Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

The Massa mishigas, health care politics and the Fix's cupcake rankings

We spent an hour this morning fielding your questions on topics as wide ranging as the impact of former Rep. Eric Massa's resignation to why former President (and Georgetown grad) was praising Syracuse during yesterday's Big East tournament. And, of course, our rankings of the best cupcake places in D.C. and New York City.

You can peruse the full transcript here. A few of our favorite questions and answers are below.

Q: Ethics D and R: Can the "ethics issues" of the last couple weeks be used to tarnish Speaker Pelosi et al? It seems to me that there were quick results: Once there was an ethics ruling, Rangel gave up his chairmanship; Massa was gone quite quickly. Am I forgetting or didn't Craig keep his positions a good bit longer; Vitter is still in the Senate and is running for reelection; Ensign; etc. Don't the facts undercut the criticisms? I guess the unfortunate follow up is -- does that matter?

A: Chris Cillizza: Well, perception matters -- a lot -- in politics.

And while any one of these issues would not necessarily hurt Democrats (and, by extension, Pelosi) when they happen in quick succession -- no matter what Pelosi did to deal with them -- in presents political peril.

All you need to do is look at the RNC's ad earlier this week featuring Pelosi in 2006/2007 promising an ethically clean and transparent Congress to see where Republicans are headed.

I am still skeptical that GOPers can make this election a referendum on Pelosi but they certainly seem to want to try.

Q. Reconciliation: Isn't blocking the health care reconciliation bill potentially bad politics for the GOP? Won't they look bad blocking a bill that eliminates the Cornhusker Compromise and all of the other sordid provisions they've been complaining about?" Once the Xmas Eve bill is approved in the House, health care reform is a reality, so it seems to me that no Republican would want to vote against a bill that would clean it up.

A. Chris Cillizza: Good question.

What Republicans are banking on is that public opinion, which has hardened in opposition to the bill in the last six months of or so, won't change in any substantial way whether or not the bill passes.

The White House -- in a memo sent to Capitol Hill yesterday -- makes the opposite argument, pointing out that the approval numbers for the bill have been trending slowly but surely upward since President Obama's state of the union speech.

Judging from my conversations with party strategists on both sides, the big sticking point for voters is not the provisions of the bill -- many of which they support -- but rather the cost, which could approach $1 trillion before it's all said and done.

The White House and Democrats in Congress have to figure out a way to sell the cost to the public if they want to transform attitudes about it in the electorate at large.

Q. Cupcakes: I had a (admittedly opening-day-free) cupcake from the Georgetown Cupcake in Bethesda and it tasted strongly of sour cream (which I assume they used in the icing). For my money, the best cupcake in DC is Baked and Wired in Georgetown.

A. Chris Cillizza: Can't believe I forgot Baked and Wired the (un)official cupcake sponsor of Fix Jr's 1st bday party.

Let me re-orient my ratings:

1. Magnolia Bakery

2. Hello Cupcake

3. Lavender Moon

4. Baked and Wired

5. Georgetown Cupcake

6. Buzz

By Chris Cillizza  |  March 12, 2010; 3:00 PM ET
Categories:  Live Fix  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Five days in May
Next: Health care vote: The final countdown

Comments

News Flash..
The U.S. Socialist Horse left the barn many years back.. and the door will never be closed.. even if we could chase the nag down...

Posted by: newbeeboy | March 15, 2010 3:28 PM | Report abuse

Don't underestimate the corrupt means peloony will use. Don't shortchange the Chicago way of the Capone admin.

They are going through tax records and interviewing escorts. Anything it takes.

Posted by: Moonbat | March 15, 2010 1:14 AM | Report abuse

The Hill has now 35 democrats going toward no - which would be 212 voting no at this point.

According to the Hill again, there are 72 undecided democrats.


Many of those democrats will probably vote no if they could - meaning if Nancy does not have the votes, and calls a vote anyway - she could release the democrats to vote as they wished - many democrats, seeking a chance to vote no, would vote no.

That may have the vote 282 - 149 against the health care bill.


That is about the reality of the situation right now.

.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 15, 2010 1:07 AM | Report abuse

Psa s for moped helmets.

Health care solved.

Now if only everyone would inflate their tires properly.

Posted by: Moonbat | March 15, 2010 12:59 AM | Report abuse

The political calculation for the democrats who voted NO the first time is simple - they already have a pass on the 30 second attack ads - they are free and clear - why should they switch back to vote yes??


In a way, these democrats are looked as potential switch votes, but they have the hardest way to go.

There are perhaps dozens of other democrats who would prefer to vote against the bill - is that any way to pass legislation ???

Obama is completely out of his mind.

At this point, Obama is so out of touch with the people, and out of touch with his own party, he should resign. In any other country, the vote in the House would not be on the health care bill, but a confidence vote in Obama - and Obama would lose miserably.


.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 15, 2010 12:56 AM | Report abuse

It is clear that democrats do not have the votes to pass the health care bill in the House - the political risks are just too great for the moderate democrats - and the rewards are not their either.

Obama has made several critical errors this year - Obama has only himself to blame.

There are several counts out there - however it would be useful to have more info on the web - one has the No votes at at least 211 right now - the Hill paper has as many as 72 democrats still undecided - an unbelievable number.

72 democrats undecided? That may be high, however it indicated how bad Obama's position is.

At this point, just perhaps 5 - but definitely if 10 democrats become firm NOs - the health care bill will be finished - and it will bring relief to many in the democratic party. At this point, they should get together and give the bill a final death, just to be done with it all - and to avoid all the threats and cruel behavior which is certain to come by week's end.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 15, 2010 12:37 AM | Report abuse

High quality universal health care is not a slippery slope toward socialism, it is Socialism. That is what I am saying.

If we were to value everyones' life equally, with our (1) ability to force the rule of law and (2) create and spend money, we would change the world.

Posted by: shrink2 | March 14, 2010 11:15 PM
---------------------------------
You write in a tantalizing way. The first sentence I understand. The second sentence begs for more.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 11:44 PM | Report abuse

High quality universal health care is not a slippery slope toward socialism, it is Socialism. That is what I am saying.

If we were to value everyones' life equally, with our (1) ability to force the rule of law and (2) create and spend money, we would change the world.

Posted by: shrink2 | March 14, 2010 11:15 PM | Report abuse

Obviously, the count is on the edge. Cross your fingers and toes.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 11:00 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: DDAWD | March 14, 2010 10:49 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: SuzyCcup | March 14, 2010 10:42 PM | Report abuse

"You seem to be saying that stratified healthcare (care for those who can afford it and none for those who cannot) is a fait accompli for large populations. Is that what you are saying?"


No. That is not what I am saying.

Posted by: shrink2 | March 14, 2010 10:21 PM
-------------------------------
I am not be argumentative. I am just trying to understand your entire argument.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 10:41 PM | Report abuse

"You seem to be saying that stratified healthcare (care for those who can afford it and none for those who cannot) is a fait accompli for large populations. Is that what you are saying?"


No. That is not what I am saying.

Posted by: shrink2 | March 14, 2010 10:21 PM | Report abuse

If the dems would only realize that the defeat of this bill would be a win-win for everybody, including themselves, they could hold the vote tomorrow and let it go down one last time. The country could finally move on to something more important, like jobs maybe?

I'll bet every democratic House member has lost countless hours of sleep wondering why they voted for Nancy in the first place.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | March 14, 2010 10:12 PM | Report abuse

The market ahould be completely outside healthcare and profiteering on basic healthcare should be a capital crime. For-profit healthcare is murder.

Posted by: Noacoler | March 14, 2010 8:46 PM


Noacoler, I hope you never get sick like 12BB did. I doubt you'll have the same feelings if you do.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | March 14, 2010 9:05 PM
---------------------------
Suzy,

I'm glad for treatment but I don't demand that the hospital and clinic be "for profit". Non profit would be just fine for me. I'm leaving the doc out since I can't figure how independent docs can be other than for profit.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 10:09 PM | Report abuse

...once this health care bill gets passed.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 14, 2010 8:32 PM


And when is that, Mr Dawd?

Posted by: SuzyCcup | March 14, 2010 9:41 PM | Report abuse

The market ahould be completely outside healthcare and profiteering on basic healthcare should be a capital crime. For-profit healthcare is murder.

Posted by: Noacoler | March 14, 2010 8:46 PM


Noacoler, I hope you never get sick like 12BB did. I doubt you'll have the same feelings if you do.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | March 14, 2010 9:05 PM | Report abuse

I wonder how the business model will change once this health care bill gets passed.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 14, 2010 8:32 PM


Mr Dawd, is that called "cloud thinking?" You know, like "cloud computing?" You need to go back and work on your "thesis."

Posted by: SuzyCcup | March 14, 2010 9:01 PM | Report abuse

It should come as no surprise that preventive care is so deprecated in a free-market HC system. There isn't as much money to be made telling people how to take care of themselves as there is in treating people who haven't. In fact insurers are motivated to see us get cancer and diabetes, since that's where the real shareholder value kicks in. Better still to not pay for their treatment, but drop them when they get sick after they've paid years of premiums commensurate with cancer care.

Ever see nutrition information ads anymore? Nit in decades. But go to one of the countries with health- instead of market-driven HC and there they are. All over VN I see public information campaigns for infant nutrition, motorcycle helmets, etc.

The market ahould be completely outside healthcare and profiteering on basic healthcare should be a capital crime. For-profit healthcare is murder.

Posted by: Noacoler | March 14, 2010 8:46 PM | Report abuse

@shrink wrote We don’t get to choose some other country’s health care system.
----------------------
True, but we can understand what the principal drivers and differences.

I'm assuming that the fact the largest populations (China, India and U.S.) do not have universal access is a significant fact. You seem to be saying that stratified healthcare (care for those who can afford it and none for those who cannot) is a fait accompli for large populations. Is that what you are saying?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 8:43 PM | Report abuse

Saying insurance companies have an interest in the long term health of their clients is like saying Rio Tinto has a long term interest in the environment.

They change their names, they go bankrupt and then change their names, they do not have long term interests. Bernie Madoff did not realize he could not do it by himself.

Posted by: shrink2 | March 14, 2010 8:43 PM | Report abuse

I wonder how the business model will change once this health care bill gets passed. Insurance companies are always have the incentive to keep their customers healthy. The question is how much do you invest in this?

Also, the relationship between increased doctor visits and improved health is speculative. It's only a few data points on that chart. So who knows?

Posted by: DDAWD | March 14, 2010 8:32 PM | Report abuse

We don’t get to choose some other country’s health care system. We are not magic.
If something over there is better than ours, it is because of conditions we can’t just fabricate. Our population is massive and it is fractious (it has various sub cultures that truly hate each other, always has, always will?) All of our population growth comes from in-migration.

No one wants to talk about other priorities. People fret education $$ have to be opposed to health care. We are decadent. We spend billions on nothing, money for…oh…lets not go there.

So,

I am saying we can afford health care for all, we can, of course we can.

But, if we go there, UHC will change American life like nothing in living memory.

People must not think health care for all will somehow pay for itself. It won’t make other things cheaper or easier and best of all, austerity is a good thing.

Posted by: shrink2 | March 14, 2010 8:31 PM | Report abuse

If they can show an improvement in bottom line by investing in primary care for the benefits of reducing more expensive interventionist medicine, then everyone is a winner. I don't know if any studies have been done that show this is a good investment, but I'm sure a good economist could figure something out. And it's not hard to implement. Just knock a little off the premiums for those who see their docs regularly.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 14, 2010 7:32 PM
----------------------------------
Don't you find it curious that insurance companies charge EXTRA for preventative care?

You can say what you want about insurance companies, but one thing they understand is their cost structure. If preventative care actually saved them money, they could use that savings to price their policies a little less to get more business.

I've heard that companies are not incented to do this since their customers don't stay with them long enough for the benefits of preventative care to be realized.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 8:01 PM | Report abuse

"You will hear about it from this liberal. I am one of the happy survivors of cancer treatment so I have no complaints (so far, anyway). I'm just glad I had the $85,000 to pay for the treatment (no chemo), 10 years ago. I'm happy as hell to be here but it didn't come for free. What the hell, money doesn't mean much when you have cancer.

Posted by: 12BarBlues"

Congrats. Glad things turned out well.

But yeah, no one is disputing that the US has good outcomes when you do actually treat the disease. It's a matter actually having the financial resources for treating the diseases.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 14, 2010 7:49 PM | Report abuse

"I've become somewhat skeptical about a lot of things I used to take as common sense. One is that it's the overuse of the system that drives up costs. Then how does the Japanese and most of European systems where their citizens access the system more than we do make sense?

