credit.
*Expanded the Child Tax Credit.
*For those who work, the Making Work Pay tax credit gave $400/indiv & $800/couple.
*For those who lost their job, a 65% tax credit to help cover the cost of health care. The first $2,400 in unemployment benefits was tax-free.
*Up to $2,500 under the American Opportunity Credit for students & parents paying college tuition.
*$8,000 for 1st-time homebuyers.
*state & local deductions for taxes paid on a new car.
*Up to $1,500 for home improvements to increase energy efficiency.

*An increase in the Earned Income Tax Credit.

*Expanded the Child Tax Credit.

*For those who work, the Making Work Pay tax credit gave $400/indiv & $800/couple.

*For those who lost their job, a 65% tax credit to help cover the cost of health care. The first $2,400 in unemployment benefits was tax-free.

*Up to $2,500 under the American Opportunity Credit for students & parents paying college tuition.

*$8,000 for 1st-time homebuyers.

*state & local deductions for taxes paid on a new car.

*Up to $1,500 for home improvements to increase energy efficiency.

(Go check your federal tax return paperwork before you reply that this isn't true & if you don't want to look like an ignorant moron, then stop watching a fake "news" station run by Roger Ailes, president of Fox "News" who used to be Nixon's campaign manager and ran campaign ads for Bush Sr. as well. ALL TRUE.

And if you vote Republican, all of this goes away and they'll give us the following:

1) Shoulder the American taxpayer with the burden of the gulf cleanup.
2) Allow companies to outsource MORE American jobs to other countries.
3) Extend the Bush tax cuts to the rich, which will increase the deficit to $4 trillion.
4) Privatize Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare.
5) More lies to take us into a war that kill American soldiers!

Posted by: camera_eye_11 | October 28, 2010 7:42 PM | Report abuse

12bar,

It won't be called default. It will be called benefits reduction and means testing.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 28, 2010 7:43 PM | Report abuse

It won't be called default.
--------------------------
It doesn't matter what WE call it. It's what our creditors call it. Default on ANY obligation of the U.S. will result in higher interest rates and if viewed seriously enough, would result in a collapse of our currency. For God's sake, don't even hint at the idea of default.

And if you have any sense, you will not wish for default, regardless of how much you would like to privatize social security.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 28, 2010 7:47 PM | Report abuse

Don't make fun of Somalia, it's a free country. No big gubmint, no problem with guns, RPGs are ok too; they have rugged individuals there that would make Ted Nugent soil his camo shorts. And not to gild the lilly, abortion is illegal, they even respect human life. Why I imagine everyone there is conservative, the liberals were killed a long time ago.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 28, 2010 7:50 PM | Report abuse

shrink2:

I'm willing to listen to your ideas.

lindalovejones:

If they de-fund HCR altogether, BAM!

Troll:

You'll understand, I hope, that some of us receiving Social Security would rather that NOT stop right away ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 28, 2010 7:53 PM | Report abuse

Don't make fun of Somalia, it's a free country. No big gubmint, no problem with guns, RPGs are ok too; they have rugged individuals there that would make Ted Nugent soil his camo shorts. And not to gild the lilly, abortion is illegal, they even respect human life. Why I imagine everyone there is conservative, the liberals were killed a long time ago.
----------------------------------
There you have it--a real life model for 21st century conservative society. No need to pay attention to the First Amendment. All the scary protesters with signs are six feet under. What's not to like?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 28, 2010 7:54 PM | Report abuse

Jake..selling insurance across state lines saves subscribers money by letting them buy substandard plans that are prohibited in the state they live in. There's no magic in the insurance model..it's the sum of covered charges divided by the number of subscribers, plus load for administration, capital charges, risk, and profit. Plans differ in costs based on the extent to which they are selective about who the cover, what they cover, and how much control they can exercise over provider charges....oh and how much profit they can realize from artful deception about the above relationships.

