Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

2012 Republicans line up in opposition to Obama health care bill

1. Making clear that the recently-passed health care bill will be a major point of debate in the 2012 presidential race, Republicans eying a run for the top spot sought to one-up each other with their condemnations of the bill.

Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney took the top prize for hot rhetoric, blasting the bill as an " unconscionable abuse of power" and accusing President Obama of "betray[ing] his oath to the nation." (The onus is on Romney to be a vocal critic as he is likely to face questions about whether the health care bill he championed as governor of Massachusetts was the basis for this legislation.)

Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) wasn't far behind in the condemnation contest. Pawlenty released a statement describing the legislation as an "overreaching, extraordinarily expensive, government-centric plan" and penned a letter to the Minnesota attorney general asking her to examine the constitutionality of the bill.

Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels , who has recently opened the door to run for president in 2012, struck a more-in-disappointment-than-in-anger tone in his own statement. "In a life of optimism about America and its future . . . I am as discouraged as I can remember being," he said.

South Dakota Sen. John Thune focused on the alleged arrogance displayed by the Obama administration with the passage of the bill. The vote "demonstrates that President Obama and the Congressional Democrats think that their ideological agenda and perceived legacy are more important than the voice of the American people," said Thune.

And, of course, former Alaska governor Sarah Palin used her Facebook page to describe the bill as an "exhibition of a detached and imperious government."

We've noted before that -- unlike House and Senate Democrats -- President Obama is operating under a long-ish timetable on health care. The strong statements by nearly every one of his potential rivals suggest that Republicans believe the bill is a winner for them -- at least in a GOP presidential primary but also, perhaps, in a general election fight as well.

2. President Obama's job approval rating dipped to 46 percent in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll conducted over the weekend, the lowest he has scored in the organization's data since coming into the White House in early 2009.

Obama's approval rating in the poll was the third time in as many months that CNN/ORC had shown him below 50 percent -- although in January and February he rated at 49 percent. (Obama remains quite popular personally with seven in ten people in the CNN poll approving of him as a person.)

The CNN survey shows a significant gulf between Obama's handling of major domestic priorities like health care and the economy and how he has dealt with matters of foreign policy.

Just four in ten approve of Obama's handling of health care while 58 percent disapprove; on the economy 43 percent approve and 54 percent disapprove. A majority (51 percent), however, approve of the job Obama is doing in Iraq and an even larger 55 percent say the same about Afghanistan.

Expect Obama to get a bump from a week (or several weeks) worth of positive press in the wake of Congress' passage of the health care bill this past weekend. But, if the CNN numbers are to be believed he needs a large -- and sustained -- bump to turn public opinion on the bill.

3. A new Siena Research Institute poll suggests that New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo (D) is not only an overwhelming favorite to replace Gov. David Paterson (D) in the fall but that Empire State voters believe he should be in no rush to announce his intentions.

Cuomo holds a commanding 59 percent to 21 percent lead over former Rep. Rick Lazio (R) and an even wider 63 percent to 16 percent margin over Suffolk County Executive Steve Levy (R) who recently switched parties to run. Cuomo, who ran for governor in 2002 but dropped out prior to the primary, is now the most popular politician in the state with 63 percent offering a favorable opinion of him and 22 percent viewing him in an unfavorable light.

While a solid majority (55 percent) want to see Cuomo run for governor, just one in four want him to stay as attorney general, and voters are divided on whether Cuomo should decide now whether he is running for the top office (44 percent) or whether he has time to wait "several months" before announcing (44 percent).

Cuomo is expected to announce his candidacy this spring, according to those familiar with his plans.

4. Former representative Nathan Deal (R-Ga.), who resigned immediately after the final health care votes in the House on Sunday to focus full time on his run for governor, will be replaced in an April 27 special election, Gov. Sonny Perdue (R) announced on Monday. While there will be no party primaries for the special election, Deal's 9th district heavily favors Republicans and smart Peach State observers see the race as a two-person fight between state Sen. Lee Hawkins and state Rep. Tom Graves.

With the Georgia special date set, we are headed to a very busy April and May in terms of House races. The special election to replace former Rep. Robert Wexler (Fla.) will be held April 13 with state Sen. Ted Deutch seen as the heavy favorite. May features two more competitive specials with the 12th district race to replace the late Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) on May 18 and the contest to fill the seat left by former representative Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii) scheduled for May 22.

The lone outstanding special election is in New York to replace the infamous former representative Eric Massa. State law gives Gov. David Paterson (D) wide leeway in terms of deciding when to declare the seat vacant. Once he does so, however, the special must be held within 40 days.

5. The 2010 cycle isn't looking great for Senate Democrats -- surprise retirements in North Dakota and Indiana coupled with a difficult national environment have made things tough -- but Roll Call's Shira Toeplitz says the 2012 cycle isn't any better.