Posted by: 12BarBlues"

Well, you're seeing doctors a lot, but it could be that they are getting great preventative care which is relatively cheap. If you come to my apartment, I can measure your blood pressure for free. And knowing that your BP is rising early on will allow you to make lifestyle changes. But when you have full blown primary hypertension, that means you take expensive drugs for the rest of your life. So if you can stave that off by having regular doctor visits, it's much cheaper.

It's pretty well known in the medical community that preventative care is more effective and cheaper than interventional medicine, but there doesn't seem to be much discussion in how to shift our system in that direction. I think insurance companies should be the ones to take the lead in this. If they can show an improvement in bottom line by investing in primary care for the benefits of reducing more expensive interventionist medicine, then everyone is a winner. I don't know if any studies have been done that show this is a good investment, but I'm sure a good economist could figure something out. And it's not hard to implement. Just knock a little off the premiums for those who see their docs regularly.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 14, 2010 7:32 PM | Report abuse

In this the US is superb. And hence you don't hear about it from liberals.

Posted by: Moonbat | March 14, 2010 7:00 PM
-------------------------------
You will hear about it from this liberal. I am one of the happy survivors of cancer treatment so I have no complaints (so far, anyway). I'm just glad I had the $85,000 to pay for the treatment (no chemo), 10 years ago. I'm happy as hell to be here but it didn't come for free. What the hell, money doesn't mean much when you have cancer.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 7:18 PM | Report abuse

@shrink,

I think I understand your point about the tradeoff between universal access and rationing. Are you also saying that, in the U.S., even if we pass universal access, we will NOT address rationing, so we will have the worst of both worlds?

And what is causing this tradeoff to exist here (and not so much for other countries)? The size of our population? Please expound a little on this, if you don't mind.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 7:14 PM | Report abuse

family time, I'll get back to this later

Posted by: shrink2 | March 14, 2010 7:11 PM | Report abuse

"Rationing of healthcare for the affluent or insured can be accomplished, but only if the underclass goes without healthcare. Is that what you mean?"

No. Affluent people can have whatever they want*, but if everybody in a country like ours gets top shelf health care, rationing has to happen - for everyone. That is socialism. We go there, we are going to pay and pay and pay. People travel here now for health care? Just see what happens if this giant country has UHC.

*happiness, redemption, there are many things money can't buy

This is pretty simple.

Posted by: shrink2 | March 14, 2010 7:07 PM | Report abuse

Is anyone else getting these annoying error messages when you submit a post?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 7:00 PM


Good job, 37. That'll teach him!

Posted by: SuzyCcup | March 14, 2010 7:06 PM | Report abuse

ting we can't ration it rationally and we will become the world's first health care centered economy.


Posted by: shrink2 | March 14, 2010 6:46 PM
----------------------
Very powerful sentence.

Let me see if I understand you--healthcare for everyone comes at the cost of rationing for all. Rationing of healthcare for the affluent or insured can be accomplished, but only if the underclass goes without healthcare. Is that what you mean?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 6:57 PM

-------------------------
Let me write that properly:

Let me see if I understand you--healthcare for everyone comes at the cost of rationing for all. Rationing of healthcare for the affluent or insured can be AVOIDED, but only if the underclass goes without healthcare. Is that what you mean?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 7:03 PM | Report abuse

Is anyone else getting these annoying error messages when you submit a post?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 7:00 PM


Try health care for PC's. That should solve your problem.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | March 14, 2010 7:03 PM | Report abuse

Life expectency is about the worst measure as it doesn't control for diet or violence. A better comparison is life after cancer or some feature of actual health treatment. In this the US is superb. And hence you don't hear about it from liberals.

Posted by: Moonbat | March 14, 2010 7:00 PM | Report abuse

Is anyone else getting these annoying error messages when you submit a post?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 7:00 PM | Report abuse

The question is how America plans to pay for health care for everybody.

Posted by: shrink2 | March 14, 2010 6:46 PM


America can't. That's why the democrats' health care plan has failed. Socialism may look good on paper to liberals, but most Americans look beyond that and realize it fails in reality.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | March 14, 2010 6:59 PM | Report abuse

The back channel payment systems are bankrupting us. Firemen are really, really expensive. They are delivering primary and even preventive care. The first responder system we have is a sacred cow.

It is a huge fig leaf too, medical care as an emergency is free, but is not. Even smart people think cost shifts are wonkish, so they must not be central to the problem.

Americans like to pay for first responder systems, they like to pay for law enforcement and corrections. So guess where health care costs are shifting?

It is socialism not by another name, but by no name.



Posted by: shrink2 | March 14, 2010 6:57 PM | Report abuse

ting we can't ration it rationally and we will become the world's first health care centered economy.


Posted by: shrink2 | March 14, 2010 6:46 PM
----------------------
Very powerful sentence.

Let me see if I understand you--healthcare for everyone comes at the cost of rationing for all. Rationing of healthcare for the affluent or insured can be accomplished, but only if the underclass goes without healthcare. Is that what you mean?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 6:57 PM | Report abuse

12BB, one thing interesting about that graph you posted. The fat lines seem to be producing the best results. (the ones where people see the doctors more)

This makes sense to me. If people see doctors more often, they get better preventative care which means less expensive medicines and procedures will be required.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 14, 2010 6:23 PM
---------------------------------
It does look like Japanese citizens access their HC system more than 12 times/yr and spend 1/3 of U.S. and live longer.

I've become somewhat skeptical about a lot of things I used to take as common sense. One is that it's the overuse of the system that drives up costs. Then how does the Japanese and most of European systems where their citizens access the system more than we do make sense?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 6:51 PM | Report abuse

The question is not whether the middle class with a health care benefit will have, over a lifetime, more or less expensive health care. It will be less expensive.

The question is how America plans to pay for health care for everybody.

Other huge countries cut the underclass loose, they live hard lives and then they suffer and die. Starving crazy people wander naked in the streets (everybody walking by just wishes they had not seen what they just saw). Little kids die of nose infections that turn to sepsis. No emergency room.

Now if we want to commit to the current system, we will continue to pay top dollar for bad outcome care. If we create an efficient new system, we have to ration care at all levels. We go like the countries our size, we will degenerate to a stratified system of care that lets the underclass suffer its brutal fate.

We have yet to confront the problem we face. We can not afford top notch health care for everyone unless we ration it rationally (Aaak, Socialism!) or pay an extraordinary portion of the gdp, something that has never been done. I am betting we can't ration it rationally and we will become the world's first health care centered economy.


Posted by: shrink2 | March 14, 2010 6:46 PM | Report abuse

Whether or not it passes, the American gross domestic product is going to move toward more and more health care production. This bill will would help define the terms of that movement, but it also mandates the progression.
------------------------------
What do you see as the natural barrier? Demographics? Surely there must be something that curbs it (eventually) or we will spend everything on healthcare and exist for no other purpose.

We don't talk about cost control but we have it. I know women going through chemo who didn't take anti-nausea drugs (very expensive), were not even told of them, all because their insurance didn't cover them. Just one small example. But, it's clear that all the cost control measures that do exist (however subterranean they may be) are not enough to curb the astounding growth in costs.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 6:44 PM | Report abuse

...This bill will would help define the terms of that movement...

Posted by: shrink2 | March 14, 2010 6:08 PM

Yes, Shrink, that's exactly why no one wants it. Movement in the wrong direction.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | March 14, 2010 6:34 PM | Report abuse

I don't think we have ever suffered through a press secretary as daft as the current issue.

Posted by: Moonbat | March 14, 2010 6:13 PM


Daft??? Surely you meant stupid.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | March 14, 2010 6:30 PM | Report abuse

12BB, one thing interesting about that graph you posted. The fat lines seem to be producing the best results. (the ones where people see the doctors more)

This makes sense to me. If people see doctors more often, they get better preventative care which means less expensive medicines and procedures will be required.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 14, 2010 6:23 PM | Report abuse

I don't think we have ever suffered through a press secretary as daft as the current issue.

Posted by: Moonbat | March 14, 2010 6:13 PM | Report abuse

Whether or not it passes, the American gross domestic product is going to move toward more and more health care production. This bill will would help define the terms of that movement, but it also mandates the progression.

No bill will return the issues to some other process, but it sure would not help solve the problems we face.

Cost controls are something we have not been able to talk about because it means a national conversation about who does not get what they want and more important, that others will not pay for what they did not get by some other means. We don't have those communication lines.

Posted by: shrink2 | March 14, 2010 6:08 PM | Report abuse

This is politics and I, you, we, do not have the ability to control health care costs. It isn't going to happen. This country is one huge entitlement.

Posted by: shrink2 | March 14, 2010 5:30 PM

Ok Shrink2, so what's your point? The health care bill should be passed because the country is already one big entitlement?

Posted by: SuzyCcup | March 14, 2010 5:48 PM | Report abuse

This is politics and I, you, we, do not have the ability to control health care costs.
--------------------------------
Can you explain this further?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 5:36 PM | Report abuse

We are not like any little country.
We are huge. We don't have the Germany option, the Canadian nor any other. We are the third largest country, after China and India, then comes Indonesia, Brazil, Russia, Pakistan and then Japan. Comparing our health care to other countries is only interesting, it is not serious. There is history and culture. Idealized policy debates are over. This is politics and I, you, we, do not have the ability to control health care costs. It isn't going to happen. This country is one huge entitlement.

Posted by: shrink2 | March 14, 2010 5:30 PM | Report abuse

obama's next book for his faithful flock. Sure to be a best seller.

http://www.weirdomatic.com/wp-content/pictures/2007/01/ar1_resize.jpg

Posted by: SuzyCcup | March 14, 2010 4:14 PM | Report abuse

obama tells democrats not to worry about any election consequences over the health care bill. Look at this picture, he says. If this little guy can make it, so can you.

http://globalnerdy.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/living-dangerously.jpg


did he make it or not?

Posted by: SuzyCcup | March 14, 2010 3:57 PM | Report abuse

While we are just daydreaming today, I can think of a way to dramatically and quickly lower HC costs.

1. Abolish all middlemen (insurance companies and government).

2. Everybody pay their own costs.

3. Watch demand for high cost medical care go to zero.

4. Watch demand for all healthcare drop dramatically.

5. Watch prices for services drop like a rock while doctors and hospitals try to find a price that people can pay.

6. Watch a dramatic contraction in the HC industry while the doctors and hospitals go bankrupt trying to find customers.

7. Watch people die during the transition.

But, if you don't care about suffering, it would work.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 3:57 PM | Report abuse

Reid says that all of the countries got serious about cost control only after mandating universal health care.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | March 14, 2010 3:29 PM
---------------------------------
Every ounce of my business sense says this is right. Only when you have skin in the game do you get serious about lowering costs.

Thanks for the info about the types of systems. Most are hybrids, ours is a hybrid. But, it is the U.S. who spends twice as much as the next highest spender (per capita), with less access and with only average life expectancy.

We can take the point of view that we can't do anything, it's just too hard, complicated and expensive to get from "here" to "there". That's not my choice, but I understand people who have just given up on improving the system and just want to stick with the present system.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 3:49 PM | Report abuse

It will be a real pleasure to see obama lose again this week. Looks like another "Chicago Olympics" style embarrassment for him. obama is getting really good at this.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | March 14, 2010 3:46 PM | Report abuse

You got to wonder what kind of dope press secretary Gibbs is. His statement below welcoming the prospect that the midterms would be a referendum on health care makes you wonder if anybody on obama's staff has brains. Duh, Mr Gibbs, did you forget Massachusetts already?

"Earlier on "Fox News Sunday," Gibbs predicted that by this time next week the health-care bill will be "the law of the land," and he welcomed the prospect that the 2010 midterm elections would be a referendum on health-care reform."

Posted by: SuzyCcup | March 14, 2010 3:35 PM | Report abuse

12BB, an "Atlantic" contributor, T.R. Reid, has categorized the HC systems of 23 industrialized nations. Many have regulated but private insurance and most have physicians operating in the [relatively] free market. Switzerland, Japan, Netherlands, and Germany insure through the private markets, but they are regulated, as the SB intends to do here. UK is socialized: think VA for all. Canada has public insurance and private physicians: think Medicaid for all.

Reid says that all of the countries got serious about cost control only after mandating universal health care.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | March 14, 2010 3:29 PM | Report abuse

Pelosi will be on her knees this week begging for the five votes she needs to pass the health care bill without a direct vote (clearly unconstitutional). She'll fail.