Posted by: dkdenze | October 28, 2010 7:54 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 28, 2010 "...There is no trust fund..."
= = = = = = = = =
No there is only a entitlement down-side up pyramid which, as Liam suggests, is massive at the top where we all will be some day soon...

...but, no check will ever bounce @ a FED bank as long as the off-shore printing presses keep on keepin' on...

We are the one's goin' to be bouncing and spinning if and when the Chinese and Russians stop buying Gold and the West panics and starts (already has in some scenarios) buying it back at 2-3k per ounce.

If we don't put a stop to the choke hold put on the Goose that lays Golden Eggs soon that the Salvation of Socialism Theology coalition @ 1600 Redistribution Ave is demanding, WE will be in that world of hurt foretold by many pundits.

Posted by: SpendNomore | October 28, 2010 7:54 PM | Report abuse

"It doesn't matter what WE call it. It's what our creditors call it. Default on ANY obligation of the U.S. will result in higher interest rates and if viewed seriously enough, would result in a collapse of our currency. For God's sake, don't even hint at the idea of default."

Whew, thanks for pulling me back. It was if a million voices cried out, and were suddenly silenced.

You never know who reads comment sections on blogs these days. Sorry Mr. Hu Jin Tao, just kidding.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 28, 2010 7:54 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 28, 2010 "...There is no trust fund..."
= = = = = = = = =
No there is only a entitlement down-side up pyramid which, as Liam suggests, is massive at the top where we all will be some day soon...

...but, no check will ever bounce @ a FED bank as long as the off-shore printing presses keep on keepin' on...

We are the one's goin' to be bouncing and spinning if and when the Chinese and Russians stop buying Gold and the West panics and starts (already has in some scenarios) buying it back at 2-3k per ounce.

If we don't put a stop to the choke hold put on the Goose that lays Golden Eggs soon that the Salvation of Socialism Theology coalition @ 1600 Redistribution Ave is demanding, WE will be in that world of hurt foretold by many pundits.

Posted by: SpendNomore | October 28, 2010 7:56 PM | Report abuse

Sorry, gild the lily, but you know what I meant. Somalia is not at all liberal, let alone libertarian, it is profoundly conservative. Jeepers, they are willing to protect their family (ok, clan) values with their lives.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 28, 2010 7:56 PM | Report abuse

It is baseball time, so I am off to fire up the Plasma. If you do not care for baseball, 30 Rock is on, preceded by Community, which is a unique quirky comedy show, with lots of droll characters. It is one of those shows that grows on you, once you catch on to the interrelationship of all those disparate personalities.

Good night and joy be with ye all. Last one left on here, please put out the lights and the cat.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 28, 2010 7:57 PM | Report abuse

"Sorry Mr. Hu Jin Tao, just kidding."

Not for long you won't be kidding. We do austerity on our own or our bankers will slowly tighten the money supply. They won't crash us, they will make us unable to choose another path.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 28, 2010 8:03 PM | Report abuse

"There you have it--a real life model for 21st century conservative society. No need to pay attention to the First Amendment. All the scary protesters with signs are six feet under. What's not to like?"

There, aren't ya glad I brought it up? It's like a weights been lifted and tribute given to the God of Democratic memes.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 28, 2010 8:04 PM | Report abuse

@troll,

You started out saying that SS checks were going to bounce and the reason they don't is because somehow fiat currency (that means the fed) was funneling money into SS. That is a paranoid view, one that is obviously incorrect, since the U.S. Treasury will NEVER bounce a check since that is U.S. default.