Toeplitz points out that of the 33 Senate seats up in 2012, Democrats must defend a whopping 24 -- a total that includes six senators elected with 55 percent or less and a seventh in Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown who won with 56 percent.

She highlights Montana, Virginia and Missouri as potential trouble spots for Democratic incumbents and notes that retirement speculation is already running rampant regarding West Virginia Sen. Robert Byrd who is in his early 90s.

The Fix early line on the top 5 races of 2012 (ranked in order of entertainment, not in order of vulnerability just yet): 1. Connecticut (Joe Lieberman) 2. Nevada (John Ensign) 3. Massachusetts (Scott Brown) 4. Nebraska (Ben Nelson) 5. Montana (Jon Tester).

By Chris Cillizza  |  March 23, 2010; 5:46 AM ET
Categories:  Morning Fix  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Choose your own House race: The health care edition
Next: Is a Republican-controlled House better for President Obama in 2012?

Comments

Oh my!

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 24, 2010 8:33 AM | Report abuse

Sorry, in my scheme for comment Nirvana I left out Independents.

If you're an Independent, your comment will be "Oh my!"

Posted by: douglaslbarber | March 24, 2010 1:26 AM | Report abuse

In an effort to elevate the level of discourse here, I propose that everyone henceforth limit themselves to one word comments, ending with a single exclamation point.

If you're Republican, your comment will be "Tard!"

If you're a Democrat, your comment will be "Turd!"

Posted by: douglaslbarber | March 24, 2010 1:15 AM | Report abuse

Grown men complaining about being called a bad name.

- they aren't adults


- and they aren't men.


.

.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 24, 2010 1:07 AM | Report abuse

What about the commerce clause?


This is going to be interesting


Are doctors' licenses generally restricted state-by-state ???


Yea, there are cases that the federal government can regulate wheat grown in your backyard - which only the people in the house eat.


However, the States DO have powers - and there MUST be some line between Federal and State powers.


It is an error to say the Federal Government can do whatever it wants - and the States' Power has to diminish until there is nothing left.


Wheat is traded across state boundaries - and the Federal government was trying to regulate supply and demand - so growing wheat in one's backyard and eating it - that reduces the demand in interstate commerce.


HOWEVER HEALTH INSURANCE IS DIFFERENT. Right now, it is illegal to sell health insurance across state lines. AND health insurance has TRADITIONALLY BEEN REGULATED BY THE STATES.


The Courts should look at this question -


___________________________________________


The Supreme Court finally came to its senses when it invalidated a congressional ban on illegal guns within 1,000 feet of public schools. In United States v. Lopez (1995), the Court ruled that the Commerce Clause may only be used by Congress to regulate human activity that is truly commercial at its core and that has not traditionally been regulated by the states. The movement of illegal guns from one state to another, the Court ruled, was criminal and not commercial at its core, and school safety has historically been a state function.


.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 24, 2010 12:29 AM | Report abuse

leichtman1:

I'm not going anywhere. It's clear to everyone you wouldn't answer three (3) simple questions and LIED about "your last interaction with me".

==

you don't speak for anyone else here you dumb b astard.

EVERYONE recognizes why people don't bother to respond to your idiotic "questions," you are nit worth anyone's time, you dumb b astard.

You're the last one with any grounds to call anyone else a liar, you dumb b astard.

Go bathe with your toaster, creep.

Posted by: Noacoler | March 24, 2010 12:21 AM | Report abuse

There's (A) detached and imperious government to government. Then there's (B) government by beauty pageant contestants who carry 98 per cent of the "no branches in the family tree and a high school diploma thanks to the excessive value 20'th century educators placed on self esteem" vote.

I'll take what's behind door "A", thank you very much.

And what CC said about Romneycare. That man is shameless, as are so many whose primary political ambition is to become the first member of their ethnic/gender/religious group to legitemize it by winning the top office.

Posted by: douglaslbarber | March 24, 2010 12:10 AM | Report abuse

Republicans against Obama, boy! that's some "news." I mean, what would you expect?
Now if a Republican or two sided with Obama that WOULD be news.
(Wonder why the Republicans are in the minority?)

Posted by: thestoryplease | March 23, 2010 11:41 PM | Report abuse

What about the commerce clause?


This is going to be interesting


Are doctors' licenses generally restricted state-by-state ???


Yea, there are cases that the federal government can regulate wheat grown in your backyard - which only the people in the house eat.


However, the States DO have powers - and there MUST be some line between Federal and State powers.


It is an error to say the Federal Government can do whatever it wants - and the States' Power has to diminish until there is nothing left.


Wheat is traded across state boundaries - and the Federal government was trying to regulate supply and demand - so growing wheat in one's backyard and eating it - that reduces the demand in interstate commerce.