Her Slaughter trick would result in a bill that would be overturned within three days by the Supreme Court. Scalia would love to write the majority opinion on this one. I would even expect one of the lib members to join the conservatives on the court for a 6-3 ruling.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | March 14, 2010 3:27 PM | Report abuse

actually, that was a fine definition. I was thinking of the whole parabola for some reason, not just the right half.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 14, 2010 3:22 PM | Report abuse

Still five votes short today. Starting to look like intrade is a good bet.

Posted by: Moonbat | March 14, 2010 12:04 PM

The health care contract has fallen to about 59 cents on intrade. Intrade has had a 100% prediction accuracy when the share price goes (and stays) above 80 cents a share. Moonbat, intrade is starting to look good only if you are shorting the health care contract. I wouldn't buy any shares and go long. You'll be a big loser.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | March 14, 2010 3:20 PM | Report abuse

shrink2 wrote it isn't like excess health spending will cut into Americans' food and shelter.
---------------------------------
Maybe not for the insured, but it will cut into food and shelter for the uninsured. The uninsured will debate whether to fill a prescription for $120 or eat. The uninsured will debate whether to go to the doctor for $500 or eat.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 3:15 PM | Report abuse

That was a dumb definition. What I mean by HC costs going parabolic is

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 3:04 PM

The libs talk about rising health care costs. What about the HUGE cost of the health care bill itself? See the CNN article below.

"In fact, it appears that it would require the Treasury to borrow almost 40 cents of every dollar in new spending the bill requires."

http://money.cnn.com/2010/03/12/news/economy/debt_health_care.fortune/index.htm

Posted by: SuzyCcup | March 14, 2010 3:12 PM | Report abuse

I've posted this before, but they say repetition is good for the soul (except when it comes to 37th).

I really recommend this graph which shows a comparison of industrialized countries' HC costs and outcomes.

You HAVE to enlarge the graph to be able to read it. It's really worth the effort. (There is a "click to enlarge" in red, then you have to enlarge it again)

http://blogs.ngm.com/.a/6a00e0098226918833012876a6070f970c-800wi

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 3:09 PM | Report abuse

That was a dumb definition. What I mean by HC costs going parabolic is

Costs used to go up somewhere are 5-6% a year. Now they are going up 40% a year (if you believe Blue Cross).

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 3:04 PM | Report abuse

parabolic? like U shaped?

Posted by: DDAWD | March 14, 2010 2:37 PM
---------------------------
Meaning like a hockey stick. Maybe it's the wrong word, but I use it to mean when a trend moves from a linear progression to a geometric progression.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 3:01 PM | Report abuse

We may drive around less, renovate less, live in smaller houses stuffed with less stuff. This may be a price America is willing to pay in order to avoid the bugaboo: socialized medicine.


Posted by: shrink2 | March
------------------------------------
Other prices we will pay: less military spending and less education spending, by government. Another subtle price we will pay is more kowtowing to China as they finance our out of control HC costs.

BTW, I was not aware that Switzerland had a free-market delivered HC system. You know this?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 2:58 PM | Report abuse

This morning on Kaiser HealthNews, the results of the following study predicts what will happen to uncompensated costs (meaning people who can't pay) with and without HCR reform. The last sentence says that the numbers of uninsured (and uncompensated costs) will go up without reform.

Urban Institute: The Cost Of Uncompensated Care With And Without Health Reform – This report analyzes various health bills. "The cost of uncompensated care will fall from $62.1 billion in 2009 to $46.6 billion in 2019 under the Senate bill, and to $36.5 billion in 2019 with the House bill. Without reform, the cost of uncompensated care will increase to between $107 and $141 billion in 2019, depending on growth in the economy and health care costs. ... Without health reform, the number of uninsured and the amount of uncompensated care will grow substantially. This will translate into increased pressure on state and local government to finance the growing cost of the uninsured" (Holahan and Garrett, 3/9)

http://www.urban.org/uploadedpdf/412045_cost_of_uncompensated.pdf

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

There is Switzerland, but comparing us to them is kind of like comparing Edina to the Twin Cities, Great Neck to Queens, Shaker Heights to...you know, a tiny, homogeneous, rich enclave to a place that is huge, diverse and lets say, not just rich.

Yesterday I read 40% of people working full time jobs in this country have less than $10,000 in retirement savings, essentially nothing saved. We are not Swiss.

But I am wondering why we should be worried about 30% of gdp on health care? We could spend less on a single payer system, but so what? As long as the money stays home and circulates, what is wrong with spending more on health care and less on other stuff? In terms of hierarchies of need, it isn't like excess health spending will cut into Americans' food and shelter.

We may drive around less, renovate less, live in smaller houses stuffed with less stuff. This may be a price America is willing to pay in order to avoid the bugaboo: socialized medicine.


Posted by: shrink2 | March 14, 2010 2:37 PM | Report abuse

parabolic? like U shaped?

Posted by: DDAWD | March 14, 2010 2:37 PM | Report abuse

So if the country spends lets say 30% of gdp on health care 15 years from now (speaking of betting, I'll be betting a lot of money on this), ...

Posted by: shrink2 | March 14, 2010 1:36 PM
----------------------------------
This is what worries me, too. Healthcare costs has gone parabolic and present evidence confirms the trend is continuing. Does anyone see any evidence (not predictions, but actual evidence that is occurring today) that the trend is flattening or declining?

The government today is the payer of 50% of total HC costs (isn't that correct?). Spiraling HC costs aren't just the problem of business or individuals, they are the problem of taxpayers. As individuals and businesses drop health insurance, as this will surely be the result of skyrocketing costs, the government will be paying even more of the total HC costs.

Since there are many industrialized countries who are managing HC costs better than we do and have universal coverage, it makes sense to model the best of those practices.

I cannot think of a single industrialized country who has an effectively-run, modern, free-market HC delivery system, cheap enough for most of their citizens to access, and costing in the aggregate a reasonable cost to the country. Can you?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 2:11 PM | Report abuse

12BB and KOZ, thanks for a conversation worth reading on a Sunday morning.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | March 14, 2010 10:59 AM
-------------------------------------------
[bow, bow to thundering applause]

Moonbat and I are sorry we ran you all out of here. When we're talking about making money, or more accurately, LOSING money, we have to exchange trading tips.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 1:55 PM | Report abuse

Democrats will pass this health care bill or they do not deserve to govern. Republicans can not stop this bill. Only democrats can do so. They did do so in '94 and if they do so again I will not vote democratic again for the rest of my life.

Posted by: Opa2 | March 14, 2010 1:46 PM | Report abuse

To pass the Health Care Industry Stimulus Act, it is getting larded up with more and more money, naturally. This is an astonishing commitment of resources, both public and private. Fortunately, it is not money down a rat hole, it all stays home. But producing and consuming health care is going to put a lot industries built on *disposable* income out of business.

For me, a capitalism v socialism argument is irrelevant. We have an amalgamation of the two and that won't change. History shows great civilizations are destroyed by the decadence of their populations, mirrored in the leaders they elect, or tolerate. Bluntly, people who pretend to work hard will find employers can only pretend to pay them.

So if the country spends lets say 30% of gdp on health care 15 years from now (speaking of betting, I'll be betting a lot of money on this), will that mean we are more decadent or less decadent? Will we be a stronger or a weaker civitas?

Posted by: shrink2 | March 14, 2010 1:36 PM | Report abuse

Still five votes short today. Starting to look like intrade is a good bet.

Posted by: Moonbat | March 14, 2010 12:04 PM | Report abuse

The entry door for stooges is labeled " IQ under 70".

Posted by: Moonbat | March 14, 2010 11:57 AM | Report abuse

12BB and KOZ, thanks for a conversation worth reading on a Sunday morning.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | March 14, 2010 10:59 AM | Report abuse

Posted by mooned:

"I choose ten percent loss as my loss limit. When it drops below this ( or below the new floor after it has gone above ten percent gain) I decide to sell. I double check to see if it has broken through the bottom bollinger band for 3 months. Then it's definate. ..."

...and then I wake up and gather my 15 smashed aluminum soda cans to take to Piggly Wiggly. After that, it's hanging out at the McDonalds inside Wal-Mart. Then it's back home to listen to Rush on my Bake-lite AM-only radio...

Wait, I get it now--

"You're traveling through another dimension, a dimension not only of sight and sound but of mind. A journey into a wondrous land whose boundaries are that of imagination. That's the signpost up ahead -your next stop, the Twilight Zone!"

All the best.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | March 14, 2010 9:17 AM | Report abuse

Wow, zook is actually capable of having a conversation. Too bad he won't do it more often, but a little is better than nothing, I guess.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 14, 2010 1:57 AM | Report abuse

I will of course have to deny that to maintain my sterling reputation.

Posted by: Moonbat | March 13, 2010 11:38 PM
-------------------------------------
Don't worry, it's only we two. Discussing technical momentum trading is probably pretty dweebie for most folks. Except those of us who make money that way!

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 14, 2010 12:24 AM | Report abuse

I will of course have to deny that to maintain my sterling reputation.

Posted by: Moonbat | March 13, 2010 11:38 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for the constructive conversation.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 11:22 PM | Report abuse

For some reason the iPhone double posts on occasion.

It seems this discussion has scared off the usual gang of idiots who post here. I know a certain all night poster has a deep seated fear of economics so I will yeild the floor.

Posted by: Moonbat | March 13, 2010 11:06 PM | Report abuse

I think I better get more disciplined. It's definitely dumb to ride the things all the way down. I've sure done that a few times.


A psychological block you must overcome. After 20 tails in a row a heads must be next right? Nope. Still 50/50.

You may find it interesting to know I play blackjack. By the book. I have memorized every combination and have reduced the house edge to just 3 percent. Then I found a strategy that claims a series of runs and probabilites can improve your wins. Turns out after a few "proof by simulation" that doubling your bet after a win or after three losses is optimal. I used it and went home very happy. My friend who was with me thought i was a genius as he won too.

Posted by: Moonbat | March 13, 2010 10:57 PM | Report abuse

I've traded KOPN a few times with good results, too. Don't know the rest of your symbols.

I like your system. It's a little different than mine (in the details only), but basically the same. We both buy on technicals and sell on profits (or get stopped out). We both buy a set amount of dollars and then follow the system. It takes discipline to follow the system, but I think it gets easier with time, don't you.

I used to trade with a partner, who is a very smart guy and a good friend, but he drove me crazy. He never wanted to follow any certain system--he always wanted to "think about it" when it was time to buy or sell. I'd always say "we won't know one thing more in the next 10 minutes than we know now". Anyway, we quit trading together after a while, but he's still an outstanding friend.

I agree with the "second exciting girlfriend". LOL.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 10:56 PM | Report abuse

I think I better get more disciplined. It's definitely dumb to ride the things all the way down. I've sure done that a few times.


A psychological block you must overcome. After 20 tails in a row a heads must be next right? Nope. Still 50/50.

You may find it interesting to know I play blackjack. By the book. I have memorized every combination and have reduced the house edge to just 3 percent. Then I found a strategy that claims a series of runs and probabilites can improve your wins. Turns out after a few "proof by simulation" that doubling your bet after a win or after three losses is optimal. I used it and went home very happy. My friend who was with me thought i was a genius as he won too.

Posted by: Moonbat | March 13, 2010 10:53 PM | Report abuse

I don't pay much attention to the numeric price. I usually buy about 5-10 k worth depending on the volatility. I am a little more cautious about the under 10s. But they also go up fast too. There are several I buy in cycles. The most I lose is about 1000 on any one but I have made over 5000 gain on several. I carry 20-30 at a time plus cash depending on overall market health. If health care passes I will go much heavier into cash for awhile if any slip.

I like dxyn. Cien. Kopn. Gbx artg and made a killing on isrg.

Once purchased I only watch the ones closely that trigger the alert. That makes it manageable.

But they have burned me on occasion. They are like a second girlfriend. Unreliable but exciting and rewarding albeit dangerous too.

Posted by: Moonbat | March 13, 2010 10:41 PM | Report abuse

I don't actually put an auto stop because if it's the first or second day I may ignore the rules. I use an alert from yahoo instead.
----------------------------
That makes sense. It's a good idea to ignore it for a few days and let it settle back into its trading range. Then set the stop. (It's maddening to buy one day and get stopped out the next.)

I think I better get more disciplined. It's definitely dumb to ride the things all the way down. I've sure done that a few times.

Oh, do you buy under $5 stocks? I would love to hear how someone can trade those puppies. I like stocks priced say from $7 or so up to $25, with small float, but fairly decent daily volume (so my trades just get lost in the noise).