If you want to argue whether privatizing ss is a good idea, go ahead and argue it. But, don't go around spreading crazy ideas that SS checks are going to bounce. That's Area 51 territory.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 28, 2010 8:05 PM | Report abuse

dkdenze:

Insuring 10 congenital heart defects in one state is actually MORE expensive than insuring 500 congenital heart defects spread all over the whole country.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 28, 2010 8:06 PM | Report abuse

All this talk about social security being unstainable is nonsense. Social Security is nothing more than a public mechanism for regulating the flow of productivity from workers to nonworkers who've been excused from their work lives because of old age or disability. W/o it, old folks would have to depend on the direct largess of their children or charity, they would starve, or we'd have to shoot them out of their misery. However, if productivity is sufficient there's money to cash in personal savings at the time retirement income is needed and there's money for social security benefits...in the absence of adequate productivity, there's neither money for social security or for the liquidation of private securities, because in that situation it would be clearly a buyers' market and none would be protected. Better get out there and campaign for another stimulus bill so we can get some infrastructure improvements that would facilitate improved productivity...you know, like we've done before....roads, bridges, schools, that sort of thing. War materiel is nice, but it's so inefficient what with its only stimulative effect being that it has to be constantly replaced.

Posted by: dkdenze | October 28, 2010 8:07 PM | Report abuse

It's unfortunate that Obama wanted congress to concentrate on health care reform in lieu of the primary concern of the electorate....JOBS and the ECONOMY!!!
How many million are either unemployed and underemployed?
I have no sympathy for a clueless congress and administration!
Nov.2nd will inform them of the stupidity of their actions...


Posted by: SeniorVet | October 28, 2010 8:07 PM | Report abuse

Of course, TrollMcWingnut never used the word "bounce".

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 28, 2010 8:10 PM | Report abuse

12bar, I don't know, though will check in a little bit and retract and apologize if proven wrong, that I said checks will "bounce". I mentioned benefit cuts and means testing to sustain the program. Or, fiat currency to keep it unaltered, I don't care who hears me!

And I didn't advocate privatization. I advocated (looks around furtively) not taking the money in the first place.

Area 51, heat, no humidity and clean air. What's not to like!

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 28, 2010 8:17 PM | Report abuse

Again, what is there that I can give up? There is no money left in SS.

Again. What benefits? They don't exist.

here is no trust fund. Checks are not bouncing because fiat currency is being created. How long will those checks have any value? The party's over.
--------------------
These aren't your posts?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 28, 2010 8:27 PM | Report abuse

The funny thing is that in 25 years, the children of today's conservatives will not believe that there was ever a time when Americans went without basic health care.

Posted by: Keesvan | October 28, 2010 8:32 PM | Report abuse

Don't worry, Troll, you don't have to respond. I know what you meant to say--you want to argue the virtues of no government involvement in social security (pre FDR days). I'm not up for such an argument. It's a generational thing: young people have time to make money in the stock market, older folks no longer have the time. That's all assuming that people DO save money.

But, I have an investing strategy if SS is ever privatized. It will be great time to be in the stock market, while the bubble of new money rolls through. Then, better get out before the bubble bursts.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 28, 2010 8:37 PM | Report abuse

"checks are NOT bouncing"

That's what I thought that Troll said too. Some people must have a tough time with reading comprehension.

Posted by: clawrence12 | October 28, 2010 8:43 PM | Report abuse

You know, I'm against it, 'cause I really don't want to pay for your healthcare!

Posted by: jibe | October 28, 2010 8:59 PM | Report abuse

12BAR,

Ok, I looked and I did say "checks will not bounce," so I owe you an apology.

Though, in my defense, I was responding to this: "O.K. I get it. I thought there might be rioting in the streets if all those teabaggers, including Jake, weren't getting their monthly checks from Social Security. But you are saying the checks have stopped, or the checks are bouncing for insufficient funds, and everybody is fine with that. I guess I'll admit to being surprised."

It was you that introduced the idea. I had not yet introduced my solutions, namely either benefit cuts and means testing, or continued fiat currency creation ad infinitum.

In fufillment I'll go full Ethan2010.

TROLL MCWINGNUT APOLOGIZES TO 12BARBLUES FOR SAYING HE DID NOT WRITE "BOUNCING CHECKS" WHEN IN FACT HE DID." (Though it was in response to 12barblues bringing it up in the first place.)