HOWEVER HEALTH INSURANCE IS DIFFERENT. Right now, it is illegal to sell health insurance across state lines. AND health insurance has TRADITIONALLY BEEN REGULATED BY THE STATES.


The Courts should look at this question -


___________________________________________


The Supreme Court finally came to its senses when it invalidated a congressional ban on illegal guns within 1,000 feet of public schools. In United States v. Lopez (1995), the Court ruled that the Commerce Clause may only be used by Congress to regulate human activity that is truly commercial at its core and that has not traditionally been regulated by the states. The movement of illegal guns from one state to another, the Court ruled, was criminal and not commercial at its core, and school safety has historically been a state function.


.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 23, 2010 11:13 PM | Report abuse

"Republicans line up in opposition to Obama health care bill"

pwnd

Posted by: nodebris | March 23, 2010 10:58 PM | Report abuse

leichtman1:

I'm not going anywhere. It's clear to everyone you wouldn't answer three (3) simple questions and LIED about "your last interaction with me".

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 23, 2010 10:36 PM | Report abuse

BROADWAYJOE


If you INSIST on defining the ENTIRE Tea Party Movement by the actions of a few people, then surely you would NOT OBJECT to going down to any courthouse in America and defining all black people by the actions of the few blacks who are on trial as criminals ????

Surely, your logic makes sense.

If you do not agree, you are a fool.

.


.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 23, 2010 10:28 PM | Report abuse

you are as Irrelevant as the constant Whining from the GOP. Get lost creep.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 10:27 PM | Report abuse

leichtman1:

You're "waiting to read" my posts or this is "your last interaction with me"? Pick one and stick with it, PLEASE!

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 23, 2010 9:33 PM | Report abuse

sorry for the typos:
don't know and don't care what the licensing procedures are or were in the 9th Circuit.

Still waiting to read what should be a simple matter: universal condemnation by the WP and bloggers here for the repeated racists posts about POTUS Obama today. That simply should not be tolerated.

This is precisely what happens when there are no moderators at a blog site.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 9:15 PM | Report abuse

don t know don t care what the liensing procedures are or were in the 9th Circuiy.

Still waiting to read what should be a simple matter: universal condemnayion by the WP and bloggers here for the repeated racists posts today. Its time for civility. Tea Partiers won't abide; hopefully moderates and indys will soon start to reject that behavior. Lets see what have heard and seen in the halls and well of our cherished institution Congress, Liar, Baby Killer, Congressmen spat on, racial rants against John Lewis, racial slurs against The POTUS here, homophobic slurs against Congressman Frank. Its time for that garbage to stop, NOW !

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 9:09 PM | Report abuse

leichtman1:

I can only HOPE that will be your last interaction with me -- somehow, I doubt it -- just so everyone else can see, here were the burdensome questions I dared to ask (BTW: the 5th Circuit is different than 9th):

1) Are you sure that you weren't arguing with JakeD3?

2) What "federal exam" did you have to take?

3) Are you claiming that the 9th Circuit has a SEPARATE exam that lawyers have to pass before arguing in said courts?!

Not sure how any of those qualify as "rants and personal childish attacks", but, whatever . . .

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 23, 2010 8:45 PM | Report abuse

To the democrats, it's the right thing. For the repubs., there are the polls showing this bill is positively on fire towards popularity. Live by the polls....... . But, the courts will decide the outcome.

Posted by: hoser3 | March 23, 2010 8:41 PM | Report abuse

Eight (8) Checks today:

Free ad/mention for five of BHO's potential opponents in 2012. Check. Check. Check. Check. Check.

Cherrypicked anti-BHO poll. (What about the Research 2000 poll that has BHO at 53 and why wouldn't you wait until some poll came out showing the impact of HCR? And what about the Wall Street Journal reporting yesterday Pawlenty is at 46 approval in his home state, the lowest of his political life?) Check.

No positive mention of the 44th Presudent of the United States. Check.

Dems-in-trouble false narrative. Check.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | March 23, 2010 8:27 PM | Report abuse

It is good that reapers can challenge this bill. The courts will decide whether it sticks or not.

The non-stop, ever present, unabashed hypocrisy remains troubling however. A republican mandate (Heritage Foundation?) and a system that is a ringer for RomneyCare in Mass. and the likelihood that more of the 45,000 to die this year will probably be in NO states. Oh well.

Posted by: hoser3 | March 23, 2010 8:25 PM | Report abuse

your post is word for word off of faux news. And your/their point? I am more ticked concerned with the racial slurs repeated here with not even a whimper from conservatives. Why not.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 8:15 PM | Report abuse

Obama did not sign the executive order today - we will see if his word is any good.

.

