Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Five House Democrats to watch on health care

1. There is only one thing that matters this week in the political world: whether or not House Democrats can find the 216 votes they need to pass the health care bill before President Obama heads out of the country on Sunday. The original House bill passed by the narrowest of margins -- 220 votes -- meaning that every vote counts this time around.

We spoke to a handful of Republican and Democratic strategists and here are the five members likely to come under the most intense pressure from both sides in this final week of lobbying.

1) John Boccieri: The Ohio freshman, who voted "no" on the bill in November, has two competing (and large) constituencies to consider -- older voters who are wary about any changes to the health care bill and working class families who would likely feel the most positive impact from the bill. He also faces a serious reelection fight from businessman Jim Renacci (R).

2) Scott Murphy: Murphy, elected in a 2009 special election in the Albany-area 20th district, ran -- and won -- on a promise to work for the president's agenda in Washington. As a result, his initial "no" vote baffled many party strategists.

3) Jason Altmire: The sophomore Democrat from western Pennsylvania publicly hemmed and hawed for weeks before eventually deciding not to vote for the bill. That initial uncertainty has Democratic leaders convinced they can turn him around although Republicans have recruited a former U.S. attorney to challenge him in the fall.

4) Kathy Dahlkemper (Pa.): Dahlkemper's personal circumstances could well affect her vote as she has lost both of her parents in the last two months and, as a result, end-of-life issues are very much on her mind, according to knowledgeable sources. But, Dahlkemper is pro-life and remains skeptical about voting for the abortion language in the Senate bill.

5) Tom Perriello (Va.): Perriello has gained a reputation as one of the White House's favorite new members thanks to his willingness to back not only cap and trade but also health care despite the swing nature of his 5th district. Given the reelection storm that appears to be building against Democrats, Perriello could well switch to "no" but in doing so he would need to find a way to explain to voters what would look like an open and shut case of political flip-floppery.

ALSO READ: Pollster Doug Schoen's piece on the political impact of switching from "no" to "yes".

2. Liberal groups will spend approximately $11 million on television ads in 45 Democratic-held districts between today and the expected House vote on health care this weekend, according to a source familiar with the strategy. The effort is an attempt to combat the heavy spending by a slew of conservative-aligned groups urging members of Congress to scrap the bill and start over.

"Members should know that when they are attacked by hack inside-the-Beltway rackets like Americans for Prosperity, and when they do the right thing, we will have their backs," said a Democratic operative close to the health care effort.

There will be two major thrusts of advertising. The first will come from Americans for Stable and Quality Care -- a broad coalition of groups that includes PhRMA and the liberal Families United among others. The group will sponsor two basic ads -- both positive in nature -- in a total of 45 districts. One, which will run in districts represented by Democrats who voted for the original legislation, will tout the immediate positive changes (pre-existing conditions etc.) in the bill. The other, running in seats held by Democrats who voted against the bill in November, will include language that many Democrats say encapsulates their best argument -- that the public will be eligible for the same care as members of Congress.

The other major player will be a group led by Health Care for America Now (HCAN) as well as two major labor unions -- Service Employees International Union and the American Federation for State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME). That coalition will run ads in 16 Democratic-districts hammering insurance companies and urging Members not to give in to them by voting against the bill.

3. In the last four days, two new polls have come out that paint VERY different pictures of Sen. Arlen Specter's (D) relative vulnerability this fall. On Monday came a poll from Susquehanna Polling and Research that showed former Rep. Pat Toomey (R) leading Specter 42 percent to 36 percent. Those results come close to directly contradicting a Research 2000 survey sponsored by the liberal Daily Kos blog released last Friday that showed Specter ahead 47 percent to 41 percent. Those numbers come on top of a Quinnipiac University poll released earlier this month that put Specter ahead of Toomey by a 49 percent to 42 percent margin. What gives?

Polling, as we have often written in this space, is part science and part art. Figuring out what the electorate will look like this November is a guessing game particularly given the huge surge in Democratic registration in the 2008 presidential election. Given that, the best way to assess the state of the race is to take one BIG step back and look at a collection of all the data on the race. That process shows Toomey with a lead of about two points on Specter, which seems about right to us. (Thanks to Real Clear Politics for their great polling aggregation tool!) The simple fact is that the race -- either the primary between Specter and Rep. Joe Sestak or the general election -- doesn't exist in the minds of most voters yet because neither candidate is on television or directly communicating with voters in any meaningful way. It's hard to imagine then that Specter has moved his number upwards in any significant way. Specter looks like a favorite -- albeit it a slight one -- in the primary but it's far too early to draw conclusions about the race in November.

4. Appointed Colorado Sen. Michael Bennet's (D) first electoral test comes later today when Democrats gather at their precinct caucuses to choose their preferred candidate. While the caucuses are non-binding -- the only thing they govern is whose name appears first on the ballot -- the Bennet forces were already downplaying expectations in advance of the vote, noting that former House speaker Andrew Romanoff, who is challenging the incumbent, has spent more than a decade assiduously courting the very people who will attend the caucuses.

And, they rightly note, that winning the Colorado caucuses have been a poor indicator of primary winners for decades. In 2004, then state Attorney General Ken Salazar (D) lost the caucuses to Mike Miles but swamped Miles in the primary; ditto on the Republican side where beer magnate Pete Coors lost the caucuses to former representative Bob Schaffer but crushed the former congressman in the primary.

Still, a convincing caucus win by Romanoff would likely draw significant national attention as it would feed into two existing media narratives: the anti-incumbent sentiment in the country and the waning political power of the Obama White House. Republicans, too, will head to the caucuses tonight to choose between a handful of potential Senate nominees led by former lieutenant governor Jane Norton and former state senator Tom Wiens.

5. A new poll conducted for North Carolina Secretary of State Elaine Marshall's (D) Senate campaign casts her as the clear frontrunner in the May 4 primary fight. Marshall takes 31 percent as compared to five percent for former state senator Cal Cunningham and four percent for attorney Ken Lewis in the survey, which was done by Celinda Lake.

Some (most?) of that lead is rightly ascribed to name identification. Marshall has been in her current post since the mid 1990s and ran unsuccessfully for Senate in 2002 while Cunningham and Lewis are newer to the political scene in the Tarheel State. Roughly seven in ten Democratic primary voters knew enough about Marshall to offer an opinion -- her favorable rating outstripped her unfavorable one by 29 points, according to Lake -- while just half of the primary electorate recognized Cunningham.

"Cunningham would need to use most of his campaign contributions just to catch up to Marshall in name identification alone," concludes Lake in a memo detailing the poll results. Cunningham, who opted out of the race against Sen. Richard Burr (R) before ultimately reconsidering, is regarded as the favorite of the national party establishment but it remains unclear whether he can make up enough ground on Marshall to win the nod.

Burr started the 2010 election as one of Democrats' top targets but the party has struggled to find a top-tier candidate while the political climate has tilted against them.

By Chris Cillizza  |  March 16, 2010; 5:38 AM ET
Categories:  Morning Fix  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: "Saturday Night Live" takes on Eric Massa
Next: The politics of health care passage

Comments

With the below post, it is obvious that someone did not take their medication today. Best argument for health care reform is that "gramps" here needs his pills so he does not go off on un-educated, tick-filled rants like this drivel: "
Anyone who voted for Obama did something EXTREMELY IRRESPONSIBLE WITH THIS COUNTRY


This country is hurting - and it is worse and worse by the day - because the White House is IGNORING THE ECONOMY AND JOBS.


Instead, Obama, a person who really should not be in the White House, is OBSESSED WITH AN EGO TRIP TO PASS SOME LEGISLATION WHICH WILL PROBABLY BE REPEALED.


It is a joke.


All Obama is doing is creating a debate - who was worse for the country Obama or Hoover ????


MEANWHILE, MILLIONS OF VOTERS REGRET THEIR VOTE FOR OBAMA - AND MILLIONS MORE BLAME THEM FOR VOTING FOR AN INEXPERIENCED PERSON - MAKING THE RECESSION EVEN WORSE.


People should wear "I'm sorry" stickers.


That would show everyone around them that they take personal responsibility for the disaster of Obama - and they are wiling to say "I'm Sorry."


.


Posted by: fenarkleman | March 17, 2010 4:12 PM | Report abuse

Looks like some far right wing inbred, completely inebriated socially bankrupt un-American group called AFP just called Kathy Dahlkemper "soft on cancer" with ads targeting her, despite the fact that she lost both of her parents to cancer. Wow! Takes some cajongas to do that, right? I guess AFP just pushed Dahlkemper into the yes on MUCH-NEED health care reform.

Posted by: fenarkleman | March 17, 2010 4:09 PM | Report abuse

Looks like some far right wing inbred, completely inebriated socially bankrupt un-American group called AFP just called Kathy Dahlkemper "soft on cancer" with ads targeting her, despite the fact that she lost both of her parents to cancer. Wow! Takes some cajongas to do that, right? I guess AFP just pushed Dahlkemper into the yes on MUCH-NEED health care reform.

Posted by: fenarkleman | March 17, 2010 4:09 PM | Report abuse

Anyone who voted for Obama did something EXTREMELY IRRESPONSIBLE WITH THIS COUNTRY


This country is hurting - and it is worse and worse by the day - because the White House is IGNORING THE ECONOMY AND JOBS.


Instead, Obama, a person who really should not be in the White House, is OBSESSED WITH AN EGO TRIP TO PASS SOME LEGISLATION WHICH WILL PROBABLY BE REPEALED.


It is a joke.


All Obama is doing is creating a debate - who was worse for the country Obama or Hoover ????


MEANWHILE, MILLIONS OF VOTERS REGRET THEIR VOTE FOR OBAMA - AND MILLIONS MORE BLAME THEM FOR VOTING FOR AN INEXPERIENCED PERSON - MAKING THE RECESSION EVEN WORSE.


People should wear "I'm sorry" stickers.


That would show everyone around them that they take personal responsibility for the disaster of Obama - and they are wiling to say "I'm Sorry."

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 16, 2010 11:06 PM | Report abuse

bgreen it is fine that you don't want to live in Austin, one of the greatest city's in the country, but there is absolutely no reason to trash all Texans for the lunacy of our current imbecile for a governor. You see while he and a few of his extremists followers felt that his comment about secession was cute, the rest of us didn't, were offended by it, and doing everything we can to term limit him in Nov with a leader who respects all Texans, not just the views here of the far far right. So please don't lump us all in that category, try as you might.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 16, 2010 8:48 PM | Report abuse

mil1 I am impressed with the debt of your knowledge of Texas economic statistics.
When you mentioned that boomers live here b/c of our No State Income Tax policy however you failed to mention that we also have one of the highest property taxes in the nation; double that of California. With our diverse population it is also amazing that we have gone from being one of the most tolerant to most intolerant states in the nation. As a native I have sadly watched this transformation over my lifetime, it is disgraceful. The conversation about whether we are a donor or donee state while interesting fails to consider the lunacy of our current governor's refusal to accept federal stimulus money, especially since we are projected to have an $11 billion dollar shortfall next year and our state constitition does not allow for having a deficit. While we are in better shape economically then most other states, you and other Texans are fooling yourself if you think that all is well in paradise. The governor certainly does not want any Texan to know of this exploding deficit we are soon to face.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 16, 2010 8:40 PM | Report abuse

mil1:
After reading your post I can see how proud you are, but nevertheless, Texas falls far short in more categories than we've got time to cover.
But if you'd like to add to your most-est and gooder-est, how about leading the nation in the number of innocent people executed by the state (Cameron Todd Willingham is a good name for you to start with), has more uninsured children than any other state and pays the most per mile of toll road than any other state.
Rather than go back and forth, tho, let's just agree that Texas is a drug smugglers' paradise and an economic parasite that the US won't miss when you decide to cut and run, a Texas trait.

Posted by: bgreen2224 | March 16, 2010 8:29 PM | Report abuse

Mark_in_Austin:
Perhaps you haven't understood that my point was that Texas does NOT live up to the image of a pull-itself up by it own bootstraps state. As I said earlier, those 'boots' are furnished by other non-Texan taxpayers. And, I really take exception to the threats from the current Governor who seems to think he can depart from the US and actually make a go of it. Unfortunately, this nonsense is perpetuated by people in the Bubba category -- though, with Texas' new educational standards, I believe your schools have a good chance of turning every Texan into that category. But,perhaps its just a clever plan to narrow the learning gap between those who drop out of Texas' high schools (there are a LOT aren't there?) and those who do graduate. If so, I believe it'll work.

But you chose to cite a reference that includes Social security taxes in computing whether a state is a 'donor' or not, and as I tried to explain -- I was typing slowly for you, though not without errors -- that if you include payroll taxes in the flow of money to D.C., you inflate the amount of money sent and thus, more states that are listed as 'donors' that actually are not -- like Texas.
As you are well aware, for the first time in history, the payroll tax level is set high, to cover not current Social Security benefits, but also to cushion those in the future from an unmanageable burden as our workforce shrinks.
If that extra payroll tax amount is included in the calculation as your source chooses to do, 'donor' states like Texas appear to be sending more money than they get back, and I can see how you became confused.
Since you picked a source that presents a list of 'donor states' that comes about by including the Social Security monies, my thought was that you could see if they could make a more accurate presentation. Now that you have revealed that you don't know anything about your source, I think you might want not to use them, at least for 'proving' that Texans can put on boots that are their OWN.

Posted by: bgreen2224 | March 16, 2010 7:46 PM | Report abuse

My point being that Texas as a "France" size European country would be quite sucessful without the US federal govt but it's history has been supported (off and on) by the federal structure. (in 1850 the federal govt took land from Texas as payment for taking on the 10 million dollars in debt the Republic had run up).

But compare California to Texas (California is listed as by the Tax Foundation as a "donee" state and as number 48 in 50 for good climate for business; Texas is number 11 in business climate). California gives it's money and about 14 cents of the federal tax dollars out in subsidies--in California's case, welfare, education and transportation. Texas on the other hand is basically giving that 14 cents to California (although in the past 5 years it's been more like 5 to 7 cents).

This is why Texans view "donee" states with disdain--we support ourselves and others. And yes, through payroll and corporate taxes.

Mark-in-Austin, who I rarely agree with, is correct in that his comparison is an apples to apples one and shows that less govt not more for one state means federally we end up supporting the bigger, less successful and more spendthrift govts of other states.

Yes, it's a federal system but sometimes it appears that it's failure versus success that this system rewards; and frankly I don't think that was the model that the founders were think of.

Posted by: mil1 | March 16, 2010 6:47 PM | Report abuse

bgreen, your point would be the same for every state. This material is relative: for 2009 all states were donees thanks to ARRA.

The 2005 numbers show all large industrial states as donors because they have the concentration of taxpayers in abundance. All small ag states are donees because a smaller proportion of taxpayers pay in big bucks. I am not complaining that NM and OK and LA are net donees - they are poor states.

I only want to correct the notion that TX is a net donee in a non-stimulus year, comparing states as we normally do. Your accounting suggestion to eliminate SS from the mix is appealing, but it would make all the industrial wage paying states probable donees, although the ag states would still be bigger donees by reason of fewer large taxpayers in the progressive personal tax system and fewer corporate taxpayers.
In other words, without payroll taxes, the deficit in the federal budget is revealed and all states are DONEES.

I do not know the authors of the report ["The Tax Foundation"] but I have no reason to think it "skews" in favor of making TX look like a donor. The volume of payroll taxes is significant, but not so much as say the corporate taxes paid by the 50% of the American petrochemical industry in metro Houston.

Are we talking past each other? Do you have some interest in making TX a donee by reason of an apples-to-oranges comparison? Am I being unfair in some way that you can explain, or have I understood your argument?

Posted by: mark_in_austin | March 16, 2010 5:44 PM | Report abuse

bgreen: I have ignored your Texas rant because it really doesn't make sense.

Why? Because:

Texas had a gross state product (GSP) of $1.09 trillion, the second highest in the U.S. Its GSP is comparable to the GDP of India or Canada which are ranked 12th and 11th worldwide. Texas's economy is the third largest in the world of country subdivisions behind California and Tokyo Prefecture. Its Per Capita personal income in 2007 was $37,083, ranking 22nd in the nation. Texas's large population, abundance of natural resources, and diverse population and geography have led to a large and diverse economy. Since oil was discovered, the state's economy has reflected the state of the petroleum industry.

Texas has the most farms and the highest acreage in the United States. Texas leads the nation livestock production. Cattle is the state's most valuable agricultural product, and the state leads nationally in production of sheep and goat products. Texas leads the nation in production of cotton. The state grows significant amounts of cereal crops and produce. Texas has a large commercial fishing industry. With mineral resources, Texas leads in creating cement, crushed stone, lime, salt, sand and gravel. (from Netstate.com)

According to the Energy Information Administration, Texans consume the most energy in the nation per capita and as a whole. Unlike the rest of the nation, most of Texas is on its own alternating current power grid, the Texas Interconnection. Texas still has a deregulated electric service.

The state is a leader in renewable energy sources; it produces the most wind power in the nation. (also from the Engry Information Administration). The Horse Hollow Wind Energy Center in Taylor and Nolan County, Texas, is the world's largest wind farm as of November 2008 with a 735.5 megawatt (MW) capacity. (from FPL Energy).

The Energy Information Administration states that the state's large agriculture and forestry industries could give Texas an enormous amount biomass for use in biofuels. The state also has the highest solar power potential for development in the nation.

So your rant about taking doesn't apparently count the fact that Texas gives Texans and the rest of the country quite a bit back.

And why do boomers live here? Well, for one--NO STATE INCOME TAX and a sales tax of 8.5 percent (on average). And a level of living that keeps your fixed income in the middle class versus the working poor range.