I have no idea why people think i'm a last word freak.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 28, 2010 9:04 PM | Report abuse

O.K. I get it. I thought there might be rioting in the streets if all those teabaggers, including Jake, weren't getting their monthly checks from Social Security. But you are saying the checks have stopped, or the checks are bouncing for insufficient funds, and everybody is fine with that. I guess I'll admit to being surprised.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 28, 2010 7:12 PM

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 28, 2010 9:06 PM | Report abuse

American's don't know what is good for them. That's been reinforced by the polling for this election cycle that shows Republicans are going to make gains in the house and senate.

2012 will be a real good year for Democrats.

Posted by: zackool | October 28, 2010 9:15 PM | Report abuse

As an Independent leaning Republican who voted for Obama .... this is why I think that THE REPUBLICAN WILL WIN both Houses on Tuesday: 70% of us voters do not know what to do ... WITH THE PARTY THAT SAYS NO ... and the bitter partisanship that exists in politics ... so my vote goes Republican ... we put them in with the intent to VOTE THEM OUT IN 2012. It will be utterly foolish for us to vote Democrat and have the same gridlock for another 2 years ... So for those whose term comes due in 2012 ... Be forewarned. We are electing a party that does not deserve to win on merit. The Republicans played politics with our voting rights by failing to participate in the body politic ... and we are getting no where. Right now I don't even have a person or voice of reason and intellect to llok up to in the Rebulblican Party. Sad!! I will not be voting for the cheerleader in 2012!

To the Republicans and the Health Care Plan - I say - we are not voting you in to give us less .. so careless words like REPEAL will come back to haunt you in 2012. Also, maybe we would get a better plan like Canada has ... but not less ... the Health companies own the Republicans.

Posted by: amitchell13 | October 28, 2010 9:22 PM | Report abuse

It may be impossible to prove one way or the other but there's simply no doubt in my mind that whatever happens next Tuesday, Democrats would have gotten a much worse butt-kicking had they failed to pass that damned bill.

Posted by: CalD | October 28, 2010 9:27 PM | Report abuse

amitchell13, we won't have to "repeal" if the ROBERTS Supreme Court rules it un-Constitutional.

Posted by: clawrence12 | October 28, 2010 9:37 PM | Report abuse

If it's war the republicans want over health care reform, it's war they'll get....I'm tired of all congerss receiving lavish benefits that congress feels the real Americans shouldn't receive, but is good enough for them....this is tyranny plain and simple.....re-address it with outright violent anarchy....I'd rather the Arabs take over this country, invoke Sharia law, and behead every past and present congressman/woman for their traitorous behavior....blow thw whole country to flames!!!!

Posted by: bigisle1 | October 28, 2010 9:57 PM | Report abuse

If it's war the republicans want over health care reform, it's war they'll get....I'm tired of all congerss receiving lavish benefits that congress feels the real Americans shouldn't receive, but is good enough for them....this is tyranny plain and simple.....re-address it with outright violent anarchy....I'd rather the Arabs take over this country, invoke Sharia law, and behead every past and present congressman/woman for their traitorous behavior....blow thw whole country to flames!!!!

Posted by: bigisle1 | October 28, 2010 9:58 PM | Report abuse

So much for "all the violence comes from the right."

Posted by: clawrence12 | October 28, 2010 10:11 PM | Report abuse

CONTINUE LAUGHTER


Anyone with a brain and common sense can see the UTTER STUPIDITY of RAMMING THROUGH a FISCAL MESS in a DEPRESSION.

If you cannot -- you are beyond help. Quit, and get a job at McDonald's.

Posted by: russpoter | October 28, 2010 11:09 PM | Report abuse

The assumption in Greg's article seems to be that the people are upset by "the process". To be fair there is something to that. Obama's outline was none too courageous to begin with, and he cut a lot of deals with Big Pharma, the insurance companies and the providers that gutted any realistic cost savings possibilities.