.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 23, 2010 8:01 PM | Report abuse

thought we already had that discussion. Yes under Art1 Sec 8 of the Constitution.It can happen, but it won't. Doubt it could be done by Executive Order, more likely only by a paranoid Congress with POTUS override. Curious how true Libertarians like Ron Paul would vote in that hypothetical. again not relevant to the discussion here.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 7:54 PM | Report abuse

wait, wait wait who is "hurling insults"? I want to hurl the insults.

.

.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 23, 2010 7:52 PM | Report abuse

If the next President requires everyone in the country to buy a gun - would that be legal ?


.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 23, 2010 7:49 PM | Report abuse

not sure why you have a bug up your..over 5th Circuit Rules. Trying to hold a civil conversation with you about anything even the totally reprehensable racist post most of here were appalled by by but you still refuse to condemn is impossible. On Sun at 4:55 pm I posted that you would start throwing spears at Stupak and rather than acknowledging my comment you start your rants and personal childish attacks. There are other intelligent lawyers here like mark in my beloved austin who have something to contribute about legitimate legal concepts like standing and ripeness. At my lawschool we spent 1/2 a semester in my federal procedure class intelligently examining that legal concept that you are unable/unwilling to even consider regarding state AG's premature litigation. I will say it one more time and this will be my last interaction with you. Some of us come here for serious interaction about important topics of the day, others like you revel in personal rants and attacks. I have no time to play your childish juveile games. Get lost creep.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 7:46 PM | Report abuse

Insisting that YOU answer previously-asked questions before I answer your later-asked questions is not "hurling insults". It's common courtesy.

==

No, insisting that others answer you is the mewling whine of an immature ignoramus who can't figure out why he needs to beg for attention. See anyone else here who begs and begs for replies?

Posted by: Noacoler | March 23, 2010 7:43 PM | Report abuse

leichtman1


If the next President requires everyone in the country to buy a guy - would that be legal ?


.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 23, 2010 7:37 PM | Report abuse

leichtman1:

Insisting that YOU answer previously-asked questions before I answer your later-asked questions is not "hurling insults". It's common courtesy.

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 23, 2010 7:32 PM | Report abuse

Thanks Noacoler. You can stuff it yourself!
Need any help finding the appropriate orifice?

Posted by: meand2 | March 23, 2010 6:52 PM | Report abuse

"Are doctors' licenses generally restricted state-by-state ??"

Unfortunately that is precisely why we have some cowboy surgeons who's licenses are yanked in one state and then move to another. An Okl neorosurgeon who lost his license in Okla City for operating under the influence of cocaine, moved to Arlington where he set up shop and did the exact same thing. Those are the types of horror stories lawyers are yelled at about for trying to stop. Unfortunately some state Medical Associations have more enforecment authority then others there is zero uniformity.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 6:20 PM | Report abuse

Scott Brown will win re-election. He appeals to the middle there.

As for "The strong statements by nearly every one of his potential rivals suggest that Republicans believe the bill is a winner for them -- at least in a GOP presidential primary but also, perhaps, in a general election fight as well", what were they supposed to say? Congratulations? We look forward to working with the President? 30 million Americans will get health care, no one can sane can expect that to come for free. You CAN argue with the total cost, but the GOP is so dead set to repealing it that they will forswear more profitable avenues of attack.

You can't beat something with nothing. Repubs have the same set of losers that bought it in 06 and 08. Reagan in 80 was a new fresh voice offering change; there's nothing new about what I'm seeing from the GOP. And people haven't forgotten Bush, Cheney and DeLay. The economy's rebounding (slowly but still), Dems will do OK this fall. GOP will blame Steele and go back to the drawing board.

Posted by: gbooksdc | March 23, 2010 6:16 PM | Report abuse

ERISA, FMLA, ADA and COBRA are all labor laws curious why that is not analogous since its dealings with pensions and Defined Benefits has federal oversite and have all been upheld under the Commerce Clause. Federal Regulation of Medicare and Medicaid are definitely federal HC policies upheld within the Commerce Clause. Attacking mandates might be their strongest argument I just don t see where the state AGs have standing until they can deliver a real resident who refuses the mandate and is then fined; and that won't happen until 2014. I asked jake to make his best arguement for standing and ripeness for Federal Jurisdiction but all that I heard were personal insults hurled, not very insightful.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 6:14 PM | Report abuse

I think there is enough hypocrisy on both the Republican and Democrat sides to go around.

==

there may have been a time when this was a reasonable proposition, but that time sure isn't now. To spew this middle of the road crap in these times marks you as some kind of pretentious twit. Take this nonsense and stuff it.

Posted by: Noacoler | March 23, 2010 6:12 PM | Report abuse

What about the commerce clause?


This is going to be interesting


Are doctors' licenses generally restricted state-by-state ???


Yea, there are cases that the federal government can regulate wheat grown in your backyard - which only the people in the house eat.


However, the States DO have powers - and there MUST be some line between Federal and State powers.