Posted by: mil1 | March 16, 2010 5:28 PM | Report abuse

Scott Murphy didn't baffle his constituents, he betrayed them. Either he votes for the health care bill this time or his a.. is out of office come fall

Posted by: SmallTownGov | March 16, 2010 5:22 PM | Report abuse

The Social Security Scam

I have been trying to expose the Social Security scam for more than a decade, but nobody would listen. I appeared on CNN Today, with anchor Lou Waters, on September 27, 2000 to discuss my then newly published book, “The Alleged Budget Surplus, Social Security, and Voodoo Economics.” I tried to convince Waters that the government was spending Social Security money on other government programs. He just looked at me in disbelief and asked, “Are you a voice crying in the wilderness?” As it turned out I was a voice crying in the wilderness in 2000, and I have continued to be such a voice ever since. During that ten-year period, I have published four books on Social Security, the latest being “THE BIG LIE: How Our Government Hoodwinked the Public, Emptied the Social Security Trust Fund, and caused The Great Economic Collapse.” In addition, I have appeared on The Dolans (CNNfn), on CNBC, and on more than 170 radio talk shows in my crusade to expose the scam. I made extensive efforts in 2000 to persuade Al Gore to break ranks with Bill Clinton and pledge to end the raiding of the trust fund.

I have been outraged ever since I stumbled onto the scam more than ten years ago, and I have wanted to tell the whole world so everybody would be outraged. The fact that our government has “borrowed,” “embezzled,” or “stolen” $2.5 trillion of workers’ contributions to Social Security has to be “the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the American people by their government.” Like Harry Markopolis, who unsuccessfully tried to expose Bernie Madoff for nine years, I have been trying to expose the Social Security scam for more than a decade, but nobody would believe me. I urge everyone who cares about the future of Social Security to visit my website at www.thebiglie.net and learn the rest of the story.

Allen W. Smith, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics Emeritus
Eastern Illinois University

Posted by: ironwoodas | March 16, 2010 4:57 PM | Report abuse

MARK_IN_AUSTIN
Texas has a larg workforce and therefore the amount of money Texans send in social security is large, much large than returned. However, if you lump this amount in with other payments from Texas you get a sum that cannot then be compared to the total amount sent back to Texas. As you know Social Security is attempting to build reserves for later distribution as boomer retire.
You picked a study that ignores the inflated effect of high Social Security payemnts so states with large workforces will typically 'look' like donor states.
The figures should be adjusted to show a wash on Social security -- the amount sent out should equal the amount sent in, OR all Social security payments going in AND out should be ignored.
Your cited source doesn't make this adjustment, so Texas looks like it's a 'donor' state. With the 94% return that KBH achieved, adjusting the numbers this way would probably make her look much more accomplished -- but I couldn't care less about her political future.
In any case, just so you get it, including Social security payments FROM Texas make it look much more generous than it really is. Talk to your buddies that published the report if you want accurate figures.

Posted by: bgreen2224 | March 16, 2010 4:41 PM | Report abuse

mark_in_austin claims that Texas sends more money to Washington than it gets back and indeed, the report he cites claims just that.
HOWEVER, mark, as you and others well know, Social Security taxes are pouring into Washington and NOT being disbursed, as baby boom retirees are just beginning to claim their benefits. Social Security surpluses are held back for future distribution. Counting all those amounts as they go in and pretending they should be compared to current disbursements allows paracitic states like Texas to claim "donor" status. Now, if Texas ends upon the opposite end, getting huge disbursements because boomers retire their in droves(why??), it would also be 'unfair' to try to make the case against Texas.
But right now, and for quite a long time, Texas attachs itself to the US like a huge leech, bringing in much more than it sends out, and wants to 'account' for it only in typical 'Lone Star' fashion.

Nice try, Bubba. Didya wurk fer Enron?

Posted by: bgreen2224 | March 16, 2010 1:15 PM | Report abuse
---------------------------
I never worked for Enron. I do not understand your criticism. I compared "apples" to "apples". The states that border TX are donees and TX is a donor.

If you are trying to say that there are no true "donor" states because of social security pay-in, say that and back it up. For all I know, it may be true, as I have not researched that.
==============
Something that I have researched is the claim that we pay undocs social security. We do not. In fact, IAs pay into SS when they work, but never collect b/c they do not have legit SS accts. One reason SS will not accept responsibility if an employer fires an employee whose SS # does not ck out is the error margin in SS reports back to employers. Another reason is b/c SS is collecting money on them it will pay out to the rest of us.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | March 16, 2010 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Geez what happen to us being the United States of America. Who would have ever thought having a black president and paying for wars but not helping the poor would amount to this. What happen to the compassionate conservative or does that term no longer exist. Wow and the uprising in the states, what are we to make of this? Is this 2010 Civil War? Will the tea party form militia and succeed from the Union? Let’s stay tuned and see.

Posted by: Goleftstopatred | March 16, 2010 4:09 PM | Report abuse

angie: living within your means is not hurting the poor and middle class--it's stopping the madness of spending what you don't have...

And yes, it should have been done years ago but it wasn't. It has to be done because the days of living on credit are over. If those who have money are forced to pay, then soon they will not have money and then what?

So now is the time. The middle class will survive---the poor? Well, US poor have subsided housing with indoor plumbing, TVs, cars in some cases and make 17 times what the poor in say, Mexico make. So it that poverty or is it subsidy?

In any case, the poor can't be carried on the backs of anyone else (not just shouldn't but can no longer be carried!) It isn't charity to make people dependent on your care even if you mean well.

This isn't evil, it's realistic and should, as I said,have been done earlier but can't be done any later than now.

Posted by: mil1 | March 16, 2010 4:02 PM | Report abuse

Typical Republican - hurting the poor and middle class while bowing to the Wealthy! But Righties believe in Reagan's trickle down theory that failed and failed again under Bush.

Mar. 16, 2010
>>>>Upending the priorities of his Democratic predecessors, Governor Christie unveiled a budget that would hit the poor, elderly, schoolchildren, college students and inner-city residents hardest, while largely sparing the wealthy and businesses.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/17/nyregion/17budget.html?src=me&ref=nyregion

Posted by: angie12106 | March 16, 2010 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Typical Republican - hurting the poor and middle class while bowing to the Wealthy! But Righties believe in Reagan's trickle down theory that failed and failed again under Bush.

Mar. 16, 2010
>>>>Upending the priorities of his Democratic predecessors, Governor Christie unveiled a budget that would hit the poor, elderly, schoolchildren, college students and inner-city residents hardest, while largely sparing the wealthy and businesses.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/17/nyregion/17budget.html?src=me&ref=nyregion

Posted by: angie12106 | March 16, 2010 3:47 PM | Report abuse

have no idea if the story is true but you should note, ER care if you have no insurance is "free"--i.e. you are seen even if you can't pay. An office visit will be charged to you (or your insurance or Medicaid or Medicare etc). Many uninsured wait hours to be seen in ER because of this--not because it's an "emergency" but rather they've waited as long as they could and now (to them) it's an emergency....

So, the story is heavy handed...but not the fact, that an ER doc sees all kinds, and many not "emergencies" (so there's no one left who watched ER on TV? Man, I am getting old).

Posted by: mil1 | March 16, 2010 3:32 PM | Report abuse

This from one of the tea-baggers here:

"As the lunatic wing of the Democrat Party prepares for the great leap into socialism by ramming through a federal healthcare entitlement certain to lead to national bankruptcy, now might be a good time to reprint highlights from a letter that Dr. Roger Starner Jones wrote to the Jackson, Mississippi Clarion Ledger:

During my last night's shift in the ER, I had the pleasure of evaluating a patient with a shiny new gold tooth, multiple elaborate tattoos, a very expensive brand of tennis shoes and a new cellular telephone equipped with her favorite R&B; tune for a ring tone.
Glancing over the chart, one could not help noticing her payer status: Medicaid.
She smokes more than one costly pack of cigarettes every day and, somehow, still has money to buy beer. And our President expects me to pay for this woman's health care?
Our nation's health care crisis is not a shortage of quality hospitals, doctors or nurses. It is a crisis of culture — a culture in which it is perfectly acceptable to spend money on vices while refusing to take care of one's self or, heaven forbid, purchase health insurance.
A culture that thinks I can do whatever I want to because someone else will always take care of me.
There it is in a nutshell: the depraved infantilism of liberalism, which demands that those who take responsibility become slaves to those who do not.

No culture rotted through with this mentality can survive indefinitely. Our healthcare system is only the beginning of what we stand to lose."

Note the important aspects of this piece-1) the patient had a shiny new gold tooth, (How the evaluator new it was a new tooth I don't know). The patient had tattoos (think hoodlum). And, most importantly, the patient had R&B on their Ipod, (apparently the Doc must have sampled some tunes). You get the idea yet? Come on tea-baggers, I know you tend to be think sometimes. Did you decipher what this Mississippi piece was telling you?
Now let's stipulate that every single thing this "doctor" wrote was true. What was left out? The patient was seen in an ER, so it is most likely true this was an emergency situation, (since the patient had the ability to be treated conventionally, in an office setting with much less disruption due to their coverage). This piece is either very phony, or very misleading-in other words, mother's milk to tea-baggers everywhere.

Posted by: whereareweandwhatarewedoinginthishandbasket | March 16, 2010 3:25 PM | Report abuse

well, the military is very much a socialist society...however, I am not thinking so much of price fixing as setting a level--like gas, milk and basic groceries are set. I know this is set by subsidies as well as fair market value but it would be better aligned than what we currently have where the public (and I mean me in particular) can't figure out where these prices come from and what is a "good" figure.

Posted by: mil1 | March 16, 2010 3:24 PM | Report abuse

Is there any way America can DEEM that Obama is not the President anymore?


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 16, 2010 3:22 PM | Report abuse

tricare is really cheap especially for meds, but it too is socialist according to the right. I agree that costs ought to be posted on insur company web sites for procedures especially with some patients telling physicians I want 3 different MRIs not considering their cost. Right now it comes down to what your HC wants to pay according to your zip and whether you are in a capitated plan or not. To do what you suggest would lead to charges of price fixing and then you would really hear screamng from the right.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 16, 2010 3:15 PM | Report abuse

Is there any way America can DEEM that Obama is not the President anymore?

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 16, 2010 3:03 PM | Report abuse

as a boomer mil I presume you have studied history a bit and understand that SS was created in the 30s as a safety net, not as a retirement plan that the right wants to incorrectly pidgeon hole it as. May I remind you what Hooverviles were all about. Belive me your mom's Medicare and even with her suppliment to Medicare is likely paying less than 1/2 in premiums what most early retirees are stuck with in the neighborhood of $2000/month.

leichtman1
________
Yes, I do understand and have studied history. And yes, not just early retirees but anyone currently with a family pay something like $2000/month.

I am not opposed to reforming health care insurance or health care. What I oppose is this bill which nether reforms insurance (it's being done with the insurance companies compliance for heaven's sake) nor reforms health care--can anyone show me a list for what it should cost for the most simple of medical procedures--say blood tests for instance? It's because it doesn't exist, worse yet, a doctor or his/her office can't tell you because the pay schedule is different depending on what insurance you have.

My household is a mix--I have TRICARE, my children (adults) are pay as you go, my mother has supplementary and Medicare---we all pay different costs for the same blood tests--and worse, the base cost is different for each. In our state (Texas) pay as you go is cheaper than insurance for these tests--Medicare and TRICARE (which are about the same) are even cheaper with TRICARE being the cheapest--possibly because it pays the poorest.)

This makes no sense--it's the same office, the same doctor, the same technician, the same lab--but you can't get a single answer on what the cost is BEFORE you get the test because it's all determined by INSURANCE or NOT....

I want reform---not a govt cut of what the insurance industry currently thinks it's owed.

Posted by: mil1 | March 16, 2010 3:02 PM | Report abuse

yes, and cons don't have hearts, brains or courage either, so--so much for that idea.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 2:53 PM | Report abuse

Recently, in light of the new Obama economy, I bought a new car.

when I say bought what I really mean is that I borrowed money I don't have nor ever expect to have.

I am going to leave the bill to my kids, long after the carcass of the vehicle is dragged away.

I plan on paying for it by subtracting the amount from my house payment. If the mortgage company objects, I will shift over some money from my citibank card. If that ever becomes a problem, I can always offer my new car as leverage.

by the time the kids figure this out, I will be gone. I told them I'd be saving up for the next three years to cover it.

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

drindl, have you also

".... sold (your) possessions and goods, and parted them to all, according as any man had need." ?

No? Why not? Acts 2:45 says you should and I believe that the 1st century interpretation of this meant sell your house, you personal goods, and keep nothing as your personal possession as Christian society would keep you until Christ's return...

Oh,right. I see 2000 years of interpretation by many, many all too human Christians have changed what 21st Century Christians think versus what lst century Christians thought might be the best way to live---(remembering that 1st century Christians were convinced was the end of time).

Early Christians practiced communism (small c) because they felt it would lead toward a perfected society--however, ACTS goes on to say that this "perfected society" led to stealing, jealousy and internal fighting over who was being treated fairly and caused these early societies to split apart....

"Social justice" can't be legislated is what ACTS shows...it has to come from the heart, not the State.

Posted by: mil1 | March 16, 2010 2:51 PM | Report abuse

well at least the truth be known. R bloggers universally promote the end of Medicare and Social Security for all, they are just struggling to tell Fla and Arizona voters how long that should take and which election cycle to formally make that pronouncement known to voters. Thanks for your honesty.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 16, 2010 2:51 PM | Report abuse

Obama has turned Washington into a CIRCUS.


Instead of concentrating the ECONOMY - Obama is off on some goose-hunt on health care.


Instead of actually passing a bill by VOTING, OBAMA WANTS HIS PROGRAM DEEMED TO BE PASSED.


Instead of actually doing his job to protect the country, Obama wants to give the terrorists a lawyer and a chance to get off in civilian courts.


Obama has created a complete CIRCUS in Washington.

No one in the country needs this clown - and it just gets worse and worse.


The people who voted for Obama are RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS DISASTER - who in their right mind would vote for someone with such little experience - with such little track-record.


There were hundreds, maybe thousands of people in this country, many with actual BUSINESS AND ECONOMIC EXPERIENCE, who would have made BETTER PRESIDENTS.


Start asking people WHO THEY VOTED FOR AND BLAME THEM.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 16, 2010 2:51 PM | Report abuse

This is typical of all political parties: My way or the highway. They don’t want independent thinkers, or any members that vote their conscience or the way their constituents want. They want members to toe the line, vote the way leadership tells them to vote.

Posted by: brunnegd | March 16, 2010 2:50 PM | Report abuse

think bold leapin. Tell Rubio and McCain voters this Nov how urgent it is that we end all of granny's socialist HC now. Why think in incriments; the GOP needs to be bold and tell seniors what they truly believe and let the chips fall where they may. Sound good to you leapin? End Medicare and SS now isn't that what you want?

Posted by: leichtman1
------------------------------------------
Like the Big O says you have to be brave, courageous. But it can be done in phases to protect the current granny. I'm sorry but it is hard for me to adjust to the new progressive economy where you don't have to live within your means like my granny told me.

Posted by: leapin | March 16, 2010 2:42 PM | Report abuse

as a boomer mil I presume you have studied history a bit and understand that SS was created in the 30s as a safety net, not as a retirement plan that the right wants to incorrectly pidgeon hole it as. May I remind you what Hooverviles were all about. Belive me your mom's Medicare and even with her suppliment to Medicare is likely paying less than 1/2 in premiums what most early retirees are stuck with in the neighborhood of $2000/month.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 16, 2010 2:38 PM | Report abuse

McCann is a RINO and you can convince him of just about anything that sounds progressive, so I doubt he would be for no SS or Medicare (as I am).

Rubio does have a strong (democrat) base of seniors, who like my mom would not care to see SS or Medicare go away--except you need to know my mother went out and bought, on her meager SS "pay"--her very own health insurance and uses this private insurance (together with Medicare, because frankly you if you make less than $8400 like my mom you can't afford the premiums...) so, maybe you'd be surprised at who might support this.
And Rubio might find that there are boomers like me who don't want to transfer this debt to then next generation and the one after that (oh, and the next generation also votes these days...)

That's not to say I wouldn't like my $2400 a month that I should get for SS--it's just I don't believe I will EVER see it. And Mom knows she "earns" too much to, for instance, get her teeth, which are falling out, fixed (at 84 you can decide if that is a "death panel" issue or not....good teeth aren't covered as it's an issue of paying the first $6000 as it's all office work not covered by Medicare....)

I can repeat often enough--some of us don't want these kinds of return of our taxes...I would much prefer the govt just pay back what I put in...but apparently the govt is bankrupt and can't....SO PLEASE STOP ADDING TO THIS DEBT! thanks.

Posted by: mil1 | March 16, 2010 2:30 PM | Report abuse

Beck claims that the Bible does not promote economic and social justice. But look at Acts 2: 44-45: "And all that believed were together, and had all things in common; and they sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all, according as any man had need." And just so there is no mistake, this model of economic justice is repeated in Acts 4: 32. These passages echo Jesus' words about "selling everything and giving it to the poor" (Mt. 19: 21) and about how hard it is for rich people to get into heaven (Lk. 18:25). I don't know what bible Beck is reading, but it's not the Catholic one. "
Posted by: drindl
------------------------------------------
As Beck has explained there is a difference from giving freely from your own riches versus confiscating and giving from someone else’s riches.

Posted by: leapin | March 16, 2010 2:28 PM | Report abuse

think bold leapin. Tell Rubio and McCain voters this Nov how urgent it is that we end all of granny's socialist HC now. Why think in incriments; the GOP needs to be bold and tell seniors what they truly believe and let the chips fall where they may. Sound good to you leapin? End Medicare and SS now isn't that what you want?

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 16, 2010 2:26 PM | Report abuse

"Beck says that ending poverty is a "personal responsibility" whereas the social justice ministry puts it all on the government. This is a lie. The papal encyclicals define Catholic social justice by requiring a balance of personal, organizational and governmental efforts. Blessed John XIII included international organizations like the United Nations in his Mater et Magistra. Apparently, Beck would have us be cafeteria Catholics who say, "Mater, sí; Magistra, no."