Then instead of presenting his plan and using his (then considerable) bully pulpit to push it through Congress, he let Congress have at it, with the pretense that Republicans and Democrats with other ideas would have a chance to actually shape the bill. The only thing Congress did was delay the bill for months and add more and more vote buying baggage to it, ballooning the costs and disgusting the American people. Eventually it barely passed via "reconciliation", having used up almost every bit of energy in Washington for the better part of a year.

Now we are left with that horrible bill, a massive government mandated expansion of our inefficient health care system with no visible means of support. Health care costs are already rising, as is the number of uninsured as employers prefer to pay a cheap "fine" rather than pay for more expensive insurance. The whole thing comes to a head conveniently just after Obama's re-election run in 2013, probably the most carefully considered part of the bill.

For my part (and I don't think I'm alone here) I'm less disgusted by the process than I am the product. I support health care reform (single payer), but this bill is worse than the status quo ante. It's going to create an immense amount of chaos, and what's worse it's going to do so at a massive cost to anyone who pays for insurance currently as well as taxpayers and their children and grandchildren generally as it contributes mightily to the the deficit. Anyone who was in a position to vote on that bill should have seen these shortcomings easily.

The problem going forward is that few politicians will be able or willing to focus on the actual problems with this bill. Democrats will pretend that everything is just fine and that eventually people will be "educated" enough to appreciate it. Republicans will groan on about "socialism" without offering the Democrats any sort of opportunity to repair the it. Obama will veto any attempt to repeal his crowning "achievement". I fear for us all.

Posted by: robert17 | October 29, 2010 1:06 AM | Report abuse

Notice that Greg frames the argument between two goalposts: the bill was just centrist enough, or it was too far to the left. I suppose he can't conceive that it was not far enough to the left.

The public option was the most popular part of the bill. Obama and the centrists secretly dealt it away for corporate support. Liberals wanted the bill to kick in right away; centrists decided to put it off for five years for a better CBO score. At any point where the choice was capitulate or fight, centrists chose to capitulate.

Posted by: stonedone | October 29, 2010 8:44 AM | Report abuse

If the Dems had fought for a better health care bill they wouldn't be in this predicament. Instead of reform, all we received was watered down bill which enables PRIVATE insurance companies to bill the rest of us for the expenses of those previously insured. Surely the PRIVATE companies will now mark down our health insurance and lower their profits so that more people can be covered. HAHAHAHAHAHA, this the problem. Not in a million years will a private company do anything but charge us all more and increase their profits. We're all pissed because our insurance rates went up 20% again to pay for all those who now have to be covered and need very expensive health care. This status quo is not sustainable, 0% raise in salary, 20% raise in health insurance cost every year. Better believe we're all pissed about health insurance.

Posted by: WestOfTheMississippi | October 29, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

Why are Real Americans still responding to trolls like Joke and STRF (under whatever six names he happens to be using now)?

Don't feed the trolls, people!

Posted by: Observer691 | October 29, 2010 9:54 AM | Report abuse

"People like Doug Schoen, who got lots of attention by predicting health care would destroy Dems, will crow and chortle about the foolishness of liberal overreach." -- Greg Sargent


"Got lots of attention" ... "crow and chortle."

Yep, that's what passes for objectivity today in the mainstream media. This column might as well have been written by Andy Griffith.

Posted by: UponFurtherReview | November 1, 2010 8:20 AM | Report abuse

"People like Doug Schoen, who got lots of attention by predicting health care would destroy Dems, will crow and chortle about the foolishness of liberal overreach." -- Greg Sargent


"Got lots of attention" ... "crow and chortle."

Yep, that's what passes for objectivity today in the mainstream media. This column might as well have been written by Andy Griffith.

Posted by: UponFurtherReview | November 1, 2010 8:22 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company