It is an error to say the Federal Government can do whatever it wants - and the States' Power has to diminish until there is nothing left.


Wheat is traded across state boundaries - and the Federal government was trying to regulate supply and demand - so growing wheat in one's backyard and eating it - that reduces the demand in interstate commerce.


HOWEVER HEALTH INSURANCE IS DIFFERENT. Right now, it is illegal to sell health insurance across state lines. AND health insurance has TRADITIONALLY BEEN REGULATED BY THE STATES.


The Courts should look at this question -


___________________________________________


The Supreme Court finally came to its senses when it invalidated a congressional ban on illegal guns within 1,000 feet of public schools. In United States v. Lopez (1995), the Court ruled that the Commerce Clause may only be used by Congress to regulate human activity that is truly commercial at its core and that has not traditionally been regulated by the states. The movement of illegal guns from one state to another, the Court ruled, was criminal and not commercial at its core, and school safety has historically been a state function.


.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 23, 2010 6:02 PM | Report abuse

#1 I wager that Bill Clinton will be right about the polling. He told Obama that his poll numbers would rise after the health care legislation passed.

#3 A Cuomo vs. Levy match could replay the 2006 Kansas District 3 congressional race where Dennis Moore (D) trounced Kris Kobach (R), an immigration law "expert" and frequent guest of Lou Dobbs and O'Reilly. Kobach lost hard, by 10 percentage points.

Posted by: Kelly14 | March 23, 2010 5:51 PM | Report abuse

The Republicans have been following the strategy outlined by their Patron Saint - Rush Limbaugh. They insult the intelligence of Americans - and thus they fail. The GOP needs to regain the honor or rational leadership if they hope to return to power. ........

http://thefiresidepost.com/2010/03/23/limbaugh-republican-political-strategy-fails/

Posted by: glclark4750 | March 23, 2010 5:46 PM | Report abuse

I think there is enough hypocrisy on both the Republican and Democrat sides to go around.
Just now the Republicans get my vote for showing the most, but by next week it might be the Democrats.
Today's Republican politics is the art of appealing to the lowest common denominator while protecting the wealthy and big business from that lowest common denominator.
What will happen if those people who are the lowest common denominator realize they've been played by moneyed interests who don't care about them or about anything but getting their votes?
Even a stupid person will realize sooner or later that shooting himself in the foot hurts.

Posted by: meand2 | March 23, 2010 5:27 PM | Report abuse

Jake


The other part of this is the democrats in Congress - Pelosi and Clyburn in particular were asked numerous times to provide a Constitutional Basis for the health care legislation - and they came up with nothing.

They really are flying blind.


Alright.


.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 23, 2010 5:00 PM | Report abuse


What about the commerce cluase?


This is going to be interesting


Are doctors' licenses generally restricted state-by-state ???

Yea, there are cases that the federal government can regulate wheat grown in your backyard - which only the people in the house eat.

However, the States DO have powers - and there MUST be some line between Federal and State powers.

It is an error to say the Federal Government can do whatever it wants - and the States' Power has to diminish until there is nothing left.

Wheat is traded across state boundaries - and the Federal government was trying to regulate supply and demand - so growing wheat in one's backyard and eating it - that reduces the demand in interstate commerce.

HOWEVER HEALTH INSURANCE IS DIFFERENT. Right now, it is illegal to sell health insurance across state lines. AND health insurance has TRADITIONALLY BEEN REGULATED BY THE STATES.

The Courts should look at this question -

___________________________________________


The Supreme Court finally came to its senses when it invalidated a congressional ban on illegal guns within 1,000 feet of public schools. In United States v. Lopez (1995), the Court ruled that the Commerce Clause may only be used by Congress to regulate human activity that is truly commercial at its core and that has not traditionally been regulated by the states. The movement of illegal guns from one state to another, the Court ruled, was criminal and not commercial at its core, and school safety has historically been a state function.


.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 23, 2010 4:58 PM | Report abuse

leichtman1


I think the hook-in is with employment - with interstate companies - with the laws you mention - they are labor laws.

However, Obama is now regulating the SALE of health insurance - and telling people what they have to do, and can't do.

IN ADDITION, THIS IS AN AREA TRADITIONALLY REGULATED BY THE STATES.


.


.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 23, 2010 4:52 PM | Report abuse

We all know that the li'l racist is a pencil-necked zit-ranch whose keyboard arrogance is disconnected from his physical reality. Probably either cancerously scrawny or ridiculously obese.

I should worry too much, jmfromdc, he'll never show up. But if he does get some pictures, and post them, so we can all have a good laugh.

I bet his girlfriend dumped him for a black man who could satisfy her in bed.