Beck says he knows Cardinals and Bishops who are against "the social justice thing." This is the stuff Joe McCarthy pulled. If Beck has the names of prelates who oppose the Magisterium on social justice, let him produce them. Catholics will write to the Holy Father to get rid of such bishops if they defy Church teaching or even if they seem to defy them. Catholic America has done it before; Boston, St. Louis and Scranton are just a few of the recent battlegrounds where prelates have been sent packing for bad pastoral decisions. Rome's way of balancing Catholicism's mission with human errors, I submit, is beyond Beck's simplistic logic. "

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 2:24 PM | Report abuse

according to the finance rules set down by the math whiz here we are required to pay for SS, Medicare and the rest all in the first year to avoid any notion of having them off budget.

At least that's what they say when Repubs are the target of the imbecilic scorn.


when it is obimbo spending us into oblivion, there are no longer any rules.

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 2:23 PM | Report abuse

Glenn Beck, the voice of far rightwing radicals, attacks the Church now:

"Few people are better at making accusations with code words than Glenn Beck, the Fox News celebrity. With his chalkboard logic, Beck creates conspiracies that almost always make him a savior against anything named "Democrat" or "Obama." Ordinarily, it is convenient to ignore such prattle as just as empty as Beck's interpretation of history, but now he is using his lies and distortions to take on my Church.

The irrepressible Mr. Beck has made quite a stir recently by equating priests who promote the social justice ministry as Communists and Fascists. Beck calls on Catholics to switch parishes and report social justice priests to the bishop. (Beck's broad brush includes other denominations as well, but I know Catholicism best.) Forget that his plan to "rat on" priests is the same strategy of the Hitler Youth and the Polish Communist Party, and just examine the porous logic of his rant. While I think others like Fr. Martin of America have provided a more developed analysis this is my perspective.

Beck claims that the Bible does not promote economic and social justice. But look at Acts 2: 44-45: "And all that believed were together, and had all things in common; and they sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all, according as any man had need." And just so there is no mistake, this model of economic justice is repeated in Acts 4: 32. These passages echo Jesus' words about "selling everything and giving it to the poor" (Mt. 19: 21) and about how hard it is for rich people to get into heaven (Lk. 18:25). I don't know what bible Beck is reading, but it's not the Catholic one. "

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 2:22 PM | Report abuse

great mil, drindl. zouk it is agreed that Rs stand for ending Medicare and SS.

Hope you found my link to Michael Steel and will let him know how very very much you want the GOP platform to include that sentiment. Is it OK if we start letting McCain and Rubio voters know that ending SS and Medicare are soon to become part of the official platform of the GOP?

Posted by: leichtman1
------------------------------------------
You do know that things can be implemented or pulled in phases? Sort of like O taxing the hell out of you before you ever see govmint HC.

Posted by: leapin | March 16, 2010 2:22 PM | Report abuse

great mil, drivl,leapin and zouk it is agreed that Rs stand for ending Medicare and SS

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 16, 2010 2:19 PM | Report abuse

Obama's latest threat - I won't campaign for you if you don't vote in favor of HC.

Based on MA it sounds like some hope for those Dems that vote NO.

Posted by: leapin | March 16, 2010 2:18 PM | Report abuse

great mil, drindl. zouk it is agreed that Rs stand for ending Medicare and SS.

Hope you found my link to Michael Steel and will let him know how very very much you want the GOP platform to include that sentiment. Is it OK if we start letting McCain and Rubio voters know that ending SS and Medicare are soon to become part of the official platform of the GOP?

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 16, 2010 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Politicians from both parties got large contributions from the Health Industry but it is interesting to note that Steny Hoyer received $2,726,559 in campaign contributions from the health industry. Frank Pallone, Dem, NJ got $2,835,586 and surprise, surprise, Charlie Wrangle, Dem, NY got $3,248,401

Posted by: avatar666 | March 16, 2010 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Open letter to all members of Congress re Obamacare

Your position and that of the sitting members of congress will not rise unscathed from the support of Obamacare. Support of this issue is a direct usurpation of the powers authorized to congress under the Constitution of the United States of America. In supporting it you violate the trust that has been placed in you by the citizens that you represent. In support of this issue you show gross disregard for the men and women that have fought and died for the words and principles of the Constitution over the entire history of this nation.

Why are you trying to destroy the United States of America by flagrantly supporting legislation that is in direct opposition to the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution? Two other instances of such activity by the federal government were FDR’s Social Security and LBJ’s Medicare. Both are in trouble while you are attempting to add to the entitlement problems.

My home state of Massachusetts had the right idea of health care administered by the state, but its progressive implementation is driving the state into financial distress due to the rising costs of maintaining the system.

Our national security is at risk as one of our largest debt holders (China) is trying to control our foreign policy with one of our close allies, Taiwan.

It has been said that if America falls, it will have to be from the inside as no other nation is strong enough to take it down externally. I ask this question of you in the open public forum “Are you proud to be one of the termites eating away at the foundations of Liberty?”

If you are a religious person, you must worry that the millions of Patriots that have passed before will be demonstrating against your entrance at the Pearly Gates.

Dale E. Brown for Congress MA05 2010
www.brownsview.us

Posted by: brownsview | March 16, 2010 2:14 PM | Report abuse

Ryan will get rid of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid --- talk about pulling the plug on Granny, and then there's little Susie and Bobbie -- too.

Mass murder -- kill the seniors and poor children. Genocide.

Posted by: drindl
------------------------------------------
Every village (voice) needs an idiot.
drindl you can do better than pull out the dem commercial that runs every four years.

Posted by: leapin | March 16, 2010 2:12 PM | Report abuse

thanks for reminding me dribbl. My yacht's dinghy needs some work before launch.

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 2:10 PM | Report abuse

liechman and drindl:

since I am granny and live with Susie and Bobbie, I say that Paul Ryan has the right idea.

However, great-granny who listened to FDR is going to be really sad---but since I am paying as much of her bills as Social Security is, maybe not as sad as you all think.

Michael Steele: Paul Ryan has a great idea, adopt it!

(sorry, drindl, I am not "a lad" but rather a lass--some of us are veterans too you know.)

Posted by: mil1 | March 16, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

There is nothing wrong with Soc. Sec. or Medicare! The only thing wrong with it was that it was mismanaged by corrupt, stupid and self interest driven Politicians. Right Wingers and such haven't seen nothing yet! They have already lost trillions because of these ineffective money-mongers who dabble with the Taxpayers money; and in reality it's not their money, it belongs to those who entrusted what was supposed to be a trusting government. Free enterpreneurs, beware! You're going to loose everything! Just watch and see as time passes! Taking away the workers hard earned cash and benefits isn't going to solve the situation! The pie is getting smaller and smaller. You'll be fighting like vicious dogs for the last pieces; It's already happening! And if you think that your money is going to be safe, then you'd better take a good second look at the stupid Politicians who have run our government the past 20 years! And Yes! Both doing the damage! Right and left! Conservative and liberal.

Posted by: moraldecay | March 16, 2010 2:03 PM | Report abuse

Ryan has stated on Hardball that he would be fine with Privatizing SS and gradually phasing out Medicare.

Now that is the kind of platform I pray that the GOP will honestly run on. Now please urge that with your leader Michael Steele. He is waiting for your calls and emails.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 16, 2010 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: drivl ==> We tried that last summer. remember the town halls. Liberals it seems have no ears.

Then assault thier other senses. This is too important to stop trying now.

Endlessly Arguing with fanatics who will NEVER change thier minds on some insignificant blog is not a real good use of time if you really want to make a difference.

Stop wasting your time here, and Go to: ==> http://www.congress.org/congressorg/home/ ==> Where you might actually do some good.

Posted by: FroboseTF | March 16, 2010 2:00 PM | Report abuse

the loon has gone over the edge hysterical again.

someone bring her some of those government meds. quick.

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 1:58 PM | Report abuse

Ryan will get rid of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid --- talk about pulling the plug on Granny, and then there's little Susie and Bobbie -- too.

Mass murder -- kill the seniors and poor children. Genocide.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 1:56 PM | Report abuse

" I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."

Since the Congress and Senate are above the law, I suppose that passage from the constitution doesn't apply to them?

Posted by: avatar666 | March 16, 2010 1:55 PM | Report abuse

I hear there's a perfectly good prison down in cuba that is supposed to be vacant by now.

and we all know Dear Reader's promises are as good as gold.

fools' gold.

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 1:54 PM | Report abuse

The Yacht Party
'Connecticut voters will have their pick of rich candidates in this year's statewide elections. So how can you tell them apart? By their boats, of course.

The Stamford Advocate reports four Senate and gubernatorial candidates own nautical vessels:

Rob Simmons, a Republican running for Senate, boasts a J-22 sailboat.

But those are like dinghies when compared to Linda McMahon's 47-foot yacht, the "Sexy B*tch" (really).

And while "Sexy B*tch" would be the flagship of most political fleets, it sinks when compared to GOP gubernatorial hopeful Tom Foley's prize: "Odalisque," a 100-foot ship docked in the Republic of Marshall Islands. (An odalisque was a female slave in Ottoman Turkey.)'

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 1:53 PM | Report abuse

finance whiz:

The White House's 2011 budget is only the second-most interesting budget proposal released recently. First prize goes to Congressman Paul Ryan, the ranking Republican on the House Budget Committee, who's released a budget proposal that actually erases the massive long-term deficit.

That's not mere press release braggadocio. CBO agrees (pdf). Under the CBO's likeliest long-term scenario, deficits are at 42 percent of GDP in 2080. Under Ryan's proposal, we're seeing surpluses of 5 percent of GDP by that time.

But Ryan's budget -- and the details of its CBO score -- is also an object lesson in why so few politicians are willing to answer the question "but how will you save all that money?"

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/02/rep_paul_ryans_daring_budget_p.html

time for a change indeed!

Ryan for President

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 1:51 PM | Report abuse

drivl wrote:

"Pretty soon they will have to let all the liberal congressman and cabinet minsters out of jail just to make room for the health care cheats."
------------

Not to mention, the "conservative" ones.

But no, they'll just borrow money out of their new "healthcare" pot, and give it to Corrections Corporation of America. I guess that will help create more jobs, huh?

Posted by: MrTracker | March 16, 2010 1:50 PM | Report abuse


"How about the freedom not to be able to afford any health care at all?"

I can't afford health care now--I have no eye coverage as my insurance doesn't cover it so I pay as I go...I have dental but it only covers check ups which are $125 a year and temporary work--since I have very good teeth paying $450 a year for this coverage isn't worth it and I will pay as I go for dental too. YOU pay my healthcare as I have TRICARE--unless of course you think I earned this by going to war three times (and yes, I mean Iraq and Afghanistan too). I was promised medical support for life when I joined but it has since been changed by the govt to the HMO TRICARE (administered by Humana). So be careful what you wish for because govt care is easily changed.

"How about the freeedom not to be able to see a doctor if you or your child is sick?"

Again, I have TRICARE--you know, the "public option", kind of---all I have to do is find a doctor who will take Medicare, as they have to take TRICARE--problem in my town, Medicare just cut payments by 21 percent. My doctor opted out of Medicare and dropped me. I was given another doctor's name who supposedly HAD TO take me--they also opted out. Right now TRICARE (Humana) tells me, I am "between" doctors....so I am hoping I don't get sick. I can go to VA--it's only two hours away---as I am considered 60 percent disabled (and why I am on a pension but still pay taxes). So I am pay as I go right now, to spite the promise of "free" health care.

"How about the freedom to die early and unnecessarily?"

Already have that freedom thanks--and I have already given my fair share in this end, IMHO.

"How about the freedom of your insurance company to dump you when you get sick?"

See above, Govt already has dumped me from military medical care to TRICARE (Humana), i.e. an HMO who can't seem to find doctors who want to be in their network...good luck with expanding this service to 30 million more people.

"Oh, you're right... you've lost sooo much freedom. you must feel like you are lving in the gulag. poor lad."

Nope, not a gulag--the military teaches you to voluntarily give up certain things for the good the many---that's different than having things taken away because the many think you owe them....no, I know I live in the best society and political system in the world because I spent a good part of my adult years outside of this system in other societies. However, every system can be better and spending my grandchildren's future on a trillion dollar program with no cost control isn't making this one better.

Posted by: mil1 | March 16, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse

zouky drivel -- so what did you say you did for a lving, besides post here?

Oh, you didn't say, did you?

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse

dribbl's mental coverage was terminated.

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 1:45 PM | Report abuse

W spent 2 years screaming about privatizing SS. Curious how that would have worked out for seniors during the 2008-2009 stock market crash who needed access to their SS at that time and could not wait 2 years for the DOW to rebound.

Once again the logical position for you and the GOP is to campaign on the slogan to End SS, the VA and Medicare now. Certainly we can agree with that?

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 16, 2010 1:44 PM | Report abuse

'You fail to understand. Insurance companies are heavily regulated. Please explain what is a reasonable risk management policy and level of income."

Depends on the state. Some are barely regulated at all. And if they were all well-regulated they would not be able to drop you at will if you become ill.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 1:42 PM | Report abuse

Happy Ranting!

Posted by: FroboseTF


We tried that last summer. remember the town halls. Liberals it seems have no ears.

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 1:41 PM | Report abuse

finance whiz: those measures are taken up in Paul Ryan's proposal for eventual government solvency. Something the liberals have refused to enact, even with the fraud thay call PayGo.

but you whiny babies will never want to remove the pacifier from your collective mouths. you said it yourself when you said all your MD and Phd friends don't want to pay their fare. they want their kids to cover it. Shame.

but I think everyone knows the perils of liberalism these days - endless taxes, out of control spending, huge bureaucracy and weak foreign policy. Same as it ever was.

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 1:40 PM | Report abuse

People Get a grip. If you want to fix Health Care in America get your Congressman, Representatives, and federal Employees to give up the fancy health plan they gave themselves (at our expense). Embarrass them untill they put themselves, and thier families into the same insurance pool you and I are in. It will be fixed in about a week. ==> Don't think it can be done?

Stop wasting your time here, and Go to: ==> http://www.congress.org/congressorg/home/

This is the official Congressional website. Here you can send all your pearls of wisdom directly to your elected officials at all levels from President Obama right on down to your local assembly persons.

If you don't know who your particular elected officials are enter your address and zip code, and the website will tell you who they are, and give you thier contact information including web addresses.

It also has a feature that allows you to send your views, and comments concerning various current topics of interest (such as this one) to the offices of your Representative, and Senators. They probably won't actually read them, but thier staffers do count the number of "For", and "Against" comments to help the Congressmen guage just how pi$$ed people really are.

So instead of ranting, and raving ABOUT your Congressmen here Rant, and Rave TO your Congressmen someplace where it will be counted, and might even do some good.

Happy Ranting!

Posted by: FroboseTF | March 16, 2010 1:37 PM | Report abuse

peter you and your arrogant crowd have no idea what SS is all about. Its called a safety net, nothing more nothing less. I have invested with value investors in my IRA/Keough/and ROTH since I was 21 something you are likely to have been too arrogant to have thought of, my family is just fine.

But once again I strongly urge you and the GOP to vocally campaign to end all socialist programs including the VA, Medicare and SS. If they are so terrible then Mitch McConnell and Michael Steele need to quickly take up your rant.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 16, 2010 1:35 PM | Report abuse

Pretty soon they will have to let all the liberal congressman and cabinet minsters out of jail just to make room for the health care cheats.

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 1:34 PM | Report abuse

I wonder if they have considered the cost of enforcing a mandatory health plan. It will be quite expensive to take money at gunpoint from those of us who will flat out refuse to participate. There are more than a few of us.

Posted by: MrTracker | March 16, 2010 1:32 PM | Report abuse

leichtman,

It is only me. the others are simply names I have invented to spook you.

Love always:

King of Zouk

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 1:31 PM | Report abuse

Please explain what is a reasonable risk management policy and level of income.


Posted by: leapin


dribbl is now desperately searching Kos, huff and TPM for something on that topic.

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 1:28 PM | Report abuse

I am going to make this really easy for zouk and his GOPers here.

Here is the link: http://www.draftmichaelsteele.com/contact

zouk et al, Urgently email Michael Steele today and tell him that the GOP's 2010 message should start with Ending all socialists programs like the VA, Medicare, and Social Security, today!

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 16, 2010 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Regulating insurance companies so they don't screw you is not welfare -- it's simply good government, something wingers are not sophisticated enough to understand.

You are the pitchfork brigade outside the citadel -- only you are on Marie Antoinette's side.

Posted by: drindl
------------------------------------------
You fail to understand. Insurance companies are heavily regulated. Please explain what is a reasonable risk management policy and level of income.

Posted by: leapin | March 16, 2010 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Hey leichtman1,

Keep that attitude and depend on the gov't for your retirement. After the baby boomers are done sucking this country dry there will be nothing left for you. SS and medicare are going belly up. I would pay to see your wrinkled old face when it finally dawns on you that a long line of slicksters like Obama have done nothing but dangle a carrot in front of your face.

Posted by: peterg73 | March 16, 2010 1:25 PM | Report abuse

If we were all as stupid as dribbl, we would need someone to care for us too.

try to be understanding of the rest of society's weaknesses.

she needs the handout. no one would hire her and those psychotropic drugs add up.

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 1:24 PM | Report abuse

Regulating insurance companies so they don't screw you is not welfare -- it's simply good government, something wingers are not sophisticated enough to understand.

You are the pitchfork brigade outside the citadel -- only you are on Marie Antoinette's side.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 1:23 PM | Report abuse

chuck grenades and say “edgy” and outrageous things

wow, finally a job dribbl is emminently qualified to seek.

the "no brain required" is particularly suited for her special needs.

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 1:20 PM | Report abuse

On Medicare (and Social Security):

I have over the past 40 years of my working life (since age 12) I have paid into Social Security and later Medicare. My parents also paid into these accounts. My father died without reaching an age to recover the costs he paid. Currently I pay my mother as much as Social Security does and quite a bit more then Medicaid. I do that from my own pension I might add.