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 10:13 PM | Report abuse

I don't actually put an auto stop because if it's the first or second day I may ignore the rules. I use an alert from yahoo instead.

Yahoo also has bollinger bands in it's advanced charts. If you examine them at three months you can see whether the price breaks through up (buy) or down ( sell). I augment this with the ten percent rule and on occasion a too sluggish rule if something is too flat.

If after two or three days the stock has not recovered and still sinking it is gone. I usually have a feeling for it by then. After two days above the mark, I readjust the warnings and begin again, permanantly locking in that gain.

I will never be burned again on the downside. I used to hope that it would eventually come back and hang on white knuckled.

Hope is for chumps. Now I gladly dump it and pick something else. Much more fun.

Posted by: Moonbat | March 13, 2010 10:03 PM | Report abuse

I choose ten percent loss as my loss limit. When it drops below this ( or below the new floor after it has gone above ten percent gain) I decide to sell. I double check to see if it has broken through the bottom bollinger band for 3 months. Then it's definate.
==============================
Thanks for the answer. I've tried a trailing 10% stop but it seemed I was making a lot (too many) of long trades which almost immediately got stopped out. I debated whether I was picking stocks that we particularly volatile and/or was paying too much for the issue. I went through a number of trades to see what they did in the next month after I bought them, and frankly, I never really could conclude anything. Then I tried placing stops just below the Average True Range (do you know this?), and that felt better, but takes chart reading every day. Guess I better not be so lazy and just do it.

Selling is the art isn't it. Buying is the easy part. I'm also a pretty good stockpicker and don't take tips either.

BTW, what do you mean "I double check to see if it has broken through the bottom bollinger band for 3 months". I'm familiar with bollinger bands, but don't use them. Do you use 2 standard deviations and 14 days to calculate (as I remember the calculation)?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 9:48 PM | Report abuse

I choose ten percent loss as my loss limit. When it drops below this ( or below the new floor after it has gone above ten percent gain) I decide to sell. I double check to see if it has broken through the bottom bollinger band for 3 months. Then it's definate.

In this fashion the worst I can ever do is a ten percent loss and I lock in every ratcheted ten percent gain. On occasion I will sell and then buy back on the next upsurge. Busting through the 3 mo bollinger band on the upside. I also like to see the stochastic up at the top and the 50 day trend above the 100 day trend, dragging it up.

I was always good at picking stocks but only figured out a selling strategy last year after a painful lesson from obamanomics.

Posted by: Moonbat | March 13, 2010 9:23 PM | Report abuse

Speaking of jokes, 37th, you should read my comment for meaning before making some, well, odd comments about my mental state.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | March 13, 2010 7:48 PM | Report abuse

Here's an interesting Gallup poll. Health care ranks third with Americans.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/126614/Americans-Say-Jobs-Top-Problem-Deficit-Future.aspx?CSTS=tagrss

Posted by: SuzyCcup | March 13, 2010 6:40 PM | Report abuse

The dems' best chance of passing health care would probably be after the election in November. All the current House democratic members would know their fate. The losers would probably be more than willing to cast a yes vote for the Senate bill in their lame duck period (as a way to get even with their constituents). The problem is, Nancy's not smart enough to consider this.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | March 13, 2010 6:36 PM | Report abuse

I was reading the transcript from today's weekly GOP address given by Scott Brown. Wow! Great job Scott! He really slammed obama and the dems.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | March 13, 2010 6:25 PM | Report abuse

The Hill has 34 democrats saying NO - plus 177 Republicans makes 211 NO votes right now...

It is game over right now.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 5:54 PM


Hello 37. I don't think Pelosi will have the head count for a straight vote on the bill. From what I read (I'm not an expert on this), variations of the Slaughter trick are going to be used. One way is for the House to deem the Senate bill passed while simultaneously passing the recon bill. This would save House members from casting an actual vote on the health care bill itself (and supposedly saving their hides in November). The scary part is that they could then send the Senate bill directly to obama for immediate signing, before the Senate even takes up the recon bill. Yikes! I've read about several other variations of this. Most seem to go against the constitution as to how bills can be passed.
Since obama delayed his vacation next week, I think he feels that the Slaughter trick will get the bill through no matter what.
Will the dems actually do this? I still don't think so.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | March 13, 2010 6:20 PM | Report abuse

The Hill has 34 democrats saying NO - plus 177 Republicans makes 211 NO votes right now.

The Hill also has the democrats at 72 undecided, which seems high.

As anyone can see, the NO votes at 211 - all that is needed is 5 more NO votes to make it out of reach for Nancy - a few more than that will be game over.


It is game over right now.


The White House being unrealistic with the House is what brought them to this mess. They are just calling the vote to get it over with.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 5:54 PM | Report abuse

Ever join Stanford Law grad JakeD/JakeD2 on his yacht?

Posted by: broadwayjoe | March 13, 2010 5:10 PM | Report abuse

@drivl,

BTW, I know Bollinger bands and stochastics.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 5:02 PM | Report abuse

@drivl,

Truce, truce for discussions about trading.

How do you set your stops for losses?

I've tried all sorts of strategies but have never been happy with the results.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 5:00 PM | Report abuse

I am a momentum trader in stocks, relying heavily on bollinger bands to make sell/buy decisions. I also consider fast stochastic graphs. the essence is to limit your losses while allowing maximal gain by ratcheting up the trading range you will accept. I also spread it around to industries and sometimes buy stocks I have never heard of or even know what they do based on numerical information.

DXYN was a recent win which turns out to be some sort of wallpaper or paint store. but I will ditch it just as fast if it strays on me. you have to set your limits up front and then stick with them, ignoring your feelings.
some of this was learned from books, others, the hard, costly way.

I never operate on tips or advice any longer and don't hold forever like many are told to do. Of course I monitor them every day even when on travel and have auto notifications sent to me on my iphone.

Posted by: drivl | March 13, 2010 4:56 PM | Report abuse

Actually, you're kind of wrong about the immediate feedback in poker. Especially if you're playing against people who are kind of competent. You can make good decisions, but still lose pots. I recently lost some big pots where I was a 90% and a 98% favorite to win when the money went in.
-----------------------
Perhaps, that is different. You can be knocked out by a longshot.

If I'm willing to hold a longer time, I don't have to buy or sell at the low or highs of the period. I can buy somewhere in the lower range of prices and sell somewhere in the higher range of prices and make money. Now, if I want to day trade, I BETTER be buying at the low of the day and selling at the high of the day. Tough.

Holding longer can turn a risky trade into an "almost" no-brainer. So being mostly right, is enough to make money. But, one MUST learn to read the trend in the prices. Price charts really aren't incomprehensible.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 4:54 PM | Report abuse

The books on the subject are quite difficult to read. there are two aspects, the combinatorics which is really mathematical optimization, very algorithmic and the structure, such as dutch auction (second price, etc.)

I suggest beginning with the structure part and see how you like it.


for example:

Auction Theory, Second Edition (Hardcover)
~ Vijay Krishna
Vijay Krishna (Author)

Posted by: drivl | March 13, 2010 4:47 PM | Report abuse

@drivl,

Based on the miserable experience most individuals have investing in markets (equities mostly), I don't think much about it is easy or obvious. People know to buy low and sell high, but what they actually do is buy high and sell low.

Someone like ddawd who admits he's learning about the market is a guy who might get better over time. It's really not easy to make money in the market.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Also ask drivl to give you information about the statistics of closing car dealerships.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 13, 2010 4:43 PM | Report abuse

Actually, you're kind of wrong about the immediate feedback in poker. Especially if you're playing against people who are kind of competent. You can make good decisions, but still lose pots. I recently lost some big pots where I was a 90% and a 98% favorite to win when the money went in. That can be frustrating. I'm sure markets have that aspect in there. Take the 2004 election. Something completely off the wall could have happened for Kerry to win Ohio and the election. It would have still made sense to buy Bush shares beforehand, but it just turned out badly. I'm not sure how much these swings happen in market trading, but it happens a lot in poker. That's why new players have to be careful not to get too results oriented.

Are you guys manipulating the market? The intrade for HCR has jumped almost another point.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 13, 2010 4:41 PM | Report abuse

12bar, you may be interested in auction theory. I took a class in it a while back.
--------------------------
Do you recommend a class, or is there another way to get an overview?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 4:38 PM | Report abuse

12bar, you may be interested in auction theory. I took a class in it a while back.

One very interesting aspect is the ad price for google, which is calculated on the fly based on some browser history, among other things.

It also has some very complex applications in federal auctions of radio frequencies as well as t-bills and more.

DDAWD, you wouldn't understand it if you life depended on it.

Posted by: drivl | March 13, 2010 4:33 PM | Report abuse

@ddawd,

Actually, the most important similarity between a market and poker is the immediate feedback on your decision making strategy. You either get better or you go under. Nothing is more conducive to system improvement than immediate and painful feedback.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 4:32 PM | Report abuse

DDAWD, you have a way of making the most obvious things in the world seem complicated and mysterious.

D'uh!

I am convinced you have no business in higher education. a realization I am sure your advisor will be arriving at in no time, if not already past.

Posted by: drivl | March 13, 2010 4:28 PM | Report abuse

12BB, I play a lot of poker and the intrade stuff actually reminds me of a lot of the decisions I make at a game. I do a lot of comparisons on how much money I have to invest in a hand versus the chance I have of winning the pot and how much money I win and so forth. The idea being that if you're better at evaluating these decisions than your opponent, then you'll make more money in the long run.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 13, 2010 4:17 PM
--------------------------------
There are a lot of similarities. One is that people put their money where their mouths are. That weeds out most of the BS-ers. Another is that trades & bets on the table have a basis in a rational way. Not that someone can't throw in an oddball price/bet, but over time, the trend tells you what most of the informed traders/bettors think.

One thing that is dissimilar is that traders do not get to read the body language of other traders. So, no tells. Sometimes, a trader will hide his depth (meaning how much he really wants to trade) by putting out a bid/ask for one. He wants to see how easily the market is moving...in other words, which side (buyers or sellers) has the upper hand. Once, he gets filled he'll put out the rest of his trade. It's actually illegal to hide your depth, and the trading houses have computer programs that prevent you from dribbling your trades out there one at a time, so you can maybe do it once a day.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 4:26 PM | Report abuse

12bar, as I said that result is based mostly on the prediction of what Nancy is prepared to do to avoid another failure. I think everyone knows by now that there is no set of morals that inhabit this administration for deciding what is right and wrong. Pure power is the motivation.

I would also bet that Nancy is that corrupt.

One or two choice defections in congress will eliminate that number in seconds.

If she had the votes, it would already be done. she is bribing, threatening, promising, grafting and cheating behind closed doors. this is a shameful black eye on our liberty. Obama has brought out the worst in everyone, exactly the opposite of what he promised.

He is a pitiful excuse of an empty shell of an executive. Unlike Bush, his place in history is going to look alot like Jimmy Carter. All promise, no results.

Posted by: drivl | March 13, 2010 4:20 PM | Report abuse

12BB, I play a lot of poker and the intrade stuff actually reminds me of a lot of the decisions I make at a game. I do a lot of comparisons on how much money I have to invest in a hand versus the chance I have of winning the pot and how much money I win and so forth. The idea being that if you're better at evaluating these decisions than your opponent, then you'll make more money in the long run.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 13, 2010 4:17 PM | Report abuse

As I was saying, the pressure on Intrade is to the upside. Right now, the onesy bids were all filled or changed and canceled, and the trades "of size" are a buyer for 20 contracts at 65 and a seller of 10 contracts at 72. The ask prices are going up AT THE MOMENT.

Remember, the trend is more important than any single day.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 4:14 PM | Report abuse

Teaching a committed socialist about markets.

HHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

next can you teach my cat calculus? my fish to sing?

didn't you know barry sets all prices and everyone simply nods their heads and chants

MMMMMMM Mmmmmmm mmmmmmmm

for example, did you know that Dear Reader has proclaimed we WILL double our trade export in five years.

What power!!!

Stalin would be proud.
did you know that we can eliminate all acturial basis for health insurance, include an additional 30 million people and still lower cost?

Only in Obamaland. you have to know nothing about markets to swallow this. But hey, DDAWD, dribbl and Ped need representation too.

today we have it on record that DDAWD knows zero about markets and thus econ. We already know that Ped is afraid and perplexed by markets and econ in general, preferring to hoard gold under the bridge, as trolls historically have done. And everyone knows that dribbl is just a complete empty headed ditz.

so 12bar, are you telling me that markets are irrelevant in government takeovers?