Posted by: Noacoler | March 23, 2010 4:14 PM | Report abuse

Congress currently regulates ERISA, FMLA, ADA and COBRA under the Commerce Clause, can t see how the Fed Courts would not also have to strike down those federal laws if that theory is correct.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 4:09 PM | Report abuse

Products sold completely within a State are still subject to the "inter-state" Commerce Clause because of the aggregate effect of each individual intra-State purchase on the whole -- I actually don't have a problem with that -- the stretching point will be when citizens REFUSE to purchase a product (healthcare insurance or guns) and, by definition, they are not engaging in ANY commerce whatsoever. The FEDERAL government was simply never given this power.

P.S. to 37th:

"Welfare" clause is not just in the preamble, but today's definition of "welfare" is vastly different to the powers given to the federal government in 1787.

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 23, 2010 3:59 PM | Report abuse

Jake


What about the commerce cluase?


This is going to be interesting


Are doctors' licenses generally restricted state-by-state ???

___________________________________________


The Supreme Court finally came to its senses when it invalidated a congressional ban on illegal guns within 1,000 feet of public schools. In United States v. Lopez (1995), the Court ruled that the Commerce Clause may only be used by Congress to regulate human activity that is truly commercial at its core and that has not traditionally been regulated by the states. The movement of illegal guns from one state to another, the Court ruled, was criminal and not commercial at its core, and school safety has historically been a state function.

.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 23, 2010 3:56 PM | Report abuse

1. I like the idea that Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels is considering a run for President. His populist while conservative style of governing is just what we need. He's truly an outside the beltway outsider with real life experience as to how to make a government function. That is, he ain't afraid to privatize things and let the private sector do it better than government could ever do. I like Daniels style of substance over anger, as anger isn't going to help change anything. I do, however, wonder what Texas Gov. Rick Perry said and if Perry will consider a Presidential run in 2012 after he wins reelection as Texas Gov. in 2010. Romney will obviously be criticized as a hypocrite after what he did in Mass. and now coming out against this. I have heard him make the case that doing things on a state level is different than a federal level. Will R voters buy it? Not likely, they will just make the case stronger that Romney is a flip-flopper. T-Paw knows the Minn. Attorney General will not file a lawsuit against the Obama administration, that was strictly politics. He also sounded angry, which catches on with people immediately, but after they cool down how well is it going to play? That may depend on what happens in the future. Thune's argument was all about the empowerment of the people, which is a good way to go about this. Each potential candidate is obviously testing the waters on style.

5. 2010 will be the first of 3 rebuilding cycles for Senate Republicans. They are already running strong in 9 races this year, with a potential 13 races they can compete to win with good recruits in Wis., Wash., and NY. In 2012 you got Montana, Rhode Island, Virginia, West Virginia (with Byrd in his 90's), Missouri, New Jersey, Maryland, Nebraska, North Dakota, and Hawii (Akaka is vulnerable). Big Republican gains throughout the next 3 cycles!

Posted by: reason5 | March 23, 2010 3:51 PM | Report abuse


In fact, it is illegal to buy health insurance across state lines.

So how is any of that interstate commerce ?

Posted by: 37thand0street

------------------------

This is one of the constitutional curiosities of the health care bill. Democrats refused to drop the laws that prevent people from buying insurance across state lines, meaning that there is no interstate commerce, and yet they also claim to derive their power to regulate from the commerce clause.

Ummmm...can someone explain to me exactly how that works? Seems to me that interstate commerce has to be happening before Congress can regulate it.

Posted by: blert | March 23, 2010 3:48 PM | Report abuse

jhr1--- see you tommorrow then? between 8am and 4pm, I'll leave a pass for you at the security desk

Posted by: jmfromdc | March 23, 2010 3:35 PM | Report abuse

jhr1--- you can run but you can't hide, not even in an "anonymous" blog

Posted by: jmfromdc | March 23, 2010 3:29 PM | Report abuse

Art I Sec 8 authorizes Congress to spend money. Madison called them enumerated powers. My response was to jake's question: could Congress authorize citizens likely with financial incentives to buy guns a mandate requiring their purchase. My answer: yes if the circumstances were similar to a Jack Bauer moment and we were being attacked.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 3:21 PM | Report abuse

The best scenario is 2010 Rep. get to 48 or 49 in the Senate, and get ready to sweep out the Dems. entirely in 2012 (along with Obama). Gridlock will reign for the last two years of the Obama presidency. Posted by: kenpasadena | March 23, 2010 2:51 PM

Ken, I want you to keep both hands on the table top while you say that. No playing!

Posted by: margaretmeyers | March 23, 2010 3:19 PM | Report abuse

Jake

What do you think about the interstate commerce clause - are we finally at the limitations - we have an industry which has traditionally been regulated by the States.


In fact, it is illegal to buy health insurance across state lines.

So how is any of that interstate commerce ?