Medicare is deficient as we speak--it can not cover this year's accounts; so all the money I have paid in was spent on someone else--or several someone elses. That amount would be roughly $500,000 (over my working lifetime). If I had been able to put that in an account (any account), it would still be available for my use....and the State, who is now deficient would not have to sell T-bills to pay for me in my old age (when that time does come as I was in a career that required me (by law) to retire earlier then age 65).

Now we, taxpayers, will also need to cover healthcare--this will also not be done by my money going to my premiums but rather my tax dollars going to cover those who a. don't want coverage (or they would already have it) b. can't get coverage (because it was too expensive to either them or the insurance company) or c. can't afford coverage (and still won't be able to under this legislation either as it doesn't contain costs.)

If the great example for healthcare is Medicare and Social Security then God help us--we have already bankrupted the one and are headed toward bankrupting the other.

I believe both Social Security and Medicare should be stopped now...I would also like the govt to pay me back on my investment but will live with the trillion dollar relief in debt that stopping these programs will give.

And for those who are boomer age and thought Social Security was going to sustain you (and Medicare cover your health care)--maybe you should have stopped smoking that weed sooner.....

Posted by: mil1 | March 16, 2010 1:20 PM | Report abuse

How about the freedom not to buy insurance for a start?"

How about the freedom not to be able to afford any health care at all?

How about the freeedom not to be able to see a doctor if you or your child is sick?

How about the freedom to die early and unnecessarily?

How about the freedom of your insurance company to dump you when you get sick?

Oh, you're right... you've lost sooo much freedom. you must feel like you are lving in the gulag. poor lad.

Posted by: drindl
------------------------------------------
You fail to understand. The man and his family are NOT government dependents. They make responsible sacrifices, decisions, and tradeoffs based on their income not unlimited welfare.

Posted by: leapin | March 16, 2010 1:20 PM | Report abuse

Tell me again, how many years are the going to collect the front-loaded tax hikes to pay for this garbage?

And while you are at it, please tell me where the money we all paid into Social Security is safely squirreled away?

What's that? Our Social Security money is nothing but a drawer full of IOU's? Did we approve this lending? Are they going to pay us interest? Oh wait, the Fed is belly-up broke and not able to pay this without begging China to loan the money.

So where will this front loaded tax be securely held for the American people during the many years the vast majority of the benefits are scheduled to kick in?

What's that? The same place as our Social Security money!

Perfect!

Posted by: wcochran60 | March 16, 2010 1:18 PM | Report abuse

"How about the freedom not to buy insurance for a start?"

How about the freedom not to be able to afford any health care at all?

How about the freeedom not to be able to see a doctor if you or your child is sick?

How about the freedom to die early and unnecessarily?

How about the freedom of your insurance company to dump you when you get sick?

Oh, you're right... you've lost sooo much freedom. you must feel like you are lving in the gulag. poor lad.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 1:10 PM
===================
Same old false boring talking points.

The majority of the people not insured are one of the following:

1. Qualify for schip/medicaid but are too lazy or too stupid to sign up

2. Can afford insurance

3. Illegal aliens

Are you liberals so stuck on stupid you think parroting your lies fools anyone but yourselves?

Next tell us how much of a blessing the ponzi schemes of SS and medicare are. You know the programs I'll put a lot more into then I ever get out.

Posted by: Cryos | March 16, 2010 1:16 PM | Report abuse

"I’m noting a lot of surprise about Erick Erickson becoming a permanent addition to the CNN staple. I honestly can’t understand why anyone would be remotely surprised by this. If nothing else, the “Dept. of Jihad” antics should give you an idea of the kind of institutional standards the place has, and beyond that, you have to recognize that they regularly feature folks like the Weekly Standard’s Stephen Hayes, Alex Castellanos, and a bevy of other sordid types, and who could forget the run that the execrable Lou Dobbs had for years. The simple fact is that CNN supplies more wingnut welfare than Reason magazine or the Heritage Foundation.

And in case you really still aren’t getting it, let me remind you where Glenn Beck was fully employed for quite some time before being hired away by Roger Ailes at Fox. Erick will give them everything they need- he’s a new face who can come in and chuck grenades and say “edgy” and outrageous things that can grab eyeballs and headlines, and then when he finally over-reaches and goes too far, they’ll dump him and pretend they are above it all, all while their editors seek out the next new Coulter/Malkin/Beck/Erickson."

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 1:16 PM | Report abuse

mark_in_austin claims that Texas sends more money to Washington than it gets back and indeed, the report he cites claims just that.
HOWEVER, mark, as you and others well know, Social Security taxes are pouring into Washington and NOT being disbursed, as baby boom retirees are just beginning to claim their benefits. Social Security surpluses are held back for future distribution. Counting all those amounts as they go in and pretending they should be compared to current disbursements allows paracitic states like Texas to claim "donor" status. Now, if Texas ends upon the opposite end, getting huge disbursements because boomers retire their in droves(why??), it would also be 'unfair' to try to make the case against Texas.
But right now, and for quite a long time, Texas attachs itself to the US like a huge leech, bringing in much more than it sends out, and wants to 'account' for it only in typical 'Lone Star' fashion.

Nice try, Bubba. Didya wurk fer Enron?

Posted by: bgreen2224 | March 16, 2010 1:15 PM | Report abuse

the finance whiz thinks that the relative sustainability and budget shortfalls of any government program is not anything we ever need to worry about.

typical Lib. not my money, not my problem.

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 1:10 PM | Report abuse

"How about the freedom not to buy insurance for a start?"

How about the freedom not to be able to afford any health care at all?

How about the freeedom not to be able to see a doctor if you or your child is sick?

How about the freedom to die early and unnecessarily?

How about the freedom of your insurance company to dump you when you get sick?

Oh, you're right... you've lost sooo much freedom. you must feel like you are lving in the gulag. poor lad.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 1:10 PM | Report abuse

hey genius that would have worked out just swell during the 2008 and 2009 stock market crash of over 60%. Apparently you slept through those years genius. Incidnteally during the decade b/w 2001 and 2010 the DOW produced a negative return of -1%. Again take the bait genius. Urge the GOP to campaign to end Mediare and SS NOW !

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 16, 2010 1:08 PM | Report abuse

"Maybe if you didn't spend every spare waking minute of your life pasting idiocy to this thread.

Posted by: drivl "

yeah, maybe, zouk, why don't you try? surely you can find some kind of work.

I worked for the Village Voice, it's true. Among many other global institutions. And still do. And you?

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

One...We have no money to pay for this unnecessary power grab by the feds. Smaller $ reforms will be much more efficient in improving what is already a healthcare system of very high quality in the USA. For those of you who say we have no money to pay for the wars too, then why would you want to compound the debt we're already drowning in by diving into healthcare. Two...The feds have no constitutional right to take centralized hold of 20 or more percent of our economy...never did. Three...There was good reason in 1965 to question the idea of creating medicare (and later medicaid) as the cost projections were ridiculously low and the programs have been a proven fiscal disaster. Better multiply any cost estimates being quoted now by 5 or 10 times for starters.

Posted by: DillsOH | March 16, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

drivl I pray that the GOP listens closely to your rants--"Social Security --- one of those model socialist programs"

and runs to end all of those socialists programs like Social Security and Medicare. Please tell the Florida, Arizona, and Pa GOP that their mantra needs to be keep your govt hands off of my Medicare and Social Security and end that socialism now. I strongly urge you to post that drivl. Would you like a link to the Miami and Phoenix blog sites to make those GOP sentiments know to their voters please?

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 16, 2010 12:58 PM
==========================
Hey genius if we could take the same amount we dump into SS and Medicare and put it into a personal retirement account we'd get a better rate of return.

Instead politicians give SS to illegals who just jumped the border

Posted by: Cryos | March 16, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

Thanks drindl Finally,the TRUTH about the tea baggers comes out. Yes they are fully funded by the Insurance Companies.
==================================
As an active TEA Party movement member since it started, I can tell you that the movement where I live is supported only by ordinary citizens fed up with losing their freedom, allowing illegal aliens to take American jobs, corrupt politicians, and the liberal agenda of the Democrat party. There was very little money involved in our rallies and meetings. What there was was raised with concession sales at the events by volunteers. No corporations or politicians have been involved here. We have just decided we have had enough of the government spending and the freeloaders in this country.
Posted by: good_angel | March 16, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse
You cannot tell a liberal that. They believe the majority of the country is for this health care reform. They believe the majority wants a public option. They believe all the polling showing otherwise is right wing tilted. They believe they have the Independents on their side despite the past elections that took place.


Posted by: Steve681
------------------------------------------
The Party of Free Lunch, kind and compassionate, is a selfish bunch voting themselves benefits form the public treasury. The problem is that is neither kind nor compassionate to confiscate the fruits of other's labor nor does the public treasury mathematically exist as a positive number.

Democrat explanations are targeted - at an uninformed, uneducated and economically illiterate constituency. It's why their arguments are based on demagoguery - because it works on an audience who doesn't know better. Liberals consistently deny policies that have been shown to work (i.e. across the board tax cuts) and repeatedly offer ideas that have been proven to fail. A complicit press rarely challenges them, so they are unaccustomed to having to answer or explain.

Posted by: leapin | March 16, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

I had a good public education

dribbl

That says it all.

no mention of college though. Went straight to work for the village voice.

now this unqualified moonbat expects a job no matter the qualifications. expects food no matter the work. Expects health care no matter the cost. typical liberal with their hand out.

Maybe if you didn't spend every spare waking minute of your life pasting idiocy to this thread.

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 1:01 PM | Report abuse

"It has everything to do to with the level of corruption and lack of address. The only thing transparent about the current administration is the lies and bribes."

You must be thinking of King George II, your president -- who managed to steer a trillion dollars of public money to repulican 'contractors' so we could wage a war to make life easier and more profitable for oil companies.

'P.S. If you had a good education you would know to capitalize the first letter of a sentence. You would know O won the election in a representative, republican process.'

If I choose to capitalize, I will. I know exactly how the president won -- fair and square.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 1:01 PM | Report abuse

"name me the 'freedom' you've lost,you incoherent clown-- you don't even understand what you're talkng about."
_________________________

How about the freedom not to buy insurance for a start?

How about the freedom not to have taxes taken from me that don't go toward anything that is of benefit to me (or my family) as I already pay through a private company?

How about the freedom to see my representative actually vote on the issue?

Posted by: mil1 | March 16, 2010 1:00 PM | Report abuse

drivl I pray that the GOP listens closely to your rants--"Social Security --- one of those model socialist programs"

and runs to end all of those socialists programs like Social Security and Medicare. Please tell the Florida, Arizona, and Pa GOP that their mantra needs to be keep your govt hands off of my Medicare and Social Security and end that socialism now. I strongly urge you to post that drivl. Would you like a link to the Miami and Phoenix blog sites to make those GOP sentiments know to their voters please?

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 16, 2010 12:58 PM | Report abuse

the "finance whiz" thinks that the price of goods will magically change one day and that the cost will somehow, also magic, be paid by some other poor sap, who doesn't have an MD, PhD or CEO behind his name.

what a bunch of whiny elitist losers your crowd must be. trying to get my kids to pay for your TVs, Jags and vacations.

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 12:56 PM | Report abuse

"As an active TEA Party movement member since it started, I can tell you that the movement where I live is supported only by ordinary citizens fed up with losing their freedom,"

name me the 'freedom' you've lost,you incoherent clown-- you don't even understand what you're talkng about.

you are a dumb-as* tool of the insurance companies.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 12:55 PM | Report abuse

"Do you have any idea how the American Revolution started? "

yeah, I had a good public education. you apparently had none. president Obama won a majority of the vote in the democratic process. he did not steal the election as your King George II the Idiot did.

but go ahead, try to overthrow the goverment in armed revolt. we call it treason and you deserve the appropriate punishment.

Posted by: drindl
------------------------------------------
You are tone deaf. It has nothing to do with the election. It has everything to do to with the level of corruption and lack of address. The only thing transparent about the current administration is the lies and bribes.

P.S. If you had a good education you would know to capitalize the first letter of a sentence. You would know O won the election in a representative, republican process.

Posted by: leapin | March 16, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

drivl has a girlfriend! drivl has a girlfriend!

Posted by: JakeD3 | March 16, 2010 12:51 PM | Report abuse

Other liberal success stories:

Sorry, couldn't find any. In stead:

Social Security --- one of those model socialist programs the progressive left enjoys pointing to as an example of the wonders of Government --- is officially broke, and is going to have to cash in Treasury Bonds in order to make up the difference between what's being paid into the system and what's being paid out.

There is no Social Security trust fund. Congress has been raiding it for decades to pay for other social programs, and stuffing it with IOU's. Now, the Social Security Administration is going to try and cash in the IOU's.

All in all, Social Security has $2,500,000,000,000 (two-point-five trillion) in IOUs. Social Security and Medicare together have an unfunded liability of $101 Trillion.

Sounds like a great time for Congress to ram through another multi-trillion dollar socialist entitlement program, doesn't it?

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 12:51 PM | Report abuse

"good way to redistribute income"
"no need to consider education or work product in a human"

interesting b/c all of my friends are professionals, doctors, lawyer, cpas, engineers and most in their 50s facing $2000/month in HC premiums unless they have Anthem and their premiums may go up to $2700/month. I am sure you would call these professionals uneducated slackards just looking for a govt handout. All of this will change on Friday precisely the way libs in this country jammed that horrible govt/socialist HC plan that your grandparents rely on. You know that socialist program you and Rs opposed and would end if you politically could called Medicare. Interesting how wrong Rs have been over the history of this country when it came to passage of Social Security, Medicare and now national HC.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 16, 2010 12:49 PM | Report abuse

Liberals love these little individual examples to create policy:

Helping Unemployed Hipsters buy Organic, Gourmet Food with Food Stamps.


Magida, a 30-year-old art school graduate, had been installing museum exhibits for a living until the recession caused arts funding -- and her usual gigs -- to dry up. She applied for food stamps last summer, and since then she's used her $150 in monthly benefits for things like fresh produce, raw honey and fresh-squeezed juices from markets near her house in the neighborhood of Hampden, and soy meat alternatives and gourmet ice cream from a Whole Foods a few miles away.
"I'm eating better than I ever have before," she told me. "Even with food stamps, it's not like I'm living large, but it helps."
Mak, 31, grew up in Westchester, graduated from the University of Chicago and toiled in publishing in New York during his 20s before moving to Baltimore last year with a meager part-time blogging job and prospects for little else. About half of his friends in Baltimore have been getting food stamps since the economy toppled, so he decided to give it a try; to his delight, he qualified for $200 a month.
"I'm sort of a foodie, and I'm not going to do the 'living off ramen' thing," he said, fondly remembering a recent meal he'd prepared of roasted rabbit with butter, tarragon and sweet potatoes. "I used to think that you could only get processed food and government cheese on food stamps, but it's great that you can get anything."

I guess sponging off the taxpayers spares the indignity of relying on their families, or taking jobs that are unworthy of a "30 year old Art School Graduate."

Also, anyone who describes himself as a "foodie" needs to be smacked on pure principle.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Item #2: Chairman Zero's Human Health Care Prop Is a Big Phony
Posted by Gregory of Yardale at 4:06 AM | Comments (8)

Continuing the Democrat strategy of "Legislation Through Sob Story," PBO dragged up cancer victim Natoma Canfield and claimed that because of our craptacular health care system, she was going to lose her house and then die of cancer. And later her corpse would tossed into a landfill and Republicans would pee on it, because Republicans hate sick people that much.

None of it turns out to be true. Canfield is receiving cancer treatment at one of the country's best facilities, is eligible for existing Medicaid and charity assistance, and is no danger of losing her home.

Far from being an example of the system being broken, Canfield indicates that the current system works just fine.

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Thanks drindl Finally,the TRUTH about the tea baggers comes out. Yes they are fully funded by the Insurance Companies.
==================================
As an active TEA Party movement member since it started, I can tell you that the movement where I live is supported only by ordinary citizens fed up with losing their freedom, allowing illegal aliens to take American jobs, corrupt politicians, and the liberal agenda of the Democrat party. There was very little money involved in our rallies and meetings. What there was was raised with concession sales at the events by volunteers. No corporations or politicians have been involved here. We have just decided we have had enough of the government spending and the freeloaders in this country.
Posted by: good_angel | March 16, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse
You cannot tell a liberal that. They believe the majority of the country is for this health care reform. They believe the majority wants a public option. They believe all the polling showing otherwise is right wing tilted. They believe they have the Independents on their side despite the past elections that took place.

Posted by: Steve681 | March 16, 2010 12:47 PM | Report abuse

The trio, Obama, Pelosi, and Reid amaze me.
They claim that 30 million people will be able to get health insurance if their plan is approved. However, replacing the best plan on the planet with socialism, putting their seats at risk, and punishing America with more debt that we will ever be able to repay, seems a big price to pay for backing an irrational president, who is out to destroy our economy. It is lunacy at the highest level. I can't figure out what our president has over these people to make them rish their careers, their reputations, and the American economy, in order to back up an irrational person, who happens to be our president. Following a person, who lies all the time, seems to be a Marxist, protects terrorists, hires communists and marxists to advise him, makes me wonder about their mentality as well. All 3 have to be absolutely brainwashed to follow this president over the cliff, when all tha was needed was a few fixes in our current system!!! Socialism, the system that people come to America to get away from!!!!!

Posted by: hankster6 | March 16, 2010 12:46 PM | Report abuse

As the lunatic wing of the Democrat Party prepares for the great leap into socialism by ramming through a federal healthcare entitlement certain to lead to national bankruptcy, now might be a good time to reprint highlights from a letter that Dr. Roger Starner Jones wrote to the Jackson, Mississippi Clarion Ledger:

During my last night's shift in the ER, I had the pleasure of evaluating a patient with a shiny new gold tooth, multiple elaborate tattoos, a very expensive brand of tennis shoes and a new cellular telephone equipped with her favorite R&B; tune for a ring tone.
Glancing over the chart, one could not help noticing her payer status: Medicaid.
She smokes more than one costly pack of cigarettes every day and, somehow, still has money to buy beer. And our President expects me to pay for this woman's health care?
Our nation's health care crisis is not a shortage of quality hospitals, doctors or nurses. It is a crisis of culture — a culture in which it is perfectly acceptable to spend money on vices while refusing to take care of one's self or, heaven forbid, purchase health insurance.
A culture that thinks I can do whatever I want to because someone else will always take care of me.
There it is in a nutshell: the depraved infantilism of liberalism, which demands that those who take responsibility become slaves to those who do not.