Posted by: drivl | March 13, 2010 4:13 PM | Report abuse

Baked and Wired is the crack of cupcake land! So daggone good, it is irresistable! I want some now!!

Posted by: PepperDr | March 13, 2010 4:06 PM | Report abuse

Interesting discussion on trading. I'm pretty new to this, so I'm learning.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 13, 2010 4:01 P
---------------------------
If you keep a tab open on the Intrade contract, you can see the interaction between the bids and asks and how they come together to make the trade. If the seller REALLY wants to sell, he will come down to the bid price. If the buyer REALLY wants to buy, he will come up to the ask price. I think the screen refreshes itself so you can see how a market works. It's instructional.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 4:05 PM | Report abuse

I'm pretty new to this, so I'm learning.

Posted by: DDAWD |


you mean thinking. Yeah, we noticed.

Posted by: drivl | March 13, 2010 4:02 PM | Report abuse

"@ddawd,

You could email Intrade and ask them to send you the life of contract data for the Kerry contract.

Posted by: 12BarBlues"

Well, I trust the Darthmouth guy more than ...others... so I'm good, haha.

Interesting discussion on trading. I'm pretty new to this, so I'm learning.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 13, 2010 4:01 PM | Report abuse

So here is the fascinating aspect of this entire argument.for the first time ever Liberals are championing the market and its cooperative and efficient manner.

yet with health care they prefer to lock in government prices and create shortages.

most amusing stooges.

Posted by: drivl | March 13, 2010 3:59 PM | Report abuse

37th wrote: The market is not telling anyone anything

A few contracts being traded does not tell anyone anything.
-------------------------------------
You and I are what makes a horse race. Thank God for people like you because you will take the other side of the trade.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 3:59 PM | Report abuse

@ddawd,

You could email Intrade and ask them to send you the life of contract data for the Kerry contract.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 3:56 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues at 3:40


The market is not telling anyone anything

A few contracts being traded does not tell anyone anything.

YOU ARE BEING FOOLED.

I BET YOU VOTED FOR OBAMA How is that working for you ?

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 3:56 PM | Report abuse

I could get my friend on the phone, and we could trade at any set of prices we picked out of the air.

The alternate explanation is someone is trying to dump a bunch of shares - but they are trying to get a higher price.
-------------------------------
All the prices are "picked out of the air". But, the beauty of a market is someone else has to agree with your price picked out of the air. Bids and asks have to meet in order to do a trade.

Of course someone trying to sell a bunch of contracts is trying to get a higher price.

What you call manipulation is the free market in action.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 3:53 PM | Report abuse

Well, everything you say about yourself is a lie
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
how do you know idiot? did AL gore tell you in a powerpoint presentation?

clearly you are unhinged and not very bright.

anyone who would go to LA to get a graduate degree clearly had very little choice about the school. do they have colleges down there? none I've ever heard of.
but hey, it seems when you flop out and can't finish that dissertation (currently trading at 92 on Intrade) you can always go back to your greatest strength, reading Tarot and crystal balls. no one expects you to be accurate so you will flourish. you can call it the Science of Tarot. Liberals will eat it up and suck the heads. don't tell Ped or she'll want in.

Posted by: drivl | March 13, 2010 3:52 PM | Report abuse

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:ltUbgtUKngwJ:www.intrade.com/news/images/Dartmouth_Election_Paper_11_9_04%2520%282%29.doc+how+did+intrade+do+in+2004%3F&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

Someone graphed the intrade data.

There was considerable fluctuation ON election day, but for months leading up to the actual day, intrade had Bush winning. Yeah, drivl lied. No surprise.

The graphs don't show up on the html version, but the top of the page has a link to the wordprocessor version that has them.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 13, 2010 3:47 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


There is no support for the price on the bid side - yet someone is trading

This could easily be done by two people working together -


I could get my friend on the phone, and we could trade at any set of prices we picked out of the air.

The alternate explanation is someone is trying to dump a bunch of shares - but they are trying to get a higher price.

In a thinly traded market this is possible - someone could have put all those 1 bids out there, just so they they can sell off a bunch of shares at a higher price.

Again, that is manipulation - but for a different reason - what is clear is that someone is playing games with it today.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 3:44 PM | Report abuse

37:

the news was that it had changed from likely to definite.

In the count published today, here’s how we stand:
All 178 Republicans will vote Nay.
34 of the Democrats are firm, leaning, or likely Nays; this includes eight Democrats who voted Yea the last time around in November.
147 Democrats are firm, leaning, or likely Yeas.
The remaining 72 Democrats are “undecided.”
That puts the current count at 147 Yea, 212 Nay, with 72 toss-ups. Note that a majority is currently 216, since there are only 431 members of the House right now.
To put it in a nuthouse, Republicans must get 4 of those toss-up Dems to vote Nay, while the Democrats must get 69 of the toss-up Dems to vote Yea.
It should be obvious now why Squeaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Haight-Ashbury, 100%) has not yet called the vote: The risk is too great that the Nay-sayers will get their 4 before the Yes-men get their 69. And she won’t call the vote until the whip-count shows better odds for ObamaCare than against it.
Now I expect the great majority of those toss-up Dems will eventually vote for ObamaCare; but if they lose only 4 out of the 72 (6%) it goes down. Bear in mind that when the current Congress ends — probably sometime in late November or December — any legislation passed in one or both chambers but not signed into law dies.


http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2010/03/13/the-hills-whip-count-on-obamacare-as-of-today/?print=1


DDAWD is one of the more dense posters on this blog, full of himself without any actual evidence to support a notion of that sort. you will find plenty of opinion based on trivial assumptions, but no actual analysis or heavy lifting that would indicate superior presence.

Posted by: drivl | March 13, 2010 3:42 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


You understand the bid side has few "of size" - the intrade market could probably slip all the way below 50 very quickly - by looking at the bids


Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 3:31 PM
-----------------------------------
Well, if it's so easy for the market to slip below 50, then it will do so. But, it hasn't done it yet.

You make the same mistake many people make, you don't want to believe what the market is telling you. You want to believe what ISN'T happening, but what could happen any moment, even if it isn't happening yet.

Right now, the market is telling us there is more pressure to bid up (buy) the market than to sell the market. It's obvious.

Again, that's why you have to learn to read trends in charts. The trend is your friend, as they say.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 3:40 PM | Report abuse

Well, everything you say about yourself is a lie. I don't know what the truth is, but I do know it's not what you say. You obviously have not an ounce of economics knowledge based on what you post on here despite you claiming to have like three Nobel Prizes or whatever BS you claim.

And I'm 85% sure you're lying about intrade picking Kerry.

I don't have the intrade figures, but I do have the polling figures.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Presidential_04/chart3way.html

Pretty solid for Bush the whole way.

So here are the two possibilities
1)intrade went against the polls AND picked the incorrect outcome

or

2)drivl is lying

I would buy #2 at 85% Feel free to move the needle if you want.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 13, 2010 3:39 PM | Report abuse

Here is the sane view of the world from a veritable stooge, DDAWD:

there is only one conservative in the universe and he spends his days as many different monikers on the Fix. He is an unemployed mental patient working for pay to subvert democracy because of purely evil intentions. He has no family, no friends, no home, no education and no money.

to be particularly tricky, he makes up things to torment liberals about his extravagent lifestyle. no liberals ever beleive him, which furthers this impulse as the reward for being not beleived grows.

In contrast, not one liberal on this blog has any of these features in the least.

that is the world inhabited by the "minds" of our stooges, dribbl, Ped, BJ and DDAWD.

Posted by: drivl | March 13, 2010 3:39 PM | Report abuse

drivl


Stupak has been a no for a while - I can't find any information on any changes today.

A group of 4 or 5 switches from undecided Dem to NO would pretty much end the whole thing.

There would not be enough votes at that point.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 3:36 PM | Report abuse

drivl


Stupak has been a no for a while - I can't find any information on any changes today.

A group of 4 or 5 switches from undecided Dem to NO would pretty much end the whole thing.

There would not be enough votes at that point.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 3:36 PM | Report abuse

DDAWD

Obviously it is way beyond your comprehension.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 3:32 PM | Report abuse

I saw it on Fox report earlier today. One was Stupak. I can't recall the others.

Posted by: drivl | March 13, 2010 3:32 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


You understand the bid side has few "of size" - the intrade market could probably slip all the way below 50 very quickly - by looking at the bids


Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Again, 37th is trying to defend the indefensible. That's why he's doing something stupid like comparing intrade shares to TV ads.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 13, 2010 3:31 PM | Report abuse

I am always amazed at the stooges intimate knowledge about every poster on this blog.

It is truly amazing since everything else in their lives seems to be in total disarray.

DDAWD, you don't know anything about me. to claim you do is just another religious experience along the lines of global warming/cooling. Pure speculation with no data and a heavy agenda underneath.

Only other liberal blowhards and idiots fall for this nonsense.

Posted by: drivl | March 13, 2010 3:31 PM | Report abuse

What do you mean it's Saturday ???
----------------------------
Meaning Saturday trading will be thin. So the bids/asks will be thin.

What you are interpreting as manipulation is a listing of the bids and asks (buyers and sellers)"in the market" (meaning they have placed the trades into the market) and how much they are willing to buy (buy) or sell (ask) at a certain price, at the PRESENT moment in time.

Right at this very instant, someone is willing to buy (bid) 20 contracts at 65 and someone else is willing to sell (ask) 7 contracts at 69. I am using those two trades since those are two trades "of size" (meaning not onesy trades). When those two trades of size get close together in price, they will do a deal for 7 contracts.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 3:29 PM | Report abuse

drivl at 2:57


you write: today there were declared four Dems that switched to NO. that should move the Intrade needle slightly.

___________________________

Who are these 4 ? do you have link I can read about this ???

thank you.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 3:28 PM | Report abuse

If there was an intrade market that says "drivl is lying about intrade picking Kerry to win the 2004 election" I'd pay like $8.5 per share.

I can't prove it, but I'm certain this wasn't the case that intrade was picking Kerry. First, the polls themselves were heavily in favor of Bush days before the election. The only thing I can find on intrade was in Florida in 2004 in which intrade did better than pollsters.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 13, 2010 3:24 PM | Report abuse

Nancy and co will stoop to any means:

Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., who is leading a charge for tougher abortion restrictions in President Obama's health care bill, said opponents are threatening to file ethics complaints against him.

Posted by: drivl | March 13, 2010 3:22 PM | Report abuse

know the word "retarded" is becoming unfashionable. So, I challenge the readers of Moonbattery to come up with a better word to describe the Democrats' grasp of basic economics, as demonstrated by party Leader Nanny Rictus Botox Pelosi.


"Think of an economy where people could be an artist or a photographer or a writer without worrying about keeping their day job in order to have health insurance."

Yes, Democrats honestly believe that it's good for the economy to raise taxes on plumbers, electricians, doctors, and other people who do real work so that artists and writers can be subsidized. Don't get me wrong, art and literature are great... but they are luxuries, and can only be afforded by an economy that is robust enough to allow people to make a living writing stories and drawing pictures.

And why is it so terrible that someone should have to work a day job and pursue his art by night (without Government subsidies)?

Posted by: drivl | March 13, 2010 3:17 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


What do you mean it's Saturday ???


Someone is trying to push up the price - by creating an artificially high bid price


come on - how far down do those 1's go ???

So, they push the price up - then they have a few people do 7 lots at 68 and 69 - oh quick Call the talking points people and get the word out.


Let's be serious. drivl who are those 4 ?

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 3:16 PM | Report abuse

Hey, don't put it down.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I encourage you to enjoy yourself. My beef is the constant whining about things others do that you also engage in. Dribbl accusing others of cutting and pasting or posting every two minutes and being unemployed.

Ped accusing others of begin nasty.

Baghdad BJ telling anyone they are mindless partisans.

when you say no one pays attention to... then pay attention all day you are pretty much revealed for a kook.

but hey, kook's need to have fun too.

Posted by: drivl | March 13, 2010 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Look at the chart - see all the 1 lots all down the bid side of the chart ?
-----------------------------
It's Saturday.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 3:08 PM | Report abuse

I own a stock, GPX. It traded 66,000 shares yesterday at prices between 8.32 - 8.68. For 10000 shares, those shares went up $3,600. Was there news? No. What happened? Nothing.

Some people wanted to buy (prices go up). Some people want to sell (prices go down). When people want to buy more shares than people who are selling, guess what, prices go up. It's as simple as that.