.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 23, 2010 3:15 PM | Report abuse

jhr1--- it's my place of work, why don'tyou and 37thandOstreet come by and we can speak about your posts

Posted by: jmfromdc | March 23, 2010 3:15 PM | Report abuse

leichtman1


The General Welfare clause is in the preamble - so it really doesnt have any force

You can try again if you want.

.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 23, 2010 3:13 PM | Report abuse

not a police station either 37thandOstreet, don't know your city very well do you?

Posted by: jmfromdc | March 23, 2010 3:08 PM | Report abuse

jmfromdc


What is that, a police station ?? boy you are a tough guy.

.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 23, 2010 3:04 PM | Report abuse

I was actually going to defend your use of a rehtorical hypothetical as ridiculous as it is.
Yea it would pass Constitutional muster under the General Welfare clause if the US had a Jack Bauer moment, but most of us don t operate in your fantasy world.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 3:03 PM | Report abuse

jhr1-- try again, not a hotel

Posted by: jmfromdc | March 23, 2010 3:02 PM | Report abuse

If anyone ELSE has a question about my hypothetical question, let me know. I'm looking forward to seldoc1's answer : )

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 23, 2010 2:58 PM | Report abuse

jhr1-- I always do

Posted by: jmfromdc | March 23, 2010 2:57 PM | Report abuse

Anyone believe Jake is a lawyer?

Neither do I.

Mandatory handguns? How idiotic.

Posted by: Noacoler | March 23, 2010 2:55 PM | Report abuse

Whew, everyone is still here!!!
Armageddeon, wasn't as painful as is imagined it would be. It kinda feels like it did before armageddeon stuck.
Question to those who have had Obama's troops march into their homes and/or workplaces. Do you tip them? I'm the worst at knowing when and when not to tip.

Posted by: priceisright | March 23, 2010 2:54 PM | Report abuse

The Republicans will reap what they so. As the party of corporatism, it makes makes sense that they have to create another bogeyman for cover. Socialism sounds so evil, doesn't it? It's ridiculous. This bill is a conservative bill. Nothing about it remotely resembles socialism. It is a compromise with insurance companies. But "socialism" and "tyranny" sound better than "conservative comprimise," right?

Well now that Republicans and their proud corporate sponsors have created a grass-roots movement and teased it into a frenzy, they can't just say - "we lost, let's move on." If they did that, they'd be shown for the unprincipled manipulators that they are. So now they are going to trump up frivolous lawsuits (standing, anyone?) and get their judges to legislate. The bill is one day old! And this is going to be a strategy up to the elections? So the Republican leadership in congress has done what in the last two years - fought tooth and nail to keep insurance companies unregulated and free to bilk ordinary Americans and hasten their decent towards bankruptcy or death? Yes - this is the party that cares about the American people.

I hope the Republican dittoheads get crushed in the elections. They don't deserve to govern. Their whole motive is not to do things better, but to dismantle any barrier to corporate profits. I wish the Republican party was a sensible, rational group of leaders acting in good faith for the benefit of individuals. And I wish the Democrats actually offered something that challenges the status quo in a serious way. But right now that's not the case. The status quo is conservatism serving corporatism. The notion that this nation is capable of passing socialist legislation is ludicrous.

Posted by: RealityIsNotOnlineOrOnTheTV | March 23, 2010 2:54 PM | Report abuse

The best scenario is 2010 Rep. get to 48 or 49 in the Senate, and get ready to sweep out the Dems. entirely in 2012 (along with Obama). Gridlock will reign for the last two years of the Obama presidency.

Posted by: kenpasadena | March 23, 2010 2:51 PM | Report abuse

Obama jamming this bill through Congress - the democrats in Washington may be happy - but the level of anger at Obama has spiked upwards.


That is not a good thing for Obama.

The American People told Obama that they did not want this health care bill - Obama's ACTIONS HAVE BEEN DIVISIVE - OBAMA IS NOT UNITING THE COUNTRY.

Obama made a mistake.


The Voters today are extremely upset with Obama - and if Obama had a chance to comeback IF he had dropped the health care bill in January - NOW OBAMA HAS NO CHANCE TO COME BACK.


.

.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 23, 2010 2:50 PM | Report abuse

jhr1--- my address is 441 4th St SW Wash DC, come on by if that yellow streak down your back is'nt bigger than the space between your ears. You're quite the tough guy when your posts are anonymous.

Posted by: jmfromdc | March 23, 2010 2:41 PM | Report abuse

UP WITH AMERICA! UP YOURS, REPUBLICANS!!!

Posted by: Bushwhacked1 | March 23, 2010 2:35 PM | Report abuse

seldoc1:

The purpose is to mandate universal gun ownership, think of it as the "2011 Second Amendment Protection and Affordablity Act".

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 23, 2010 2:31 PM | Report abuse

49% say it is a good thing that the bill passed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
they were told Dear Reader would stop giving the same old tired speech now.