No culture rotted through with this mentality can survive indefinitely. Our healthcare system is only the beginning of what we stand to lose.

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 12:45 PM | Report abuse

"Do you have any idea how the American Revolution started? "

yeah, I had a good public education. you apparently had none. president Obama won a majority of the vote in the democratic process. he did not steal the election as your King George II the Idiot did.

but go ahead, try to overthrow the goverment in armed revolt. we call it treason and you deserve the appropriate punishment.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Listened to the trained progressive seals respond with "boos" when insurance companies are mentioned, and cheers and applause as Dear Reader promises them that insurance premiums will go down 3,000%!


3,000%? So, at that rate, insurance companies would be paying employers to cover their employees.

Alternately, Dear Reader is an idiot who doesn't have even a marginal clue what he's talking about.

Progressives Are Idiots with No Math Skills

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 12:44 PM | Report abuse

King Barry's

Please. we have moved beyond that. Please continue with either:

Dear Reader

or

Chairman Zero

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 12:43 PM | Report abuse

"This approach goes beyond the conventional nullification position, which argues that states should have the power to interpose themselves against the federal government. In this case, Bachmann is calling for a individuals to commit civil disobedience against the law -- which should be very interesting to watch, if it really does come to that, and a sitting member of Congress leads citizens in breaking the law."

Loonybird Michelle Bachman urging people to break the law... go for it, Michelle! I hope to see a lot of baggers in jail. This will be fun to watch.


Posted by: drindl
-------------------------------------------

Do you have any idea how the American Revolution started? (Probably not if you received a liberal revisionist history education). Substitute King Barry for King George.

Posted by: leapin | March 16, 2010 12:40 PM | Report abuse

this entire health care "solution" is so typical of liberals in general:

Take an input, be it a person or a government handout.

Process it through the system and guarantee the output.

that's it. Equal output regardless of input.

no need to consider education or work product in a human. no need to consider risk or cost in insurance. In fact it has nothing at all to do with insurance, which is designed to spread catastrophic loss, not handle minor inconvenience without regard to risk.

good way to redistribute income, Bad way to motivate anyone to excel or profit.

Everyone is promised an equally bad result - the goal of big government liberalism.

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 12:39 PM | Report abuse

good_angel curious if you would claim that Dick Armey has no affiliation with the Insurance Industry?

Last week I had doubts HC would pass. Just reading the whining here from the right, sounding much like squealing pigs it makes me more certain of its passage.
Its too bad there was no internet in 1965, I am certain the exact same whining was expressed by R opponents to the historic passage of Medicare in 1965 calling it socialism and govt takeover of HC. As much as we think Rs change over the years their whining stays exactly the same.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 16, 2010 12:35 PM | Report abuse

The Republicans will cry bloody murder if you attempt to increase the top marginal income tax rate by 4%. Yet, they have absolutely NO PROBLEM with the economic rape the lower and middle class experiences with year over year increases in premium costs of 40%!! That's all anyone needs to know! Their two big ideas to reduce cost, (tort reform, and allowing insurers to bypass oversight and regulation by crossing state lines), when taken together are actually WORSE for consumers, (but much better for insurers!). These Republican slugs will be happy to lay on their backs for you, as long as you can leave enough money on the nightstand.

Posted by: whereareweandwhatarewedoinginthishandbasket | March 16, 2010 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Hey VMR1, I hope you're enjoying all your liberal perks. At some point take a break from patting yourself on the back and make sure you thank your kids and grandkids, because you're sticking them with the bill.

Posted by: peterg73 | March 16, 2010 12:35 PM | Report abuse

drindl:

Nice talking points but here is what the bill doesn't do on these very same issues:

"Offer tax credits to small businesses to purchase coverage"

yes, but this will not necessarily mean small businesses will purchase coverage as the credit does not mitigate the cost.

"Prohibit pre-existing condition exclusions for children in all new plans"

Again, at what cost? No mention of affordability.

"Provide immediate access to insurance for uninsured Americans who are uninsured because of a pre-existing condition through a temporary high-risk pool"

High-risk pool by definition means high cost; so there will be access--but again affordability...?

"Prohibit dropping people from coverage when they get sick in all individual plans"
And the cost?

"Eliminate lifetime limits and restrictive annual limits on benefits in all plans"

Again, there is nothing in the bill to stop any of the plans--individual or group--from being repriced.

"Require premium rebates to enrollees from insurers with high administrative expenditures and require public disclosure of the percent of premiums applied to overhead costs"

--added administrative cost to track overhead will simply be included in all new enrollees---this "rebate" doesn't have a level set nor is there a discussion on what is a "high" expenditure...poor language leads to poor legislation; and who will pay this cost?

"Ensure consumers have access to an effective internal and external appeals process to appeal new insurance plan decisions"

Please define effective appeals--and who is this appealed to? HHS? A new govt agency? or is it the insurance company as usual; not defined in the legislation.

"Require plans to cover an enrollee's dependent children until age 26"

Great, not sure why this "child" needs this but it is in the legislation.

"Require new plans to cover preventive services and immunizations without cost-sharing"

So who is paying for preventive services and immunizations? If you aren't paying by premium then you are paying by tax dollars and since it doesn't define preventive services are we discussing gym memberships?

"Relief on the Donut Hole."

I presume you mean the Medicare pharmacy costs issue--which should be addressed as separate legislation but isn't; so even though we can't meet Medicare Part D costs right now we will commit to spend even more to cover Part D costs---so relief means that Medicare tax will increase in those who have Medicare taken from their pay....not exactly relief for them right?

I dislike when some here describe this as things we get versus things we will definitely pay for--because this isn't relief this is added tax burden.

Posted by: mil1 | March 16, 2010 12:34 PM | Report abuse

I concur that Obama should get kicked out of office but that leaves us with Joe Biden. Should he be ousted, that leaves us with Nancy Pelosi, the wicked witch of the east, and eventually her evil twin, Hillary Clinton, if all of the above are removed from the positions of power they are so blatantly abusing. What don't they understand about the will of the people? "Out of touch" doesn't even begin to describe these self-centered, egotistical, arrogant despots. No matter which way we turn we are faced with yet more pandering, and plain old corruption. I hate to say it but it's going to take an old fashioned revolution to get their attention. We did it once to get rid of a tyrannical overlord and we can do it again. It will be bloody and cruel but if that's the price of freedom, I am willing to make the sacrifice. I just hope I'm not alone.

Posted by: tdp2012 | March 16, 2010 12:33 PM | Report abuse

"Despite all that we agree on and all the Republican ideas we've incorporated, many Republicans in Congress just have a fundamental disagreement over whether we should have more or less oversight of insurance companies,"

"Now, I don't believe we should give the government or insurance companies more control over health care in America. I believe it's time to give you, the American people, more control over your own health insurance,"

"If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor."


Posted by: drindl
------------------------------------------
These are words from a man that is a proven, documented liar. Therfore only a fool would have a high level of confidence in them. You can keep your own doctor only as long as the source of payment for seeing that doctor is in place. When the HC bill results in that source being eliminated you will be seeing a doctor of King Barry's choice and the King will look the other way and, as usual, blame others.

Posted by: leapin | March 16, 2010 12:33 PM | Report abuse

OK, say you own a hamburger restaurant. Everybody wants free hamburgers so they voice this to the government. The government creates a law that says everybody can have hamburgers whether they pay for them or not.

Question: How long will the hamburger restaurant stay in business?
Answer: It won't.

This will end up being a government take over of health care. "no pre-existing conditions" will put the insurance companies out of business. Not only that, the US debt will spiral out of control until we collapse. We have to stop spending now. You can't add services and not add spending. We already have spent too much. Passing this particular health care plan is insane. We need to do something else to bring down costs because this won't do it.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Posted by: BusinessOwner1 | March 16, 2010 12:29 PM | Report abuse

"This approach goes beyond the conventional nullification position, which argues that states should have the power to interpose themselves against the federal government. In this case, Bachmann is calling for a individuals to commit civil disobedience against the law -- which should be very interesting to watch, if it really does come to that, and a sitting member of Congress leads citizens in breaking the law."

Loonybird Michelle Bachman urging people to break the law... go for it, Michelle! I hope to see a lot of baggers in jail. This will be fun to watch.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse

Thanks drindl Finally,the TRUTH about the tea baggers comes out. Yes they are fully funded by the Insurance Companies.

==================================
As an active TEA Party movement member since it started, I can tell you that the movement where I live is supported only by ordinary citizens fed up with losing their freedom, allowing illegal aliens to take American jobs, corrupt politicians, and the liberal agenda of the Democrat party. There was very little money involved in our rallies and meetings. What there was was raised with concession sales at the events by volunteers. No corporations or politicians have been involved here. We have just decided we have had enough of the government spending and the freeloaders in this country.

Posted by: good_angel | March 16, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse

great post, vmr.

"What great country? Where you health and very life are dependent on actuarial departments of insurance companies and/or whether or not your employer chooses to subsidize your health insurance?
If there's anything great about this country, it was delivered by the "liberals"

The highways you drive upon, Medicare, Medicaid, Unemployment Insurance, Social Security, Veterans Administration, National Parks, military and economic mobilization and becoming one of the winners in WW II, the space program, compulsory and free public education, state college systems, community colleges, public parks and beaches, etc.

With the "great country" you envision, you'd be paying $800 per season to access a lakefront beach and pandering in front of a bus station to help pay for your kids' medical bills.

Been there done that. Re-read your Charles Dickens, Theodore Dreiser, and Karl Marx."

except you are assuming that these winger posters actually read books--they don't. they listen to the radio and watch TV, being subliterate.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 12:26 PM | Report abuse

Intrade has the chances of HCR passage at 79% today. Every day the chance have been trading higher. Just 16 days ago, the chances were less than 40%.

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

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 16, 2010 12:24 PM | Report abuse

Whether Obama gets this round of health care through or not, Obama has shown that he is clearly out-of-touch with the American People.

Obama has completely proven that he is not fit to govern this country.


Obama is off - and he is IGNORING THE ECONOMY AND JOBS - IN JANUARY WHEN THEY SAID HE WAS GOING TO PIVOT - THERE WAS NO PIVOT.

Obama should resign.

Obama lied about the pivot - he should resign.


.


Posted by: 37thand0street | March 16, 2010 12:22 PM | Report abuse

"Truly in this great country, liberals are the minority"


What great country? Where you health and very life are dependent on actuarial departments of insurance companies and/or whether or not your employer chooses to subsidize your health insurance?
If there's anything great about this country, it was delivered by the "liberals"

The highways you drive upon, Medicare, Medicaid, Unemployment Insurance, Social Security, Veterans Administration, National Parks, military and economic mobilization and becoming one of the winners in WW II, the space program, compulsory and free public education, state college systems, community colleges, public parks and beaches, etc.

With the "great country" you envision, you'd be paying $800 per season to access a lakefront beach and pandering in front of a bus station to help pay for your kids' medical bills.

Been there done that. Re-read your Charles Dickens, Theodore Dreiser, and Karl Marx.

Posted by: VMR1 | March 16, 2010 12:19 PM | Report abuse

Ted Turned sold CNN. That was when it started to go right -- and south.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 12:11 PM | Report abuse

It is not a right wing leaning news organization
It leans left. They are just more honest than MSNBC which is real loony

Posted by: Steve681 | March 16, 2010 12:19 PM | Report abuse

"I'm sick of the liberals. Everything is fine for them. They are ok with killing babies and gays "marrying" in churches. They spend, they tax then complain it's the fault of the prior administration. Their back room deals and lack of accountability are sickening. Truly in this great country, liberals are the minority;yet, they have control of our Gov at the moment. Libs are a bunch of out-of-touch people without morals or a moral compass."

Remember when conservatives were saying this the last time? When Clinton was in office, and we had a budget surplus. Bush got us into two undeclared wars, Iraq and Afghanistan, and a host of other undeclared wars, such as Pakistan.
Conservatives are such a moral compass. That is why Rove suddenly left office, Rumsfeld suddenly left office, Brownie was left minding FEMA while millions suffered.
Now, we're in debt up to our eyeballs. It wasn't Obama who bailed out the big banks, though he has done his share of panic spending since to end this depression.
Got amnesia much?

Posted by: tftobin | March 16, 2010 12:18 PM | Report abuse

"Truly in this great country, liberals are the minority"


What great country? Where you health and very life are dependent on actuarial departments of insurance companies and/or whether or not your employer chooses to subsidize your health insurance?
If there's anything great about this country, it was delivered by the "liberals"

The highways you drive upon, Medicare, Medicaid, Unemployment Insurance, Social Security, Veterans Administration, National Parks, military and economic mobilization and becoming one of the winners in WW II, the space program, compulsory and free public education, state college systems, community colleges, public parks and beaches, etc.

With the "great country" you envision, you'd be paying $800 per season to access a lakefront beach and pandering in front of a bus station to help pay for your kids' medical bills.

Been there done that. Re-read your Charles Dickens, Theodore Dreiser, and Karl Marx.

Posted by: VMR1 | March 16, 2010 12:18 PM | Report abuse

liberal talking point of the day. the hive wants to make sure this gets out. Please repost at least 100 times:

What will kick in this year:

What will kick in this year:

What will kick in this year:

What will kick in this year:

What will kick in this year:

What will kick in this year:

What will kick in this year:

What will kick in this year:

What will kick in this year:

What will kick in this year:

Love, the ever mindless minions of the far left.

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 12:18 PM | Report abuse

"Truly in this great country, liberals are the minority"


What great country? Where you health and very life are dependent on actuarial departments of insurance companies and/or whether or not your employer chooses to subsidize your health insurance?
If there's anything great about this country, it was delivered by the "liberals"

The highways you drive upon, Medicare, Medicaid, Unemployment Insurance, Social Security, Veterans Administration, National Parks, military and economic mobilization and becoming one of the winners in WW II, the space program, compulsory and free public education, state college systems, community colleges, public parks and beaches, etc.

With the "great country" you envision, you'd be paying $800 per season to access a lakefront beach and pandering in front of a bus station to help pay for your kids' medical bills.

Been there done that. Re-read your Charles Dickens, Theodore Dreiser, and Karl Marx.

Posted by: VMR1 | March 16, 2010 12:17 PM | Report abuse

"Truly in this great country, liberals are the minority"


What great country? Where you health and very life are dependent on actuarial departments of insurance companies and/or whether or not your employer chooses to subsidize your health insurance?
If there's anything great about this country, it was delivered by the "liberals"

The highways you drive upon, Medicare, Medicaid, Unemployment Insurance, Social Security, Veterans Administration, National Parks, military and economic mobilization and becoming one of the winners in WW II, the space program, compulsory and free public education, state college systems, community colleges, public parks and beaches, etc.

With the "great country" you envision, you'd be paying $800 per season to access a lakefront beach and pandering in front of a bus station to help pay for your kids' medical bills.

Been there done that. Re-read your Charles Dickens, Theodore Dreiser, and Karl Marx.

Posted by: VMR1 | March 16, 2010 12:17 PM | Report abuse

you sure have a lot of time to waste stalking me, zouky drivel.

take my advice, get another victime -- er, girlfriend. oops, i forgot about your personality ... and all those restraining orders.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 12:16 PM | Report abuse

Maybe we need healthcare, but we certainly do not need a rushjob healthcare plan that will consume about 1/6 of our budget. Anytime something is being rammed down your throat to meet a deadline, you know there ulterior motives and sneaky clauses. In our business, we do not make rush deals as we've learned from experience, those are the ones we've most regretted. I am a democrat. The antics the Republicans played were disgusting and unethical. However, it is no more ethical for Democrats to play the same antics. It is time for the government to fear its people rather than the people fear their government. Anyone, Republican, Democrat, Libertarian or any other ideologist should be removed from office for unethical antics, backroom deals, and self-motivated votes. The "public officials" acting as your representatives are your SERVANTS and are to do your will. Do not let them pull the wool over your eyes. You need to remove them from their perches if they do not SERVE you. People take back your government and let your voices be heard. You need not feel like government is happening to you. Make government happen according to your design. Our "government" our "leaders" have put the American people in such a financial bind that we work long hours and many days a week which makes us too tired to get involved with our government and policy. If you want your government to work for you, get involved, be less of a consumer and more of a reader - saves you money and makes you more informed AND gives you more time to take notice of your family, your government and your self.
Here's to you AMERICA and AMERICANS
Posted by: quoilers | March 16, 2010 12:03 PM | Report abuse
The Democrats do need the rush job. Nancy Pelosi and Obama want to get it past as fast as they could so that they can prevent the American public from finding out all there is to know about what is in the bill. The American public has found out too much already and they do not want it. Why else would they have problems getting their own party to come on board for this bill? Why else would they have to bribe their own party and strike up secret deals in back rooms to get it past?

Posted by: Steve681 | March 16, 2010 12:15 PM | Report abuse

What will kick in this year:


"Offer tax credits to small businesses to purchase coverage;

Prohibit pre-existing condition exclusions for children in all new plans;

Provide immediate access to insurance for uninsured Americans who are uninsured because of a pre-existing condition through a temporary high-risk pool;

Prohibit dropping people from coverage when they get sick in all individual plans;

Eliminate lifetime limits and restrictive annual limits on benefits in all plans;

Require premium rebates to enrollees from insurers with high administrative expenditures and require public disclosure of the percent of premiums applied to overhead costs;

Ensure consumers have access to an effective internal and external appeals process to appeal new insurance plan decisions;

Require plans to cover an enrollee's dependent children until age 26;

Require new plans to cover preventive services and immunizations without cost-sharing;

Relief on the Donut Hole.