Manipulation? I call it supply and demand.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 3:07 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


Look at the chart - see all the 1 lots all down the bid side of the chart ?


http://www.intrade.com/jsp/intrade/common/c_cd.jsp?conDetailID=709242&z=1268509321859


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, was 50 minutes late for his briefing, apparently a record for tardiness, but few reporters in the White House press room bothered to feign outrage; they didn't seem all that eager to ask him questions anyway. (Snip) If you are president, the only thing worse than criticism is not being covered. And the truth is, we in the press are bored with Barack.The "mainstream media" are losing patience with, and even interest in, their erstwhile hero.

Posted by: drivl | March 13, 2010 3:03 PM | Report abuse

drivl

Who were the 4 dems who switched ??

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 3:00 PM | Report abuse

drivl wrote I have extensive experience with Intrade and have had mostly positive wins over the years. It has its meander as does all public opinion polls.
----------------------
It's not a poll. It's a market. You know, like money changes hands.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 3:00 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


There were only 7 lots traded at 68-69 - before that the trade was at 61.1

Pretty much a manipulation of the market.

AND if you look at the bids, someone has posted a bunch of 1 lots all the way down the bid chart. - Another sign of manipulation.

You can say all you want about how great the markets are - how they are just like orange juice -


However, intelligent people know better.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 2:58 PM | Report abuse

Don't you ever wonder why no one responds to you in a substantive way? Just a hint.

Posted by: 12BarBlues


Yet you have been bickering with him all day long, Loser. Just like Ped, whining and carping about the activity you do that you despise in others. typical Lib.

Posted by: drivl | March 13, 2010 2:48 PM
----------------------------
Hey, don't put it down. This is the only real conversation I've ever had with 37th and all because he has temporarily stopped with his multiple post mantras.

BTW, I am rather enjoying it.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 2:57 PM | Report abuse

I have extensive experience with Intrade and have had mostly positive wins over the years. It has its meander as does all public opinion polls.

Intrade also had John Kerry winning the election about a few days ahead, which was very profitable for me personally.

those betters only have the same information that you or I get from Fox news or 2 or 3 of you from MSDNC.

today there were declared four Dems that switched to NO. that should move the Intrade needle slightly.

since Peloony seems to be willing to break any rule and conduct a mass suicide kool aid moment for her peeps, it seems a risky bet to go against someone with such brazen recklessness and arrogance.

all we keep hearing is what extra-cirricular efforts and superhuman manipulations the Libs are willing to suffer to try not to see like complete and utter failures on everything they have attempted since taking power.

this is going to go on their permamant record. Even other Libs are getting sick to their stomach at the corruption of this congress.

Posted by: drivl | March 13, 2010 2:57 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


At the continental divide, one inch determines whether a drop of rain will flow thousands of miles to the Atlantic Ocean, or west to the Pacific Ocean.

The speed and direction of the wind at the very moment that drop of rain falls determines which side of the line it will fall on.

Your life is like that drop of rain.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 2:55 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


The current price is 66 - it is trending downward

What happened in the last 2 hours to justify a move of 3 points ?

Nothing.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 2:49 PM
-------------------------------
It's a MARKET. People trade in and out for MANY reasons. People need the money, they need to take profits, they need to add to their investment, and a million more reasons.

That's why you have to look at the overall trends. But since you can't spot trends in a chart, you cannot perform this very simple task that EVERYONE who is an investor can do without problems. Because to you, charts just look like a bunch of ups and downs with no start and end point.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 2:55 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


OK well how are the polls for Obama doing ???? Trending downward, huh ??


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 2:51 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


The current price is 66 - it is trending downward

What happened in the last 2 hours to justify a move of 3 points ?

Nothing.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 2:49 PM | Report abuse

Don't you ever wonder why no one responds to you in a substantive way? Just a hint.

Posted by: 12BarBlues


Yet you have been bickering with him all day long, Loser. Just like Ped, whining and carping about the activity you do that you despise in others. typical Lib.

Posted by: drivl | March 13, 2010 2:48 PM | Report abuse

You can look at a chart of ups and downs - and find any trend you want - it just depends on where you start and where you end.
--------------------------
Ok, you don't look at charts, I can tell that. Go your way and believe what you want.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 2:47 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


Very suspicious when all of a sudden intrade is in the democratic talking points.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 2:36 PM
---------------------------------
Every morning I do two things: I look at the polls on Obama approval and HCR and I look at Intrade. I am not parroting Democratic talking points and didn't even know that anyone but me is talking about Intrade.

It's not that the polls or markets are necessarily predictive, but they reflect the opinions of lots of people who bet real money. I don't like to live in a bubble of my own opinion, where I am not exposed to the real world.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 2:45 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


You can look at a chart of ups and downs - and find any trend you want - it just depends on where you start and where you end.

Well, sure sounds like you are trying to create a perception there.

That is called manipulation in anyone's book.

Thursday's trade in the 40s were dense.

So, you made a statement without checking your facts, which makes me think you are full of it.


Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 2:44 PM | Report abuse

Intrade is an opinion. Their current opinion is about 69% for HCR passage. This has been trending up since March 1.

The polls on HCR reform have been trending more positive for a while now. The last 5 polls show now show a net negative of about 5 points as opposed to -17 points a few weeks ago.

Now, we could just ignore all that and listen to 37th, who says his opinion is more accurate. And why? He won't tell us why his opinion is better--does he walk the halls of Congress? Is he the Democratic whip?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 2:37 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


Very suspicious when all of a sudden intrade is in the democratic talking points.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 2:36 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


intrade was at 45 on Thursay - do you think anything has changed to justify 25 points in two days?

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 2:22 PM
------------------------------
Wow, you really are sophisticated. You ignore the major trend and find one trade at 45 and make that significant. Maybe you should go run down that trader and find out why he did that trade. Maybe he had a margin call, maybe he talked to you, maybe he has a hernia, who knows.

The major trend for HCR passage is from less than 40% to nearly 70% since March 1.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 2:29 PM | Report abuse


12BarBlues


People spend money to influence public opinion all the time - how much does a tv commercial cost ????

For much less than a tv commercial, someone can go onto intrade and move the market.

Then they call the DNC or their White House pals, say, hey the intrade market moved.

The next thing you know, it is in a talking point, out in an email - and a bunch of idiots are saying that Intrade is indicating something.

Yea, it is indicating that someone is blowing smoke in YOUR FACE.

.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 2:27 PM | Report abuse

Do you really think people are going to go waste a whole bunch of money just to move the intrade needle? Of course not. But this guy has decided he's got to pretend to be Limbaugh. Thus, he's coming up with this nonsense.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 13, 2010 2:20 PM
-------------------------------
If Intrade is being manipulated to the high side, then the obvious trade would be for 37th to short the market. He could sell contracts at today's price and buy them back later at lower prices. So could anyone else who thinks the market is too high.

But, would 37th put his money where his mouth is?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 2:24 PM | Report abuse

Broadwayjoe


Have you lit all the candles in your shrine to me in your House ??


I think you missed a few.

Go back and check.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 2:23 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


intrade was at 45 on Thursay - do you think anything has changed to justify 25 points in two days?

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 2:22 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


I know you are such an expert - but anyone with a bunch of money can go on there - buy or sell a bunch of contracts - and move intrade any way they want.


It is subject to manipulation.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 2:17 PM
------------------------------
You can look at it as a vast left wing conspiracy.

The futures market is an opinion--just like you have an opinion. Their opinion is not necessarily better, but they DO put money on it. You don't, do you?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 2:21 PM | Report abuse

see? This goes along with what I was saying before. People like zook and 37th are charged with defending the indefensible, so they have to say stupid things. You think he knows what a socialist is or what socialism is? Of course not. Do you really think people are going to go waste a whole bunch of money just to move the intrade needle? Of course not. But this guy has decided he's got to pretend to be Limbaugh. Thus, he's coming up with this nonsense.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 13, 2010 2:20 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


Truth is important - I am giving you truth - at some point in your life, you became misguided. You should take this opportunity to learn truth.


Don't be such a hater.

Learn to tolerate opposing view points. If you agreed with my posts, you really wouldn't complain, would you ???


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Most importantly about Intrade contracts is to look at the trend, not just the price today. The chances of HCR passage has gone from less than 40% to nearly 70% since the first of March.

Look at the graph on http://www.intrade.com/jsp/intrade/common/c_cd.jsp?conDetailID=709242&z=1267779857294

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 2:17 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


I know you are such an expert - but anyone with a bunch of money can go on there - buy or sell a bunch of contracts - and move intrade any way they want.


It is subject to manipulation.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 2:17 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


You really think if I care whether a bunch of idiots respond to my posts? I don't. And most of the democratic posters on here have some cult-like devotion to Obama - which everyone in the country thinks is completely nuts.

You can all dream on.

For some reason, you believe that the "responses" on this blog, of your little group judge the value of everything everyone says.


No. in fact the judgement of your little group is pretty meaningless.

I'm sure you send emails between yourself talking about all sorts of things.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Intrade responds to a bunch of smoke in the media - and it sure looks like that is what this is.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 2:07 PM
-------------------------------
Intrade trades real contracts for real money. It is volatile like all futures markets. Contracts do not go up and down because of smoke. They go up and down based on supply and demand, just like every other real market, like oil, sugar and orange juice.

If you don't like Intrade's numbers, take it up with the multiple traders who trade there.

It's not a poll--it's a market. There is a difference.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 2:14 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


I really don't care about the democrats responding to me. Why should I care if a socialist responds to me or not ?

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 2:02 PM
-----------------------------
Fair enough.

Most people here are here for back-and-forth discussion. You apparently are not here for that reason. No problem.

But, knock off the multiple posts. No one else thinks his opinion are so important they must be repeated and repeated. Why are yours so important?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 2:08 PM | Report abuse

One of our many unsuccessful attempts to pushback against 37th's (IMO) pathology. Sadly, it continues...

"37andOsewer, check the calendar.

BHO doesn't become president for another two months. As I recall, your vp candidate can't remember a newspaper she's read, couldn't submit to journalist interview, and doesn't know Africa is a continent -- so much for foreign policy experience. But why revisit an election that has ENDED wekkes ago. Hello! Stop the carpet-trolling!!!! As it is, you have had to change your troll handle about four times so far. Why go for five? The topic was whether O had a mandate: I think he did and arguably also had a landslide victory (at least as good anyone will get in this environment). Do you have anything to say on this topic aside from your previous lunatic bigoted trolling?

Posted by: broadwayjoe | November 26, 2008 8:58 PM"

Posted by: broadwayjoe | March 13, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

Intrade can be easily manipulated - and it is telling when all of a sudden it becomes a talking point.


Intrade goes up and down - thursday it was at 45.

Intrade responds to a bunch of smoke in the media - and it sure looks like that is what this is.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


I really don't care about the democrats responding to me. Why should I care if a socialist responds to me or not ?

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 2:02 PM | Report abuse

broadwayjoe


You are really obsessed with me - you are almost like a stalker.

Why are you so obsessed ????

Do you have like 100 pictures of me on your walls ?? Do you have a shrine to me in your house???

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 1:59 PM | Report abuse

DDAWD


EXACTLY I agree - this time is different

There is so much tension, so many deadlines.

They have thrown in the towel.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 1:56 PM | Report abuse

Here is an interesting piece.
Republicans are learning, slowly...

"The public, it turns out, prefers a say in the electoral process.

“When you come down to it, it is probably best to let the voters pick the nominee,”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/14/us/14memo.html?hp

Well that is too bad, I thought they would never learn. On the other hand, if conservative voters actually got to determine their nominees, maybe the Republicans would become something other than corporate shills (see, Cheney as in Dick).


Posted by: shrink2 | March 13, 2010 1:53 PM | Report abuse

Hard as it is to believe, the original "37" was just as bad as this fake 37:

"To the Posters who call themselves DDAWD, broadwayjoe, SeanC1 and DrainYou:


I have FREEDOM OF SPEECH guaranteed to me by the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.


The Washington Post fought one of the most famous Free Speech battles ever against the Nixon Administration over the Pentagon Papers.


I will characterize your postings as this: an attempted conspiracy to RESTRICT THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH OF US CITIZENS.


The Nixon Administration would be proud the the Obama people have adopted these tactics, first at the Daily Kos, and now here on this blog.


One other note: the conspiracy you are attempting to engage in - which is based on THE CONTENT OF ONE'S SPEECH - should be viewed as a VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS UNDER THE UNITED STATES FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS ACTS.


In intimidation, harassment of other posters whose views you do not like - hmmm - some of this is being paid for - PAID BLOGGERS have been instructed to hit the 'report abuse" button based on the CONTENT OF ONE'S SPEECH NOT ANY REAL VIOLATION.