Congress has been debating health care reform for years and the American people deserve an up or down vote. We shouldn't hide behind rules to prevent us from going on record and casting a vote for or against reform. This is about giving Americans what they're entitled to: a clear vote showing what people stand for and believe and where the majority vote rules.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 12:14 PM | Report abuse

there are loony mooonbats and then there are tedious rabid psychos:


Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 10:22 AM
Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 10:24 AM
Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 10:27 AM
Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 10:30 AM
Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 10:32 AM
Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 10:41 AM
Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 10:44 AM
Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 11:03 AM
Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 11:09 AM
Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 11:17 AM
Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 11:20 AM
Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 11:24 AM
Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 11:28 AM
Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 11:32 AM
Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 11:42 AM
Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 11:46 AM
Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 11:56 AM
Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 11:59 AM
Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 12:01 PM
Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 12:02 PM
how much do they pay you to post on this blog all day every two minutes?
Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 12:10 PM

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 12:13 PM | Report abuse

What will kick in this year:


"Offer tax credits to small businesses to purchase coverage;

Prohibit pre-existing condition exclusions for children in all new plans;

Provide immediate access to insurance for uninsured Americans who are uninsured because of a pre-existing condition through a temporary high-risk pool;

Prohibit dropping people from coverage when they get sick in all individual plans;

Eliminate lifetime limits and restrictive annual limits on benefits in all plans;

Require premium rebates to enrollees from insurers with high administrative expenditures and require public disclosure of the percent of premiums applied to overhead costs;

Ensure consumers have access to an effective internal and external appeals process to appeal new insurance plan decisions;

Require plans to cover an enrollee's dependent children until age 26;

Require new plans to cover preventive services and immunizations without cost-sharing;

Relief on the Donut Hole.

Congress has been debating health care reform for years and the American people deserve an up or down vote. We shouldn't hide behind rules to prevent us from going on record and casting a vote for or against reform. This is about giving Americans what they're entitled to: a clear vote showing what people stand for and believe and where the majority vote rules.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 12:13 PM | Report abuse

A lot of people don't seem to understand that the rises in health care spending ate every pay raise they received in the last 20 years.
Do you want to continue to see middle class income erode, to health care? Or do you want an imperfect bill that both the House and Senate have passed, to at least make an attempt?
Right now, families are governed by the dictates of their health care provider. That is why an astounding percentage of us keep losing their health care, and why people are facing 30-40% premium hikes.

Posted by: tftobin | March 16, 2010 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Ted Turned sold CNN. That was when it started to go right -- and south.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 12:11 PM | Report abuse

What will kick in this year:

The TAXES


Remember, Obama plan is to tax the American people for 3 years before the benefits start to kick in.


YOU are a bozo.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 16, 2010 12:11 PM | Report abuse

"rush job HC plan"

Started by POTUS Harry S. Truman. 70 years is one heck of a rush job for Rs, don't you think.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 16, 2010 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Got plenty of work this year, zouky drivel. advertising has come back from the dead -- business booming. and you? Wnat did you say you did again? how much do they pay you to post on this blog all day every two minutes?

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Thanks drindl Finally,the TRUTH about the tea baggers comes out. Yes they are fully funded by the Insurance Companies. Now Mister RealTexan1 - more TRUTH.
1) Insurance premiums will go up.(If this were true - Why are the insurance companies spending Millions to defeat the bill??
2) Dem's will be voted out of office.( Yes, this will probably happen. More from the traditional midterm elections where regardless of what party is in the whitehouse the opposite party picks up seats in congress.
3) Supreme Court will strike down the individual mandate and other unconstitutional provisions.(Whew! got me on this one. But I suppose that is why the bill is 700 pages with every conceivable detail coverd by law so the conservative think tanks can't tear it apart)
4) It will take years to undo the damage this bill will do.(If saving, by conservative estimates 4,500 childs lives is damage then bring on the wrecking ball brother!!
The good news old TEX!! at least you have your village idiot back home!


Posted by: Android3 | March 16, 2010 12:09 PM | Report abuse

'I guess CNN is run by the Republican Party too.'

CNN leans pretty far right, yes. They have far more rightwing commentators than left... far more.


Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 11:59 AM | Report abuse

Wow! Never heard anyone say that bout CNN. The Network started by Ted Turner. They lean to the left in their reporting, just not as far left as MSNBC.

Posted by: Steve681 | March 16, 2010 12:07 PM | Report abuse

"Truly in this great country, liberals are the minority;yet, they have control of our Gov at the moment. Libs are a bunch of out-of-touch people without morals or a moral compass."

how do people this bone-headed stupid even manage to type?

i see zouk/moonbat/drivel is on duty at exactly noon today, right on schedule, and will be posting every two minutes until 8 pm tonight. how's the weather in Fairfax today, ole zouky? who pays you, the Heritage Foundation?

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 12:06 PM | Report abuse

I am a 67 year old retired veteran. I have never been so angry and so disgusted with congress and the current president as I am right now. The people the leadership of the Democrats are the most vile, crooked people I have ever seen in office. The majority of Americans have been telling these arrogant idiots for the past year that they DO NOT want the massive, oppressive, pork laden, payoff loaded, health care bill passed. They not only are ignoring us, they are using I believe illegal payoffs and crooked moves to get it passed against our will. Every single Democrat that votes for this bill should be removed from office as soon as possible. The people of the TEA Party movement should immediately start collecting money to challenge this bill as being unconstitutional and to have each and every Democrat that votes for this bill investigated by private investigators for payoffs and other crimes. We the people must take stronger action to let these disgusting maggots know they work for us. All of the people opposed to this travesty should get off their duffs and help fight it. Call every congress person you can and tell them we will work to remove them from office forever! Volunteer to help the TEA Party movement! Fight for your rights! No American federal government has the right to make you buy any product including health insurance. No American federal government has the right to make you pay for killing babies through abortion. This is part of the Democrat platform. Remember that in November. Democrats do not believe in freedom of the individual or they wouldn't be trying to make this a socialist country. Obama should be impeached for placing this country in the worst financial condition it has been in our entire history. Don't let them give you the guff that George Bush left this for them. Obama has tripled the debt since Bush left and it will become even larger under his presidency if he is allowed to stay in office. He is destroying our American way of life.

Posted by: good_angel | March 16, 2010 12:03 PM | Report abuse

Maybe we need healthcare, but we certainly do not need a rushjob healthcare plan that will consume about 1/6 of our budget. Anytime something is being rammed down your throat to meet a deadline, you know there ulterior motives and sneaky clauses. In our business, we do not make rush deals as we've learned from experience, those are the ones we've most regretted. I am a democrat. The antics the Republicans played were disgusting and unethical. However, it is no more ethical for Democrats to play the same antics. It is time for the government to fear its people rather than the people fear their government. Anyone, Republican, Democrat, Libertarian or any other ideologist should be removed from office for unethical antics, backroom deals, and self-motivated votes. The "public officials" acting as your representatives are your SERVANTS and are to do your will. Do not let them pull the wool over your eyes. You need to remove them from their perches if they do not SERVE you. People take back your government and let your voices be heard. You need not feel like government is happening to you. Make government happen according to your design. Our "government" our "leaders" have put the American people in such a financial bind that we work long hours and many days a week which makes us too tired to get involved with our government and policy. If you want your government to work for you, get involved, be less of a consumer and more of a reader - saves you money and makes you more informed AND gives you more time to take notice of your family, your government and your self.
Here's to you AMERICA and AMERICANS


Posted by: quoilers | March 16, 2010 12:03 PM | Report abuse

dribbl is on a mindless tear again.

Lost that job already moonbat?

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 12:03 PM | Report abuse

"Despite all that we agree on and all the Republican ideas we've incorporated, many Republicans in Congress just have a fundamental disagreement over whether we should have more or less oversight of insurance companies,"

"Now, I don't believe we should give the government or insurance companies more control over health care in America. I believe it's time to give you, the American people, more control over your own health insurance,"

"If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor."

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 12:02 PM | Report abuse

'My working-class parents had their bills paid for by insurance that they paid for, because they prioritized buying insurance over buying big screen tv's, cell phones, cable tv, beer, etc. '


the usual red herrings, straw men, etc.

Do you people ever have an original thought? No? I didn't think so.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 12:01 PM | Report abuse

Gawd, people are so mind-numbingly STUPID.

Posted by: DDAWD


gazing into the mirror again fourth stooge?

Posted by: drivl | March 16, 2010 11:59 AM | Report abuse

I'm sick of the liberals. Everything is fine for them. They are ok with killing babies and gays "marrying" in churches. They spend, they tax then complain it's the fault of the prior administration. Their back room deals and lack of accountability are sickening. Truly in this great country, liberals are the minority;yet, they have control of our Gov at the moment. Libs are a bunch of out-of-touch people without morals or a moral compass.

Posted by: JBfromFL | March 16, 2010 11:59 AM | Report abuse

'I guess CNN is run by the Republican Party too.'

CNN leans pretty far right, yes. They have far more rightwing commentators than left... far more.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 11:59 AM | Report abuse

I'm sick of the liberals. Everything is fine for them. They are ok with killing babies and gays "marrying" in churches. They spend, they tax then complain it's the fault of the prior administration. Their back room deals and lack of accountability are sickening. Truly in this great country, liberals are the minority;yet, they have control of our Gov at the moment. Libs are a bunch of out-of-touch people without morals or a moral compass.

Posted by: JBfromFL | March 16, 2010 11:59 AM | Report abuse

Yes, to the comments about all the ad spending this week - I would like to know the totals for all the sides. Also, how much money is being spent on astroturf.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 16, 2010 11:57 AM | Report abuse


What will kick in this year:


"Offer tax credits to small businesses to purchase coverage;

Prohibit pre-existing condition exclusions for children in all new plans;

Provide immediate access to insurance for uninsured Americans who are uninsured because of a pre-existing condition through a temporary high-risk pool;

Prohibit dropping people from coverage when they get sick in all individual plans;

Eliminate lifetime limits and restrictive annual limits on benefits in all plans;

Require premium rebates to enrollees from insurers with high administrative expenditures and require public disclosure of the percent of premiums applied to overhead costs;

Ensure consumers have access to an effective internal and external appeals process to appeal new insurance plan decisions;

Require plans to cover an enrollee's dependent children until age 26;

Require new plans to cover preventive services and immunizations without cost-sharing;

Relief on the Donut Hole.

Congress has been debating health care reform for years and the American people deserve an up or down vote. We shouldn't hide behind rules to prevent us from going on record and casting a vote for or against reform. This is about giving Americans what they're entitled to: a clear vote showing what people stand for and believe and where the majority vote rules.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 11:56 AM | Report abuse

drindl:
"So, dbw, your mother got fine care in a good hospital because of federal aid. You object that that? You would have preferred she die, perhaps? Or that you personally paid her bill? How much would that have set you back, hmm?"

My working-class parents had their bills paid for by insurance that they paid for, because they prioritized buying insurance over buying big screen tv's, cell phones, cable tv, beer, etc. How they had their care paid for had nothing to do with the plaque I mentioned, which of course has nothing to do with 'federal aid'.

Do you ever bother to think about what you type before you hit submit? Using facts instead of liberal talking points and hysteria tends to be much more effective.

Posted by: dbw1 | March 16, 2010 11:55 AM | Report abuse

Where the hell does this "take over 1/6th of the economy," come from anyways?

Gawd, people are so mind-numbingly STUPID.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 16, 2010 11:41 AM

dawd, i see anger in you now. must be the upcoming defeat of the health care bill.

Posted by: doof | March 16, 2010 11:54 AM | Report abuse

Liberal groups will spend approximately $11 million on television ads in 45 Democratic-held districts between today and the expected House vote on health care this weekend....................


How much health care would that buy?

Posted by: asmith1 | March 16, 2010 11:52 AM | Report abuse

leichtman1:
"the higher taxes you assert will be paid by less than 1% of Corporations in 2018 on very select HC plans. Minor details you failed to mention, but we are used to that kind of hysteria/inaccuracies from the right by now."

According to the non-partisan Joint Commission on Taxation, you are clearly proven wrong. I won't list them all here, but just to pick a couple:
- tax on high-end health plans. These impact 'working-class' union members, which is why the House is working so hard to get them eliminated in the final legislation. They won't be. They will have the effect of either making employers reduce their workers coverage, charge more for the 'employee contribution', or reduce their pay to offset the increased cost for their health plan...or all three. Obama can say all he wants how he's not 'taxing the working class', but you can't run from the obvious indirect financial impact they will feel.

- "Fees" (please don't call them taxes, per H Reid) on medical device makers. Not only will grandpa have to pay more out of pocket for his scooter, but 'working class' individuals will lose jobs as employers have to make up this additional cost burden elsewhere...as a large medical equipment device maker in Ohio has already done, enacting layoffs last month anticipating this bill is going to get passed.

There's a link below you can read the rest at your convenience. Little advice: before you call out someone for missing 'minor details', it might be helpful if you actually had your facts straight and knew what you were talking about. It helps add to your cedibility, which is faltering at this point.

http://www.jct.gov/publications.html?func=startdown&id=3635

Posted by: dbw1 | March 16, 2010 11:49 AM | Report abuse

Steve681, I must differ with you on Rasmussen. What you say about the national polls in 2008 is essentially correct except that other polls showed virtually the same spread of 6 or 7 points.

Where Rasmussen fails is in his local polling because he uses methods that tend to favor republicans. Why? He uses a likely voter method. Sometimes that works, sometimes it doesn't. It all depends on the nature of the election.

The reason Rasmussen is looked at with some suspicion is that his Fox News commissioned polls always somehow seem to match the biases of his paymasters. He uses a good deal of automated polling techniques and he always manages to massage his polls sufficiently to come up with a result that Fox News viewers prefer. He can get away with that on issue oriented polls and the sort of polling he does for social issues that conservatives favor. But on the really big ones, the national polls, he has to rely on more reliable methods and that is why his big national polls tend to mirror other national polls.

Posted by: jaxas70 | March 16, 2010 11:49 AM | Report abuse

Let me lay it out for you: The health care bill will not only pass...

Posted by: jaxas70 | March 16, 2010 11:40 AM

you're living on planet obama. this is planet earth.

Posted by: doof | March 16, 2010 11:46 AM | Report abuse

CNN POLL
What do you think Congress should do on health care -- pass a health care bill similar to the
legislation that Congress has been working on for the past year, start work on an entirely new bill,
or stop working on any bills that would change the country's health care system?

Feb. 12-15 2010
Pass similar bil 25%
Start work on new bil 48%
Stop working on health care 25%
Other (vol.) 2%
No opinion 1%

I guess CNN is run by the Republican Party too.

Posted by: Steve681 | March 16, 2010 11:46 AM | Report abuse

yes they are, dawd. check out this winner:

'A far-right Republican candidate for governor of Georgia has issued what must be one of the most counter-productive -- and flat-out hilarious -- denials in the history of modern political campaigning.

On Saturday, Ray McBerry sent out a lengthy statement denying that he "attempted to have an affair" with his former campaign manager; had sexual relations with under-aged girls; stole custody of his son from the son's mother (who, he noted, had tested positive for meth anyway); is no longer allowed to teach in the state; and is unpatriotic, just because he refuses to salute "the current federal flag which represents the present unconstitutional leviathan in Washington," and instead salutes the flag of Georgia and the "original Betsy Ross American flag."

McBerry -- who now works as a producer of radio and TV commercials, and is polling around 2 percent in the race -- is the chair of the Georgia chapter of the League of the South, which describes itself as "a Southern Nationalist organization whose ultimate goal is a free and independent Southern republic."

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 11:46 AM | Report abuse

Bart Stupak is another tool of the rightwing, else he wouldn't be on FOX -- another DINO, a christianist with an agenda.

So, dbw, your mother got fine care in a good hospital because of federal aid. You object that that? You would have preferred she die, perhaps? Or that you personally paid her bill? How much would that have set you back, hmm?

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 11:42 AM | Report abuse

Where the hell does this "take over 1/6th of the economy," come from anyways?

So do seatbelt laws mean that the government has taken over 10% of the economy?

Gawd, people are so mind-numbingly STUPID.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 16, 2010 11:41 AM | Report abuse

"Polling, as we have often written in this space, is part science and part art."

The science part ends when the test for randomness fails --- which is always. The rest, such as using fudge factors, may be art but is also BS.

Posted by: markwit | March 16, 2010 11:41 AM | Report abuse

By the time we reach the 4th of July celebrations, all of this bubble and fizz will be just a vague memory. Let me lay it out for you: The health care bill will not only pass, it will have attached to it a student loan reform package that is wildly popular. The bill is also front loaded with a great many popular items the public has favored for years.

Following passage of the health bill, democrats are going to be confident and energized and you will see a virtual explosion of the logjam of popularly supported pieces of legislation on financial reform, jobs and education. The republicans will have no choice but to engage the democrats because of the popular will.

There is about to be a really big turnaround in fortunes. In fact, it has already begun.

Posted by: jaxas70 | March 16, 2010 11:40 AM | Report abuse

HUH? Something seriously wrong with your brain wiring. But that would explain your choice of party. Rassmussen runs Republican-rigged polls. eveyone knows it. The outfit is a wholly owned subsidiary of the party and hence is a joke.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 11:28 AM | Report abuse

Thanks for poving my point.

In 2008, Obama won 53%-46% Rassmussen final poll showed Obama winning 52% to 46%.

In 2004 George W. Bush received 50.7% of the vote while John Kerry earned 48.3%. Rasmussen Reports was the only firm to project both candidates’ totals within half a percentage point by projecting that Bush would win 50.2% to 48.5%.


Scott Rasmussen is the pubisher and president of Rasmussen Reports. He has described himself as an independent pollster for more than a decade. Like the company he started, Scott maintains his independence and has never been a campaign pollster or consultant for candidates. seeking office.
Scott, along with his father, founded ESPN in 1979.

Liberals just can not exept the fact that the majority of the country is against this bill.

Posted by: Steve681 | March 16, 2010 11:38 AM | Report abuse

"Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), who is a "no" vote, thinks his leadership is far short of 216."

“I'd be surprised if they have 200 votes,” he told Fox News’s Greta Van Susteren on Monday night.

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/86985-rules-memo-outlines-dem-plan-to-pass-healthcare-bill-without-actual-vote

Posted by: doof | March 16, 2010 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Scott Brown, with the pink leather hot pants, you mean? Massachusetts elected a boy hooker. they'll be sorry, but everyone makes mistakes.

The 'tea party' is a collection of cranks, freaks, nutbags and fruitcakes.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 11:32 AM | Report abuse

more drindl drivel:
"Without this health bill, we are going to be seeing more and more of this, as more and more children, elderly and poorer families lose coverage."

My mother had the misfortune of having to make an extended stay in an Ohio hospital in recent months. I noticed a plaque on the door where we entered, that informed all entrants that if you are below the poverty line, you get free health care in that hospital. If you make less than 200% of the poverty level, you get subsidized health care in that hospital.

And that hospital is one of the largest in the country, consistently rated among the top hospitals on the planet. Further proof that this 'health bill' will do nothing to give the "poor" anything more than what they have today.

What it will do is give the federal bureacracy more dependents enslaved to it, which is just fine for most Democrats who will prefer any outcome that adds more voters to their base at the expense of actually accomplishing anything that helps people long-term.

Posted by: dbw1 | March 16, 2010 11:31 AM | Report abuse

"Now the liberals who support the bill will be saying the poll is right wing propaganda. Any Democrat who speaks out against this bill is a mouth piece of the Republican Party. "

HUH? Something seriously wrong with your brain wiring. But that would explain your choice of party. Rassmussen runs Republican-rigged polls. eveyone knows it. The outfit is a wholly owned subsidiary of the party and hence is a joke.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 11:28 AM | Report abuse

LOL. This group of nutbags couldn't sway anything. They've lost every election they've been in so far--and a lot of independents vote Democratic. You're a joke.
Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse
That is why Scott Brown won in Mass. Because Independent voters went for the democrat.
That sounds like what MSNBC said when Scot Brown won.
Scott Brown, Who is against the bill MSNBC said this (Scott Brown is now Sen. Elect Brown. The people of Mass have spoken. They are saying pass health care now) HA
The tea party movement is a movement of conservatives and Independent voters.

Posted by: Steve681 | March 16, 2010 11:26 AM | Report abuse

Again why does the party of NO truth need to break arms and legs for votes for a great plan that controls costs by letting people consume as much healthcare as they think they need paid for with other people’s money? Why does the party of NO truth, featuring the most arrogant LIARS and BRIBERS in American history, need to lie and bribe for votes?

Posted by: leapin | March 16, 2010 11:26 AM | Report abuse

To Obama, its not about affordable insurance or better access to healthcare for Americans.
Its all about the government taking over
17% of our economy. That's the "change" he was talking about.
Obama fooled Americans into voting for him,
and now he's fooling us with this phony
excuse for reform.
If you want to make health insurance more
affordable, this is not the way to go about it.

Posted by: ohioan | March 16, 2010 11:25 AM | Report abuse

If passed, this will become the most corrupt bill ever passed in the history of the United States Congress. The sweetheart deals made to wavering members of Congress might be considered criminal corruption if applied to "we the people" but for the Obama administration, it is simply good politics.

Posted by: rgn1 | March 16, 2010 11:25 AM | Report abuse

drindle dribble:
"There are some, like Rassmussen, that are so flawed and rigged as to be a joke."

I always get a bit giddy when I have the opportunity to point out facts that drop-kick another liberal talking point to the curb. Rasmussen has consistenly rated as the top politics pollster for accuracy. (google it if you don't believe me)

ABC/Wash Post? Not even in the top 10.

Posted by: dbw1 | March 16, 2010 11:24 AM | Report abuse

" Liberal groups will spend approximately $11 million on television ads in 45 Democratic-held districts between today and the expected House vote on health care this weekend"

didn't see any mention of the millions being spent by the Chamber of Commerce this week.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 16, 2010 11:24 AM | Report abuse

Without this health bill, we are going to be seeing more and more of this, as more and more children, elderly and poorer families lose coverage, and premiums for everyone else continue to rise as they have this year -- up to 40% a year, every year:

"Maryland's two largest counties outlined spending cuts Monday that would reach from children's health clinics to nursing homes, slice tens of millions of dollars in education spending and furlough thousands of public employees.

Drop-offs in revenue and in expected state aid are forcing officials in Montgomery and Prince George's counties, home to nearly a third of the state's population, to confront some of the same unforgiving math that has caused governments across the Washington region to propose cuts to popular programs and safety-net services."

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 11:24 AM | Report abuse

Minor notes:

It's sleight of hand, not slight of hand. Deem and pass is a bit cowardly, though Pelosi is in a whatever it takes mode (or is that mood).

"no one who has insurance is assured of keeping what they have"

Tell that to anyone who has been laid off. There is no free lunch. There are no guarantees in life. Life is pain. Anyone who says otherwise is selling something.

Jake in 3D signing out.

Posted by: JakeD3 | March 16, 2010 11:21 AM | Report abuse

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 43% favor the health care plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats, while 53% oppose it
Now the liberals who support the bill will be saying the poll is right wing propaganda. Any Democrat who speaks out against this bill is a mouth piece of the Republican Party. Liberals cannot fathom that legislation that they want to put forth for America is unpopular.

Posted by: Steve681 | March 16, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse

"The independent voters, and the Tea Baggers, are enough to sway any close election."

LOL. This group of nutbags couldn't sway anything. They've lost every election they've been in so far--and a lot of independents vote Democratic. You're a joke.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse

curious why you would think Ds would political advise from an obvious R.
You are incorrect when you posted:
"higher taxes working-class families will pay (either directly, or indirectly as employers take the government-imposed taxes on employers"
the higher taxes you assert will be paid by less than 1% of Corporations in 2018 on very select HC plans. Mrnor details you failed to mention, but we are used to that kind of hysteria/inaccuracies from the right by now.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 16, 2010 11:19 AM | Report abuse

Favorite Jon Stewart take on Dick Morris

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-september-3-2008/sarah-palin-gender-card

Incidentally, that was around the time where the mainstream press was having to change semen soaked underwear hourly over how fair Karl Rove was as a FOX contributor.

"Now, now, now. In Dick Morris' defense, he is a lying sack of sh*t"

Posted by: DDAWD | March 16, 2010 11:17 AM | Report abuse

From a good New Yorker piece on Justice Stevens:

Stevens believes that even the 1954 landmark, Brown v. Board of Education, which struck down the doctrine of “separate but equal” in education, is under assault. In 2007, when the Court, in an opinion by Roberts, struck down the Seattle school-integration plan, Stevens, in dissent, could only murmur in wonder: “It is my firm conviction that no Member of the Court that I joined in 1975 would have agreed with today’s decision.”

The court now is the most radically rightwing it has probably ever been. More of the damage from history's worst presidency.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 11:17 AM | Report abuse

There are some, like Rassmussen, that are so flawed and rigged as to be a joke. Many of the ones known to be the most flawed are often feature here as support for the usual R talking points.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 10:41 AM | Report abuse

Rasmussen polls flawed, HA, they have the most accurate polls out there. Going back to Obama’s election they have been right on with the numbers.

Posted by: Steve681 | March 16, 2010 11:16 AM | Report abuse

I work in John Boccieri's disctrict, and just wanted to point out that the Fix missed 1 fairly important item, and made 1 incorrect statement.

1) Boccieri was elected in '08 during an Obama tidal wave of 'change' to a district that had a Republican retire after a couple decades in office. Boccieri knows that his days in Congress are over if he gives the voters in his right-leaning district even a faint appearance that he's siding with Pelosi in a big-government intrusion into their lives. His only hope of getting relected is to show he doesn't take marching orders from the Pelosi-led left-wing of the Democrat Party. It doesn't matter who his opponent is, if he votes for this bloated big-government health care bill the majority of independent voters in his district that put him into office will vote for the "R" on the ballot this fall.

2) "...working class families who would likely feel the most positive impact from the bill."
Ummmm, only problem with this statement is that it's not true. Other than that, no problem with it. If the higher taxes working-class families will pay (either directly, or indirectly as employers take the government-imposed taxes on employers out of their workers pay) counts as "positive impact", for absolutely no demonstrable improvement in health services or lowering of costs, that's pretty sad.

This bill is about anything other than improving health care. Now it even has student loan legislation lumped in with it. Further evidence of the albatross that this bill has become, full of riders, add-ons, and buy-offs to win votes so Obama can claim a 'victory'....whatever the cost to the taxpayers.

Posted by: dbw1 | March 16, 2010 11:13 AM | Report abuse

" Liberal groups will spend approximately $11 million on television ads in 45 Democratic-held districts between today and the expected House vote on health care this weekend"

WHY NO LINK, when there is always a link to anything trashing Dems?

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 11:09 AM | Report abuse


To the members of Pelosi's pork plundering poodle pack:

If you support the Speaker's effort to ram through Obamacare, your district will have a new Representative in Congress after the November Purge.

The independent voters, and the Tea Baggers, are enough to sway any close election.

Good luck!

Posted by: Soloflexerus | March 16, 2010 11:07 AM | Report abuse

"Tea partiers, Republicans, and Republicans masquerading as tea partiers are rallying against health care reform this morning on Capitol Hill at an event they're billing as "Code Red."

This rally is being organized by the more establishment side of the tea party movement -- or co-opted side, depending on your point of view. The sponsors include the Tea Party Express, founded by Republican operatives in California, and FreedomWorks, the corporate-funded outfit run by former House Majority Leader Dick Armey. Accordingly, the list of speakers is dominated by elected Republicans, albeit some of the more whacked members of the GOP caucus: Reps. Michele Bachmann, Marsha Blackburn, Joe Wilson, and Phil Gingrey."

and the money behind it? The health insurance industry of course. Republicans are just its sock puppets.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 11:03 AM | Report abuse

basically Dick Morris. No one considers him a Democrat anymore.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 16, 2010 10:59 AM | Report abuse

Anyone who is familiar with the Clinton impeachment proceedings remember that Pad Caddell was vicious in his condemnation of Clinton and the democrats.

He may have been a democrat or even a liberal back in the 60s and 70s but like so many of them, when right wing radicalism became fashionable, they jumped on that bandwagon.

Look. Think David Horowitz. Tht is Pat Caddell. Any poll he comes up with can be dismissed right from the word go.

Posted by: jaxas70 | March 16, 2010 10:55 AM | Report abuse

NEWS ITEM: Obama Seeks Universal Internet Access

INCONVENIENT TRUTH: The U.S. government, via Homeland Security-administered "fusion centers," CENSORS and MALICIOUSLY SABOTAGES the telecommunications of extrajudicially "targeted" Americans -- many targeted for their political views or activism, says veteran journalist.

Here's his account of how your federal government violates the constitutional rights of American citizens on a routine, daily basis:

http://nowpublic.com/world/how-u-s-spy-ops-censor-web-political-speech
http://nowpublic.com/world/u-s-censors-net-while-obama-lectures-china-net-censorship
www.poynter.org/subject.asp?id=2 (click "More Reporting, Writing..")
NowPublic.com/scrivener

Posted by: scrivener50 | March 16, 2010 10:46 AM | Report abuse

leitchtman is right. Caddell and Schoen might have been something else years and years ago, but as of today, they are rightwing operatives and nothing more.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 10:44 AM | Report abuse

" In the last four days, two new polls have come out that paint VERY different pictures of Sen. Arlen Specter's (D) relative vulnerability this fall."

Well, duh. Polls are conducted with WIDELY and wildly different methodologies, wording and intent and wildly different degrees of accuracy and legitimacy.

There are some, like Rassmussen, that are so flawed and rigged as to be a joke. Many of the ones known to be the most flawed are often feature here as support for the usual R talking points.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 10:41 AM | Report abuse

"What nonsense Pat Caddell is far from being to the right"
apparently you have not listened to a word from Caddell during the last 4 POTUS election cycles. He has been a regular on faux news trashing Clinton, Kerry, Hillary and Obama and praising W and McCain. In some parrallel universe that makes him a D. He has not said anything positive about Ds since Jimmy Carter, before most here were even born.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 16, 2010 10:41 AM | Report abuse

Scarborough used to be fair and balanced has recently become a mouthpiece for the GOP. I was a loyal viewer, no more.

Dennis Kusinich was not listed as possible changed votes, I am guessing The Fix sees him as intractable. Personally if I were in his district and he opposes this HC bill which seems all but certain, I would be supporting a primary challenger.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 16, 2010 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Shoen and Caddel are NOT DEMOCRATS. They are as far right as you can get -- Fox contributors. They may call themselves that, but any democrat who uses their services is a fool. Any one who quotes them is only looking for a faux 'democrats' they can use to bash Dems -- like Joe Lieberman.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/34441.html#ixzz0iLjPOr8O

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 10:27 AM | Report abuse
What nonsense Pat Caddell is far from being to the right. You just don’t like him because he is honest. He has worked for Democratic presidential candidates George McGovern in 1972, Jimmy Carter in 1976 and 1980, Gary Hart in 1984, Joe Biden in 1988, and Jerry Brown in 1992.
Caddell had wide influence in the Carter White House, and was the chief advocate of what later became known as Carter's "malaise speech".

Posted by: Steve681 | March 16, 2010 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Klaxon blaring.
Ramming Speed! Ramming Speed!

It is fun to watch The Right suffering,
all over again! I never gets old.

Posted by: shrink2 | March 16, 2010 10:35 AM | Report abuse

This is funny -- more tea party fractures:

'Today, at a luncheon at the National Press Club on the future of the Republican Party in Washington, FreedomWorks chairman and tea party strategist Dick Armey slammed former Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO) and other anti-immigration activists for “alienating a ‘natural’ constituency [Latinos] that could help the party win elections.” Armey admitted that as House leader, he made sure Tancredo didn’t have a stage to speak on. The Daily Caller reports:

Former Republican House leader Dick Armey said staunch anti-immigration opponents such as Rep. Tom Tancredo are destructive to Republicans — and are alienating a “natural” constituency that could help the party win elections. “Who in the Republican Party was the genius that said that now that we have identified the fastest-growing voting demographic in America, let’s go out and alienate them?” Armey said, referencing Hispanics, during a luncheon in Washington at the National Press Club.

“When I was the majority leader, I saw to it that Tom Tancredo did not get on the stage because I saw how destructive he was,” Armey said of the Colorado congressman and 2008 Republican presidential candidate known for his opposition to illegal immigration. [...]

In an interview with Charlie Rose that aired earlier this month, Armey listed Tancredo (R-CO) as representing part of the “tea party tent” that he feels “uncomfortable” with. In 2006, Armey referred to Tancredo as the “cheerleader of jerkiness in the immigration debate.”

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 10:32 AM | Report abuse

Spector's polling today is irrelevant until his primary with Sestak is over.
There are many Ds in Pa who are likely still suspicous of Spector's party loyalty when he made a comment weeks after changing parties saying he was anot a reliable D vote. My guess is that if he wins his primary challenge that most of those disaffected Pa voters will come home for Spector in the general election and not currently showing up in Spector's polling numbers imho.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 16, 2010 10:31 AM | Report abuse

"Today on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, during a discussion on the health care bill currently being considered in Congress, host Joe Scarborough accused progressive contributor Lawrence O’Donnell of being an “avowed socialist, a eurosocialist.” O’Donnell sardonically reminded Scaborough that there is “not a single Republican socialist in the Congress who wants to repeal one sentence of our existing socialist program, in Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.”

Scarborough quickly retorted, “Oh, I do“:

O’DONNELL: There’s not a single Republican socialist in the Congress who wants to repeal one sentence of our existing socialist program, in Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.

SCARBOROUGH: Oh, I do.

O’DONNELL: Oh, would you? Oh, OK.

Last fall, Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) offered an amendment on the floor of the House of Representatives that would’ve eliminated Medicare. Not a single House Republican voted to repeal the program that their party has fought since its inception, despite the fact that it is, indeed, a single-payer, not-for-profit, “socialist” universal health care system for the elderly."

Why? Because they are hypocrites.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 10:30 AM | Report abuse

Obama is more concerned about political agenda instead of representing the people who elected him.
He says he wants a bill that no one wants, and for it to be bipartisan, but he did everything to make it partisan. he would not scrap this bill and star over on a bipartisan bill, to keep it partisan.
Instead of working to create jobs, he is working on ways to get the government involved in out private lives. He complains about the news agencies and that they brain wash the public. He says we should go to the white house press instead to get brain washed by the government. He has no clue on what America is about.

Posted by: Steve681 | March 16, 2010 10:28 AM | Report abuse

Also,

"A Washington Post piece by Joel Benenson, President Obama’s “lead” pollster, today challenges the argument and the data offered by myself and Pat Caddell in a piece published Sunday in the same newspaper about health care reform and raises the question: Who is right?"

Shoen and Caddel are NOT DEMOCRATS. They are as far right as you can get -- Fox contributors. They may call themselves that, but any democrat who uses their services is a fool. Any one who quotes them is only looking for a faux 'democrats' they can use to bash Dems -- like Joe Lieberman.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/34441.html#ixzz0iLjPOr8O

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 10:27 AM | Report abuse

Unfortunately from my perspective, I think the bill (or more precisely, Slaughter's procedural gimmick) will pass with 1-2 votes to spare. It's usually the case that on razor-thin votes of considerable import, most of those who go into the vote publicly uncommitted eventually fall in line with their leadership. In this case, it's uncommitted Dems who are in play. Pelosi will verbally waterboard enough of them to sing her tune when it counts.

Posted by: mbcnewspaper | March 16, 2010 10:26 AM | Report abuse

"I have noticed that anytime Chris Cillizza comes across any poll that threatens his conventional wisdom driven, group-think analysis which for months has been pretty much a negative narrative on Obama and the democrats, he tries to come up with some weasel word effort to debunk such polls.