So, we have foreign money coming into the Obama people, unverified by simple software which has been turned off, a flood of questionable money from questionable sources - a flood of money which might be foreign money - of questionable legality - being utilized to restrict the Freedom of Speech of American citizens.

The disgraceful actions began last winter and they continue.

.


.

.

.

Posted by: 37thOStreetRules | November 27, 2008 10:49 AM"

Posted by: broadwayjoe | March 13, 2010 1:52 PM | Report abuse

@37th,

Since you are just like everyone else, posting your opinions, why the HELL do you post multiple posts, over and over again, when no one is even responding to them. Yesterday, you posted one of your diatribes 5 times in a row.

Why do you think you have the right to flood this blog with your OPINIONS. No one else habitually posts multiple posts. Why are your posts SO important they must be repeated again and again?

Don't you ever wonder why no one responds to you in a substantive way? Just a hint.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 1:42 PM | Report abuse

37th, mind if I ask what the hell is up with those blank lines after your posts?

Posted by: DDAWD | March 13, 2010 1:33 PM | Report abuse

I wouldn't take the fake 37th's word the sun is bright or that night is dark. If they schedule the vote, she's got the votes. Regardless, win or lose, we all can finally move on after the vote.

More dog whistles favoring HRC in 2012...the Post recently fronted a huge article about the Black Caucus' dissatisfaction with BHO. Quoted the most was Rep. Cleaver, one of 15 blacks in the U.S. to support HRC over BHO. The message to BHO seemed to be: the Jackie Robinson/rope-a-dope approach isn't cutting it anymore (people forget after his first year in MLB, Jackie DID fight back, hard).

Still time for BHO to call a big Leo McGarry staff retreat, gather himself, and Let Obama be Obama--certainly hope so--but no signs that's forthcoming.
_____________

Want to take this opportunity for saying during the Dem primary that Hillarians were just 18 "harpies, losers, and mentals." (In the words of Lott, I apologize if you were offended. :) ) Your country may need you and your Pants-suited leader (HRC) to step up to the plate in 2012. If the party elders pay you a visit soon, please let them in.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | March 13, 2010 1:31 PM | Report abuse

@37th,

Now, I get it. Your posts are just your OPINION.

Somehow, I got the false impression you knew something different than the rest of us.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 1:30 PM | Report abuse


12BarBlues


I am just saying that Obama has been extremely unrealistic these past few weeks - almost in an out-of-touch way - and that has produced a great deal of tension between Obama and the House leadership.

Obama wants a unicorn.


I am just saying that Nancy scheduling a vote that she knows will fail might be the natural result of all this tension over the past few weeks.


They overreached. They should never have tried to play this game with abortion.

Even if the abortion issue was not there - because many House members are hiding behind that, Nancy would be having trouble this week. Passing this bill which the American Public does NOT want is going to lead to disaster this fall for the democrats - people who want to ignore that central reality it is a waste of time to even talk to them.


.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 1:26 PM | Report abuse

By the way, intrade is a really fascinating site. Just looking at these futures.

During the Scott Brown race, the conservatives were crowing about some intrade threshold that if it's crossed, then the market has never been wrong. I forget what it is.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 13, 2010 1:22 PM | Report abuse

Pelosi has never scheduled a vote on something she didn't have the votes for.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 13, 2010 1:01 PM
-----------------------------------
Exaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaactly!

But, 37th is CONVINCED that this time is different. And since he is CONVINCED, we should all be persuaded. Is that working for you?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 1:04 PM | Report abuse

37th says the votes are not there.
---------------------------------
OK, I'll bite. You walk the halls of Congress? You are the Democratic whip? What?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 1:01 PM | Report abuse

Pelosi has never scheduled a vote on something she didn't have the votes for.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 13, 2010 1:01 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


I'm trying to be nice to you - take a look at the reality here.

Normally, when they have the votes line up, they schedule a vote.

That has not happened this time.

Obama has put so much pressure on them - to produce votes in a very unrealistic environment.

I didn't say any of those things about Nancy.


I'm just looking at the situation as it now stands - you are trying to say that this is not the situation - but it is - Pretending the votes are there does not produce the votes.

RATHER - pretending that you are done tells everyone who has not committed to vote yes that it is OK that they are voting no.

The tension between the House and Obama is what is going on here.

All the potential benefit is on Obama's side - much of the risk and peril this year is on the House side - there is a disconnect.

Nancy just might be scheduling a vote - and going to tell Obama to get the votes himself - and the thing is just going to fail.

The votes are not there.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 12:57 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 12:55 PM | Report abuse

More from Mr. Raines:

"My great fear, however, is that some journalists of my generation who once prided themselves on blowing whistles and afflicting the comfortable have also been intimidated by Fox's financial power and expanding audience, as well as Ailes's proven willingness to dismantle the reputation of anyone who crosses him. (Remember his ridiculing of one early anchor, Paula Zahn, as inferior to a "dead raccoon" in ratings potential when she dared defect to CNN?) It's as if we have surrendered the sword of verifiable reportage and bought the idea that only "elites" are interested in information free of partisan poppycock."

Agreed.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | March 13, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

@37th,

This is your premise: Nancy and the Democrats are going to schedule a vote which they know they are going to lose because they want to send a message to the Democratic President that they aren't there to fulfill the platform they all ran on.

YOU could be a political strategist. The only question is who would pay you for this advice.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


The calendar is such that if they don't vote this week, it will be pushed back to late April or early May - they decided they didn't want to do that. I think Nancy and Steny are SICK of Obama telling them what to do - AND DEMANDING THAT THEY DO ALL THE HEAVY LIFTING.

Obama is the problem.

I think Nancy and Steny may be PULLING THE PLUG ON THIS WHOLE THING - they are sick of Obama putting pressure on them - Obama isn't doing the work - it is all on Nancy and the House - they are going to tell Obama to get his own votes.

The tension is what is telling.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 12:45 PM | Report abuse

MM, I went to Whole Paychec-, er, Foods awhile back. Bought something called "Organic Frosted Flakes." Inedible. Since then I've stuck to Safeway and Kellogg's. Maybe it's just me, though.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | March 13, 2010 12:41 PM | Report abuse

@37th,

No one could possibly stop you from speculating on the possible reasons Nancy would schedule a vote she is going to lose.

1. She is crazy.
2. She is suicidal.
3. She got a death threat.
4. She is channeling 37th&O.
5. The Democrats are actually Republicans in sheep's clothing.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 12:39 PM | Report abuse

No - something is going on - they scheduled the vote without having all the votes lined up - one can speculate about the reasoning.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 12:31 PM
-------------------------------
Yes, the "something" that is going on is that they didn't appoint you as the official Democratic vote counter. Then, you could tell Nancy when she can schedule the vote, if ever.

Bwahahaha!

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 12:34 PM | Report abuse

Do you think that whatever you are NOT seeing in YOUR crystal ball, may be perceived by others:

Intrade prices the chances of HCR reform passage at 68%. At the beginning of March, the chances were only 40&. Obviously, traders are recognizing the increasing odds for passage.

http://www.intrade.com/jsp/intrade/common/c_cd.jsp?conDetailID=709242&z=1267779857294

Intrade makes a market for futures contracts that trade (for real money) on certain current events.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 12:32 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues


No - something is going on - they scheduled the vote without having all the votes lined up - one can speculate about the reasoning.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 12:31 PM | Report abuse

Bushwhacked1


Just because you max out 5 credit cards, does that mean it makes sense to max out 5 more ????

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse

f they don't have the votes lined up, they usually do not schedule a vote. We all know they do not have the votes right now.

by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 12:22 PM
-----------------------------
Do you think it is even teensy weensy possible you do not have all the information? Or is your crystal ball totally clear, as usual?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 13, 2010 12:25 PM | Report abuse


There is something eerie about the House scheduling the vote for this week - and it doesn't seem like they have the votes right now.

Obama has created the pressure for this round -

AND everyone is SICK OF IT. They want it over. It sure sounds like they are going to have this vote whether it will pass or not.

There is something unusual about what is going on.


Maybe they are going to have a vote an let it fail. If they don't have the votes lined up, they usually do not schedule a vote. We all know they do not have the votes right now.


.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 12:22 PM | Report abuse

Sad how the GOP (Greedy Obstructionist Pharts) is more than happy to piss away a trillion $ on invading Iraq so they can line the pockets of their BFF's in the military-industrial complex and the oil industry, but they spit on the American people when WE need help. I'd pose a rhetorical questions about them having no shame, but the answer is painfully obvious. REWARD THE RICH, PUNISH THE POOR - VOTE REPUBLICAN!!!

Posted by: Bushwhacked1 | March 13, 2010 12:18 PM | Report abuse

broadwayjoe writes

"It is they--fellow journalists--who view this space as Drudge-lite. "


OK, I guess the only thing that would make you happy is Chris printing out the white house talking points every day.

You have a really really sad view of what "should" be printed.

We have Freedom of Speech - there is NOTHING that "should" be done.

If you have an opinion state it, everyone else can state their opinion too.

There is no "should."


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Obama has got to be kidding. Obama is in the fantasyland about the status of the health care - but he wants Nancy and the democrats on the Hill to do the heavy lifting. AND the democrats on the Hill are the ones who are going to be hurt at the polls this year.

Obama has a real problem here.

Obama ran around the country for two years saying he was the one who could "unite" everyone in Washington - and do the hard work. What has happened now is Obama WANTS EVERYONE ELSE TO DO THE HARD WORK.

This is ridiculous.


Tell Obama to go get his own votes.

.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 12:03 PM | Report abuse

broadwayjoe at 10:39


Sadly you appear to have some set of ideas in your head on how the free flow of idea "should" go.


Well, that is not how it works.

I dispute the notion that if the flow of ideas goes in a direction other than where you think it "should" go, then something is wrong.

Nothing is wrong.


Case closed.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 11:55 AM | Report abuse

lol@jaked thinking that current HC system poses no financial burden to US government. Good luck selling that.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 13, 2010 11:47 AM | Report abuse

Liberals have realized that without a one sided monopoloy of message at the hands of the dishonest and leftist media, They stand no chance in the war of ideas.

But letting them vet an inexperienced and utterly inept leader has shown the frivolity of this dying morality.

Posted by: Moonbat | March 13, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse

"... the full amount that must be borrowed by 2019 is $488 billion. (That's 39% of the total cost, composed of the $875 billion official estimate plus the Doc Fix of $371 billion, for a total of $1.25 trillion.) Add in interest, which is excluded from the official CBO cost, and the total amount approaches $600 billion. So the U.S. will need to borrow an additional $600 billion to pay for a new medical system ..."

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 13, 2010 11:15 AM | Report abuse

Oh dear. Four more dems wake up and smell the coffee. Won't support socialism in medicine.

Posted by: Moonbat | March 13, 2010 11:14 AM | Report abuse

I like Raines message, but Raines is probably not the best person to deliver it.

1) he's going to be inextricably linked to Jayson Blair, fairly or not. The two are connected in people's minds.

2) Raines himself was a proponent of advocacy journalism and what FOX News is doing could be considered an extension of that philosophy. The obvious criticism is, "is it ok for the NYT times to advocate liberal positions, but not for FOX to advocate conservative ones?"

Posted by: DDAWD | March 13, 2010 11:04 AM | Report abuse

What Obamacare will REALLY cost:

http://money.cnn.com/2010/03/12/news/economy/debt_health_care.fortune/index.htm

Sure to be dismissed as "daily hate content".

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 13, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse

BTW, journalists are talking about Howell Raines courageously calling out Fox's Roger Ailes in a column published in, among other places, the Washington Post, this blog's sponsor.

Excerpt:

"One question has tugged at my professional conscience throughout the year-long congressional debate over health-care reform, and it has nothing to do with the public option, portability or medical malpractice. It is this: Why haven't America's old-school news organizations blown the whistle on Roger Ailes, chief of Fox News, for using the network to conduct a propaganda campaign against the Obama administration -- a campaign without precedent in our modern political history?"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/11/AR2010031102523.html

So far, the article has drawn almost 2400 comments, extremely high for any Post article/column. Raines's piece may mark a turning point in MSM's tiresome refusal to challenge the daily hate-content of Fox News.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | March 13, 2010 10:54 AM | Report abuse

@37: The following is the take of our journalism community on this blog's content via, not the DNC or the ACLU, but the Columbia Jourmalism Review:

"Drudge is in part a victim of his own success. He spawned imitators and emulators, who in turn have only further splintered the media world. If there is an agenda to be set, no one outlet or editor has the power to set it. It’s simply too rapid and unknowable a thing to harness. While The Fix, put together by Chris Cillizza of The Washington Post, and Playbook, put together by Politico’s Mike Allen, are often referred to as Drudge’s heirs,...."

http://www.examiner.com/x-23185-Seminole-County-Democrat-Examiner~y2009m9d10-Drudge-Report-loses-traffic-unlike-the-Huffington-Post

It is they--fellow journalists--who view this space as Drudge-lite. That perception will change when the space changes, i.e., away from relentless Dems-in-trouble narratives (in the face of more GOP retirements than Dem ones), cherry picked polls (and results within polls), endless free ads/mentions for BHO's opposition's candidates and agendas (and for Charlie Cook), shoutouts to figures like Chip (Magic N-gro CD) Salsman, banning posters for objecting to racist posts and personal attacks but retaining the racist posters, etc.