Look. The author of this piece and this blog is clearly biased in favor of republicans and conservatives. It comes out fairly obviously in his analysis. It is one of the reasons that MSNBC has dropped him as a regular on its chat shows. I would not be at all surprised to see him show up on Fox News as a regular contributor."

I think a FOX gig is exactly what he wants -- and he would be just right for it.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 10:24 AM | Report abuse

"I have noticed that anytime Chris Cillizza comes across any poll that threatens his conventional wisdom driven, group-think analysis which for months has been pretty much a negative narrative on Obama and the democrats, he tries to come up with some weasel word effort to debunk such polls.

Look. The author of this piece and this blog is clearly biased in favor of republicans and conservatives. It comes out fairly obviously in his analysis. It is one of the reasons that MSNBC has dropped him as a regular on its chat shows. I would not be at all surprised to see him show up on Fox News as a regular contributor."

I think that gig is exactly what he wants -- and he would be just right for it.

Posted by: drindl | March 16, 2010 10:22 AM | Report abuse

That is why passing the bill now and getting it off the table can only help democrats.

Posted by: jaxas70 | March 16, 2010 10:04 AM


no wishful thinking on my part. if the democrats were to pass health care, it would dominate the news for months to come. the health care bill is to democrats what bush was to republicans. the democrats will be hammered with it.

Posted by: doof | March 16, 2010 10:11 AM | Report abuse

pgr88:

If there's a military coup, does that mean that all Americans will get the same health care benefits as the military does?

Posted by: Bondosan | March 16, 2010 10:10 AM | Report abuse

Republicans, too, will head to the caucuses tonight to choose between a handful of potential Senate nominees led by former lieutenant governor Jane Norton and former state senator Tom Wiens.

---

At least two Colorado Democrats also want Jane.

She's awesome.

http://www.gunbarrelteleprompter.com/2010/03/editorial-jane-norton-sort-of-like-betsy-ross.html

Posted by: michaelniland | March 16, 2010 10:08 AM | Report abuse

I think bloggers like doof are just in wishful thinking mode. But, I don't blame them for that. Most political prognostication is based on the old adage of the wish being father to the thought.

I don't know but I suspect that if the bill passes and is signed by the President, by November, the only people who are going to remember anything about it are those fringy 10 percenters. Most people are not all that concerned about health care at the moment. That is why passing the bill now and getting it off the table can only help democrats. If it fails, everyone come November will remember that.

And that is why the right wing and the GOP are so dog determined to see it fail.

Posted by: jaxas70 | March 16, 2010 10:04 AM | Report abuse

+ children will no longer be denied coverage for pre-existing conditions
+ no more doughnut hole for seniors
+ ban on dropping coverage when the insured get sick
+ children can stay on parents' policies until they're 26 years
+ no maximum on lifetime or annual benefits
____________________
Angie: and you can cite this from the currently proposed legislation?

The legislation says that pre-existing conditions can't be used as a means of precluding coverage--it doesn't say you will be able to afford that coverage.

I am unsure what you mean by senior doughnut holes but believe me Medicare as of THIS YEAR can't coverage actual costs; Medicare, without major overhaul, as of RIGHT NOW needs to decide what it can and can not cover--i.e. seniors and the poor will see a marked degradation in coverage whether this legislation passes or not.

As for the ban on dropping your insurance if you get sick---There is no ban in the bill on dropping coverage if the cost of the procedure exceeds your insurance coverage.

Although children are children to parents all their lives--26 years is a ridiculously long time to be on a parents coverage and if this bill is health care reform why would anyone that age need to be paid from their parent's coverage anyway? But point for you--26 years olds can be on parent's insurance.

No maximum on lifetime or annual benefits--for those that can pay, you are absolutely right....

I assume you are well off and can pay the several thousand dollars this type of coverage will cost....it really doesn't help most of the 30 million; most are uninsured because they will not be able afford it. No studies have been done on what these kind of premiums will cost.....again, this bill isn't health care reform, it's insurance re-management. And insurance companies aren't being hurt by it.

Posted by: mil1 | March 16, 2010 9:58 AM | Report abuse

I have noticed that anytime Chris Cillizza comes across any poll that threatens his conventional wisdom driven, group-think analysis which for months has been pretty much a negative narrative on Obama and the democrats, he tries to come up with some weasel word effort to debunk such polls.

It is clear that in Pennsylvania, the mainstream media's conventional wisdom is that Arlen Specter is vulnerable. Thus, any poll like the Research 2000 poll or the Quinnipiac poll (both widely respected polling organizations) come up with identical results showing Specter with a lead of 7 points over Toomey, Chris feels impelled to somehow "explain" such a poll by coming up with his own self-serving set of assumptions that somehow end up giving Toomey a 2 point lead. He does this with this questionable method of a "poll of polls" which averages out all polls.

Why is this questionable? Because it fails to account for the fact that invariably, there are flawed polling methods used by partisan organizations and including them in a "poll of polls" skews averages.

Look. The author of this piece and this blog is clearly biased in favor of republicans and conservatives. It comes out fairly obviously in his analysis. It is one of the reasons that MSNBC has dropped him as a regular on its chat shows. I would not be at all surprised to see him show up on Fox News as a regular contributor.

Posted by: jaxas70 | March 16, 2010 9:56 AM | Report abuse

democrats are left with a choice to wreck their party or wreck the obama presidency. passing the bill would wreck the party. rejecting the bill would wreck obama. all for one or one for all?

Posted by: doof | March 16, 2010 9:55 AM | Report abuse

bgreen, you are incorrect about TX - we are a donor state.

Federal Tax Burdens and Expenditures: Texas is a Donor State
Texas taxpayers receive less federal funding per dollar of federal taxes paid compared to the average state. Per dollar of Federal tax collected in 2005, Texas citizens received approximately $0.94 in the way of federal spending. This ranks the state 35th nationally and represents a slight decrease from 1995, when Texas received $0.95 per dollar of federal taxes paid (ranking them 37th nationally). Neighboring states and the amount of federal spending they received per dollar of federal taxation paid were as follows: New Mexico ($2.03), Oklahoma ($1.36), Arkansas ($1.41), and Louisiana ($1.78).

This was an issue in the R Primary. TX received only about $0.80 when KBH was elected to the Senate in the early 90s. Goodhair kept using those numbers to prove
TX was getting screwed. KBH argued she had raised TX's take to $.94 and Goodhair then accused her of porkulus.

All big states are donors - CA is treated least fairly. All rural states are donees. Why, b/c NM has as many Senators as CA or as TX.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | March 16, 2010 9:54 AM | Report abuse

@Angie 12106:

So nice,

I'll cosign twice.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | March 16, 2010 9:50 AM | Report abuse

Well, I see 'RealTexan1' is out of therapy again and telling us all what WILL happen...
and indeed, is proving he IS a real Texan.

Funny, though, the image of Texas, a state full of those who shun the helping hand and prefer to imply that they pull themselves up by their bootstraps, that Texas has for DECADES received billions more tax dollars FROM the Federal government than taxes sent by Texans.

So, if they're pullin' themselves up by their bootstraps, you should know, YOU'RE the one that bought them the boots!
Yee haw, Bubba

Oh, and BTW, should we jest take yer word for thew doom you predict, or can you cite ANY sipport for yer spew, lil' doggie?

That's what we all thought, Tex.

Posted by: bgreen2224 | March 16, 2010 9:42 AM | Report abuse

health care bill will go the way of the george bush immigration bill from a few years back. expect the House members to cave in. democrats won't have the votes they need. could be really embarrassing for pelosi if she decides to have a vote. the more she waits, the more will defect to no.

Posted by: doof | March 16, 2010 9:41 AM | Report abuse

I think what those who comment here are missing, including Mr. Chillizza, is that voters outside the beltway do not view what the House Speaker is doing as being in the public interest--and I am speaking of both the right and left voting public.

"Deem and pass" is slight of hand whether it's a legitimate House rules technique or not. A public voice has been lost in both the House and Senate version of this bill but particularly in the Senate's version. House "approval" of the Senate version honestly wins no one's approval, except those who think their insurance won't be effected and those who think they will be able to get coverage for something they currently can't get.

A closer reading of the 2000 plus pages shows that no one who has insurance is assured of keeping what they have and those who think they may get coverage could end up being able to pay the premiums but not the doctor visit bill (as happens currently in some state workers coverage).

This bill is not reform but rather an attempt at enforcing (or forcing) the uninsured to take insurance and for the insurance companies to pick up 30 million uninsured. It's this quantity that is supposed to reduce costs but nothing in the bill ensures this.

My medical coverage is from the govt. Every year it covers less and less. More frequently the doctors in my town have simply dropped medicare (and thus my Tricare as well) and I am left to find a doctor that will take my insurance. This bill will not keep doctors from opting out or regulate cost of a visit or procedure from one doctor to the next or one region of the country to the next.

If you believe in health care reform, this is not the bill you want--- it doesn't reform health care. If you believe that big govt can't perform even the smallest administrative tasks correctly (IRS, Dept of ED, etc) then this isn't the bill you are looking for.

Having worked for the federal govt, I don't look forward to a department such as HHS deciding what procedures will be best for my doctor to preform, nor a discussion every 5 years on what I think I should do for my end of life care with someone who thinks of me as what? A human being? A number? A drain on society? Their job?

"Deem and pass" only makes the House look as if it hasn't ears to hear their own constituency or time to read what a dismal bill this really is.

Posted by: mil1 | March 16, 2010 9:40 AM | Report abuse

JohnGalt9, there is nothing unusual about the process of deemed passage. However, in this case it would be an exercise in chickenturdiness. See:

http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/16/passing-legislation-without-voting-on-it/

Congresswomen Slaughter did not invent or discover this process. But obfuscating one's vote for political cover does not pass the smell test, and Rs will get some talking points if deemed passage is used here.

For those who do not dabble in parliamentary procedure, if "unpassed" legislation is used as the express basis for another bill that does pass, the formerly "unpassed" legislation is deemed to have passed by necessary implication.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | March 16, 2010 9:39 AM | Report abuse

These benefits included in health insurance reform will be effective THIS YEAR...

+ children will no longer be denied coverage for pre-existing conditions
+ no more doughnut hole for seniors
+ ban on dropping coverage when the insured get sick
+ children can stay on parents' policies until they're 26 years
+ no maximum on lifetime or annual benefits

YaaaaaaaY!!

Posted by: angie12106 | March 16, 2010 9:38 AM | Report abuse

These benefits included in health insurance reform will be effective THIS YEAR...

+ children will no longer be denied coverage for pre-existing conditions
+ no more doughnut hole for seniors
+ ban on dropping coverage when the insured get sick
+ children can stay on parents' policies until they're 26 years
+ no maximum on lifetime or annual benefits

YaaaaaaaY!!

Posted by: angie12106 | March 16, 2010 9:38 AM | Report abuse

prg88 wrote>>>If Pelosi goes for "deemed passed," it time for a military coup - simple as that

Did you propose military coupS when Republicans used "deemed and passed" OVER 200 TIMES between 1995 and 2006?

http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/03/13/self-executing-rule

Posted by: angie12106 | March 16, 2010 9:35 AM | Report abuse

Mark, I didn't read your link, but Ezra Klein had his own post about it.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/03/_over_the_course_of.html

Posted by: DDAWD | March 16, 2010 9:33 AM | Report abuse

I got my "Don't Blame Me, I Voted For The American!", "Next Time Vote American", "Miss Me Yet?", and other great stickers and gear at www.keep2theright.com

Posted by: NYC_CON | March 16, 2010 9:32 AM | Report abuse

T.R. Reid strikes again - thanx, Ddawd. Did you see the link I posted yesterday?

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Blog/The-Costs-of-Failure.aspx

I will include both in my R email.

Andy, I read "Animal Farm" and can sing "Beasts of England..." to either the tune of "La Cucaracha" or of "Clementine". Was the novel "1984" as good as the movie?

Posted by: mark_in_austin | March 16, 2010 9:26 AM | Report abuse

Things are looking better and better for Republicans; all thanks to the incredible and incomprehensible urge of Obama to lead himself and his party down the road to destruction

www.robbingamerica.com
is advancing the thesis that Republicans should allow the Healthcare bill to pass in order to sweep the next elections.

However, now they think that it would be infinitely better if they push Obama and his flock to jump down the cliff of the "slaughter Rule". And that is because not only is more brazen and anti-democratic, but because it could be repeal much more easily by simply challenging its constitutionality.

It would for certain be repealed by the Supreme Court. That will be equivalent to strike down the Obama Presidency. What a bonanza.

Republicans should encourage, secretly, the passing of the healthcare bill via the "Slaughter Rule.

Posted by: JohnGalt9 | March 16, 2010 9:25 AM | Report abuse

If Pelosi goes for "deemed passed," it time for a military coup - simple as that - because Pelosi and Obama will have proved they are anti-constitution.

Posted by: pgr88 | March 16, 2010 9:10 AM | Report abuse


===

We have a system for ridding ourselves of politicians we don't agree with.

It's called "elections".

Posted by: mikem1 | March 16, 2010 9:21 AM | Report abuse

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/12/AR2010031202287.html

I'm thinking of passing this column on to Congressman Cao.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 16, 2010 9:13 AM | Report abuse

Mark,
You should read 1984, mainly because of its historical importance. It and Animal Farm are the definitive works of the anti-establishment literature IMO.

I think Pelosi has this one and she knows how to make it happen. Once she passes the bills (however that may happen) you will see the Senate move as quickly as possible to pass the House changes. Also I would expect the Jobs bill to pass in the next day or two in the Senate so that hopefully Obama can sign both before he leaves for Indonesia.

This may actually work in the favor of the White House. There are a lot of critics and members of Congress who will NOT criticise the President while he is oversees so that may dull some of the intensity of the criticism from the more respected members of the GOP. Also the ones who do heavily criticize him while he is oversees run the risk of the Democrats calling foul that the GOP is attacking the President when he can't defend himself. At least that is how I would spin it if I worked for the WH.

Posted by: AndyR3 | March 16, 2010 9:13 AM | Report abuse

If Pelosi goes for "deemed passed," it time for a military coup - simple as that - because Pelosi and Obama will have proved they are anti-constitution.

Posted by: pgr88 | March 16, 2010 9:10 AM | Report abuse

Very good book. I recommend it a lot.

But yeah, I've been trying to sway my Congressman too. He's one of the Stupak bunch. I let him know he's got my vote in November if he votes for it and he doesn't if he doesn't. I'm trying to get other people to agree to it and call him. I think I got like 20 people. I doubt it will sway him, but it's worth a shot.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 16, 2010 9:08 AM | Report abuse

Federal health care reform? "First, Do No Harm."

SECRET HOMELAND-LED PROGRAM SILENTLY TORTURES, IMPAIRS, 'SLOW KILLS' AMERICANS WITH NATIONWIDE CELL TOWER MICROWAVE/LASER 'DIRECTED ENERGY' WEAPON SYSTEM: VETERAN JOURNALIST

• Secret Bush-Cheney legacy multi-agency federal-local program uses cell tower/GPS satellite microwave/laser electromagnetic precision "directed energy" RF radiation attack system to silently torture, impair, subjugate "targeted" citizens -- and oversees local police-protected "community watch" vigilante harassment, vandalism, and financial sabotage campaigns.

Electromagnetic and social neutralization, elimination of "dissidents," undesirables.

• Why so many cell towers saturate the American landscape -- urban and rural.

• Weapon system patents reveal silent, powerful attack system in YOUR backyard.

• American human rights atrocities, ideological purge, under the cover of national security.

WHY WON'T MAINSTREAM MEDIA QUIZ THE ADMINISTRATION ABOUT THIS DOMESTIC WEAPON SYSTEM -- IN EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD IN AMERICA?

See: poynter.org/subject.asp?id=2 ("articles" list)

OR: http://www.nowpublic.com/world/u-s-silently-tortures-americans-cell-tower-microwaves

BUCKS COUNTY, PA- BASED MAGLOCLEN FUSION CENTER: "Central command for a Mid-Atlantic States American Gestapo."

Where is the DOJ/Civil Rights Division Investigation?

http://nowpublic.com/world/gestapo-usa-govt-funded-vigilante-network-terrorizes-america
OR: NowPublic.com/scrivener RE: "U.S. SILENTLY TORTURES..." and "GESTAPO USA" ("stories" list).

Posted by: scrivener50 | March 16, 2010 9:01 AM | Report abuse

Ddawd, "drindl" has chided me for never having read "1984". I did see a movie version, and an "Apple" advertisement.

I am e-mailing my Congressman to vote for the bill. He is a R who strongly opposes the bill. I am e-mailing my law school roommate and congressman from a neighboring district to vote for the bill. He is a R who strongly opposes the bill. After those two efforts at influencing the vote I will go about my day.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | March 16, 2010 8:57 AM | Report abuse

Mark, can you link him to 1984 Cliffnotes or something as well? Where the hell does Big Brother come from???

Posted by: DDAWD | March 16, 2010 8:34 AM | Report abuse

RealTexan1, here are one liberal and one conservative legal commentary. I am a lawyer and I think both of these views are more likely to find adherents on the Supreme Court than the loose talk of "unconstitutionality".

See:

http://healthcarereform.nejm.org/?p=2764&query=TOC

See, also:

http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_08_16-2009_08_22.shtml#1250981450

Posted by: mark_in_austin | March 16, 2010 7:55 AM | Report abuse

"Reconciliation" in the Senate.

"Deem and pass" in the House.

Democracy at work?

I think not!

Posted by: mwhoke | March 16, 2010 7:33 AM | Report abuse

No public option here. This bill is NOT healthcare. It is "Big Brother"; the bill is loaded with unconstitutional provisions and backroom sweetheart deals.

If this bill passes:

1) Insurance premiums will go up.
2) Dem's will be voted out of office.
3) Supreme Court will strike down the individual mandate and other unconstitutional provisions.
4) It will take years to undo the damage this bill will do.

If you are for healthcare, this bill is NOT for you.

Posted by: RealTexan1 | March 16, 2010 7:03 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company