This blog is sponsored by our national paper of record, the Washington Post, which serves a multicultural progressive community (including many Obamacans like Powell) that voted for BHO and his agenda about 10 to 1, but you'd never know it from reading this "Political News & Analysis." Oh well. Sadly, case closed.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | March 13, 2010 10:39 AM | Report abuse

BB, since it's Lent I bought a baguette at Whole Foods to go with the fish soup for dinner last night. I'm not usually at WF -- too expensive for my family -- but they sell a cheese I like (d'affinois) and I thought they would have a good baguette to go with soup and cheese. It was dreadful: not airy and crisp at all; it was dense, and a little damp and chewey in a not-nice way. WF must have had the B team in the bakery.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | March 13, 2010 10:13 AM | Report abuse

fine, fine, apology accepted, 37th. Not sure you can fault me for sticking to your ModOp, though. You do pretty much fill up this board.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 13, 2010 9:33 AM | Report abuse

Liberals always judge others. They themselves are of course immune from scrutiny. It is the liberal way.

Posted by: Moonbat | March 13, 2010 9:24 AM | Report abuse

it was like finding one's personal coffee cup on a planet orbiting a distant star, stunningly unexpected.

Peds home world emerges.

Posted by: Moonbat | March 13, 2010 9:21 AM | Report abuse

Is it really broadwayjoe's place to sit in judgement of Chris???


Broadwayjoe acts like he is entitled to a certain kind of coverage by Chris - and that broadwayjoe is the sole person deciding what that coverage should be like.

The Obama people got used to a real coddling press - and now that reality is setting in, the Obama people are getting mad .... at the press.

That doesn't make any sense.

What is even worse, is that that Obama STILL is getting a relatively easy ride from the press -

The press is still really cautious about criticizing Obama - the late night comics are afraid of making jokes about Obama.


When all that comes back, when Obama is treated like everyone else - then everything else would be equal.

However, we are not at that point - Obama is still getting an easy ride and the Obama people are complaining because the press is not fawning.


When the really tough stuff starts, that's when there is a complaint.

However, at this point, broadwayjoe complains everytime a good thing is said about any Republican.

Broadwayjoe is a complete joke. Our democracy will be in much better shape when he and his bunch of pals are gone.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 3:14 AM | Report abuse

Lying piece of garbage. You repeat posts all the time.

Now I've heard everything ... a First Amendment lecture from a foghorn.

Posted by: Noacoler | March 13, 2010 3:13 AM | Report abuse

DDAWD


Ban yourself !


It was the computer getting jammed.

Your complaint is based on the content of the speech - not anything else.

Please have more respect for the First Amendment.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 3:05 AM | Report abuse

"It seems unfair that Republicans get to use bathrooms for anonymous sex and Democrats just get berated in the shower by Rahm Emmanuel."
-- The Onion

Posted by: Noacoler | March 13, 2010 2:38 AM | Report abuse

lol@37

I left a message to Chris on the last thread. 37th apparently was so afraid that the attention would be focused on someone else for a second that he decided to bury it with the same message four times.

Chris, anytime you want to ban this guy will be fine with me.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 13, 2010 1:00 AM | Report abuse

WIth regards to other matters, it's silly to accuse CC of some responsibility for a purported Republican takeover. Shooting the messenger is tiresome.

==

Come on, BB, you're smarter than that.  You've read BWJ's daily checks and you're know he's spot on.  Cillizza not only slants the news, he does so brazenly; cherry picking polls, chery picking WITHIN polls, ignoring good new for Obama and the Democrats, eternally painting a rosy picture for Republicans and excluding any information that leads elsewhere.  He reports GOP propaganda with zero critical analysis, more the stenographer than the messenger.  When Obama acquitted himself admirably at the HCR "summit" we got the first positive mention of the President since inauguration; it was like finding one's personal coffee cup on a planet orbiting a distant star, stunningly unexpected.

How many times did we read about Democratic retirements before a single mention that a larger number of Republicans are retiring?
Why is CC positively giddy about Republican nonentities nobody else cares about?  Why does he hyperventilate over anything that sounds good for Republicans, however bad it might be for the American people (are the two even separable)?

This blog is Drudge Lite.  No I don't think CC is part of some GOP conspiracy, but I do think he's carrying water for them in full hope of strengthening the wholly false impression that they have something to offer the nation and are on the way back.  They have nothing to offer the nation, they care only about power, and their performance in office would instantly and cruelly deepen our economic dilemma, they would get us into more wars, they would continue dismantling safety nets and eradicating the middle class.

And if the GOP is on its way back, God help the world.

Posted by: Noacoler | March 13, 2010 12:20 AM | Report abuse

It is entirely possible that Nancy and Steny have had enough of this whole thing.


Obama and the White House have been in fantasyland for the past month -

And all they have been doing is telling Nancy and Steny to pass a bill when it will put at risk the ENTIRE HOUSE LEADERSHIP - AND MANY HOUSE DEMOCRATIC SEATS.

Public opinion - Obama doesn't care about it.

It is entirely possible that Nancy is just going to call a vote - without having the votes - just to get it over with - just to finish it off.


Obama deserves it.


Think about it - if you were Speaker - and putting up with everything Obama has thrown at the House over the past year - and then Obama pulled what he has pulled over the past month - that bogus health care summit which was more like a lecture on what Obama wanted.

I would tell Obama to go stuff it.

Call the vote for Friday and tell the White House to get their own votes - give them the package they asked for and tell Obama - you are such a hot-shot - going around the country for 2 years telling everyone what you could accomplish in Washington.


But really all Obama has done is dump all the hard work on Nancy's doorstep.

Tell Obama to go pound salt - Tell Obama to get his own votes.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 12:19 AM | Report abuse

Nancy and Steny are moving forward without the votes - it sort of sounds like how this entire health care bill process has been - they pass a version of the bill in committee or even in the Chambers - and they say, "don't worry, this is not the final version of the bill."


Always implying that the final version will be much better.


Now they are preparing the final bill - but now it is "take it or leave it" - no negotiations about anything - any provision - no amendments at all.


Sure sounds like the free trade deal "fast track" votes - the ones that have practically destroyed the US economy.


Anyway, looks like Nancy and Steny are putting together the bill - and they DON'T have the votes. They are just going to sit there and present it to the members - and they are going to be 10 votes short on Thursday night.


At that point, they are going to call Obama - and say "It's your problem now."

The whole thing just has the sense that the democrats are moving forward - ignoring a reality in front of them - the piece from Caddell and Schoen was telling - they said the democrats lose either way.


The democrats will be better off if they health care bill fails.


Maybe that is what Nancy and Steny really want at this point - they want the bil to fail.


Maybe Nancy and Steny are going to tell the members at the last minute that they can vote against the bill - so 100 members have the opportunity to register a NO vote before the fall elections.


They can pass a much less expensive version of the health care bill that the Republicans like.


Or they can wait until next year when the Republicans are much stronger - and have real negotiations which produce a bill which will have real widespread bipartisan support.


That would ensure that any new programs don't get repealed or de-funded in the future.


Marching forward at this point - calling a for a vote on Friday or Saturday even though they Don't have the votes - and the path ahead is difficult - there must be some other reasoning at work right now.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 13, 2010 12:13 AM | Report abuse

FairlingtonBlade


There is no Republican take-over. This is a blog for freedom of speech - the free flow of ideas - and discussion.

It is your sick minds who treat this blog as something that should have one point of view prevailing. The democrats appear to feel something is "wrong" when other points of view are presented.

Others do not share that view. There is nothing "wrong."

This attitude has led the democrats to mock other posters, get nasty - even abandon all substance of postings in favor of attacking other posters.

You don't come on here to discuss anything - and now you are complaining about a "Republican take-over." What a joke. Other people disagree with you. Big Deal. You should have expected that all along - especially with your views.


.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 12, 2010 10:59 PM | Report abuse

Looks like Nancy does not have the votes - it appears that the 14 potential switch votes are dwindling - Nancy needs at least 7 to switch in order to save the bill.


However that 14 is now down to 12.


And Stupak probably has 10. So it is really tight. All is needed now is a block of 5 0r 6 democrats to get together and announce they are firm "no"s and that is it.


It is pretty close to being out of reach.


In addition, now the Hispanic members appear to be making noise - they might be looking to make some sort of deal - however it is breaking out to be even more problems - rather than momentum in the right direction for Nancy.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 12, 2010 10:36 PM | Report abuse

It's kinda weird that Zouk is compelled to comment under two different names. Then again, I assume JakeD3 is a regular around here, so Zouk's not the only one around here with some serious issues.

WIth regards to other matters, it's silly to accuse CC of some responsibility for a purported Republican takeover. Shooting the messenger is tiresome.

Oh, and seriously. To any of the locals. Check out Best Buns. The best baguettes I've been able to buy around here. A brioche to die for (but only on Saturdays). And some serious cupcakes.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | March 12, 2010 9:28 PM | Report abuse

"Don’t you ever lie awake nights thinking about what damage you’re aiding? How many would die as a result of the people you support regaining any power? The death of American integrity?"

No and he could have no clue what you are talking about. Well I guess that is why we bother. Sure I like to see how they think, because the left's echo chamber problem is at least as ridiculous as it is to the right. But it isn't really a joke.

Though I won't stop joking. It is a matter of life and death.

Posted by: shrink2 | March 12, 2010 9:02 PM | Report abuse

ON Obama postponing his Indonesian family trip:


Pelosi said, "I am delighted the president will be here .........

SO OBAMA CAN TAKE THE BLAME.

.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 12, 2010 8:07 PM | Report abuse

When Waxman says he does NOT want to change federal law on abortion - and then the Senate bill changes the law - why are they lying to the country???


What is wrong with these people??

Why can't they just be honest ????


Psychos -


..

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 12, 2010 7:17 PM | Report abuse

A view from the safari:


Cupcakes are for children's birthday parties

Happy hunting Ped.

Posted by: drivl | March 12, 2010 7:00 PM | Report abuse

Way to dodge the question on Massa, Chris, you suck as a journalist.

Posted by: JRM2 | March 12, 2010 6:33 PM | Report abuse

Ped. It is good if your angry phase subsides and your good humor returns.

Posted by: Moonbat | March 12, 2010 5:45 PM | Report abuse

For heaven's sake BB don't mention kids and buns in the same sentence or you'll have zouk awake all night.

Posted by: Noacoler | March 12, 2010 5:39 PM | Report abuse

The all night ped session begins.

Posted by: Moonbat | March 12, 2010 5:01 PM | Report abuse

Don't forget Best Buns in Shirlington! And they're definitely not just for kids.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | March 12, 2010 4:47 PM | Report abuse

Cupcakes are for children's birthday parties. I think you want to write about muffins, the American answer to the continental breakfast.

Posted by: Noacoler | March 12, 2010 3:53 PM | Report abuse

A: Chris Cillizza: Well, perception matters -- a lot -- in politics.

==
 
And what a pity reality has to take a back seat to it.
 
So for the enterprising Republican such as yourself disinterested in truth relative to shaping perceptions to favor Republicans, truth is an enemy to be combated at every turn.  If the Republicans want to play themselves as fiscally responsible and friend of the common man, both entirely false, they can count on you to help.  Democratic scandals!!  Republican rising!! Pickup opportunities!! 
 
Don’t you ever lie awake nights thinking about what damage you’re aiding?  How many would die as a result of the people you support regaining any power?  The death of American integrity?
 
Guess not.
 
 

Posted by: Noacoler | March 12, 2010 3:50 PM | Report abuse

How about the Udall family for a good political dynasty. Mark and Tom are both sitting Senators and Gordon Smith just got ousted in 2008. Mo Udall was a pretty effective rep in NM.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 12, 2010 3:20 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company