Posted by: Zouk_is_King | March 23, 2010 2:30 PM | Report abuse

Jake2D:

In answer to your question....that would depend upon why the law was enacted.

Posted by: seldoc1 | March 23, 2010 2:21 PM | Report abuse

There are two issues here - and I am disappointed that the Washington Post did not outline the issues - pros and cons - instead of basically dismissing the idea.

The individual mandate is NO WHERE TO BE FOUND IN THE CONSTITUTION - it is a whole new legal concept - and it really has little basis in the Constitution.


The individual mandate could be interpreted as a taking - but does that taking have due process? The only process is - you live, you have to pay.

The second issue is much more complex and it involves the Interstate Commerce Clause - obviously there have been numerous court cases which have expanded this cluase - to the point at which one might believe the entire universe might one day be included.

Well - is that right? You have an industry - health care insurance which has BEEN ILLEGAL TO SELL ACROSS STATE LINES - AND HAS BEEN TRADITIONALLY IN THE POWER OF THE STATES TO REGULATE.

So Obama may have problem there.

This area deserves Constitutional review -


On Obama's side, there were Court cases with ERISA and with Cobra - in which the federal government has strayed - But those cases had a hook-in: employment which interstate corporations.


Health insurance and health care itself does not really have that hook-in. Perhaps they will find another hook-in.


FDR had much of his program struck down by the Supreme Court - Obama loves having things in common with famous people - maybe it will happen again.

.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | March 23, 2010 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Good news everyone! The polls are already turning around according to USA Today. 49% say it is a good thing that the bill passed while 40% say it is not. It is USA Today/Gallup poll so NOT a partisan one.

Here is the link http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-03-23-health-poll-favorable_N.htm


Posted by: Sharon1949 | March 23, 2010 2:19 PM | Report abuse

jhr1 @ March 23, 2010 2:13 PM: Do you consider that reasoned discourse or pure bigotry? But you are correct that a person is what a person is.

Posted by: AMviennaVA | March 23, 2010 2:18 PM | Report abuse

I see the dribbl/Ped mentality has overtaken the blog.

too bad.

Posted by: Zouk_is_King | March 23, 2010 2:15 PM | Report abuse

seldoc1:

Would you sue if you were legally FORCED to purchase handguns?

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 23, 2010 2:12 PM | Report abuse

dug2008, let me know where you live, I can put an end to this anonymous thing right away.

Posted by: jhr1

***************************************************************************

You are truly pathetic. Go play Internet tough guy on the spongebob boards and leave the adults alone. Maybe you can indoctrinate them into your "Aryan Nation".

Posted by: theobserver4 | March 23, 2010 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Stew in your racist juices, GOP.


You can argue that the Federal Highway System puts an unfair mandatory tax on motorists.

You can argue that public water lines are examples of "socialism."

Ever notice some states are called "commonwealth"?

I'd be careful with this lawsuits, lest you give our activist neo-con judges permission to let states secede over this? Because everyone knows you people no longer believer in a Perfect Union. You just put the Republican Party above the interests of this nation.

Posted by: tony_in_Durham_NC | March 23, 2010 2:05 PM | Report abuse

looks like others are making my same legal argument:

"Second, established law dictates that a state in and of itself does not have the right to challenge the constitutionality of a federal law if it does not have a legal construct called “standing.” Meaning, to challenge a federal law a plaintiff must have been harmed in some way among other things. If a state is not harmed in a way that legal standing requires to bring a lawsuit in federal court the lawsuit will not proceed. Under Article III of the Constitution a state must show some sort of actual injury to have standing. We do not see how the state of Virginia establishes standing in this case. Individuals, however, who are adversely affected by a federal law do have standing to challenge the constitutionality of a federal law. In the case of an individual having standing to challenge the health care reform bill the individual must first be adversely affected by the law. The only type of challenge that may be available in the the health care reform law and may pass the non-frivolous test concerns the individual mandate that requires citizens to buy health insurance. If an individual decides not to buy health insurance and is assessed a penalty he/she can challenge the constitutionality of the penalty assessment in federal court. However, the individual mandate does not kick in until 2014 therefore no individual can be harmed until 2014. Any challenges brought before 2014 are not “ripe” another legal construct that prohibits preemptive law suits. Because such suits are not ripe they are frivolous and done merely for political theatre and are therefore a GIGANTIC waste of taxpayer money. A Massachussesetts citizen challenged its individual mandate and the court dismissed the case as frivolous even though it was ripe. It is baffling that at a time when many Virginians are struggling to meet its budget goals Cuccinelli wants to use state funds to bring a frivolous lawsuit in order to try and score political points"

summary judgment will be in place if mandates are litigated before 2014.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 2:04 PM | Report abuse

Sadly, the Republicans are unable to accept the passage of the bill and go on with the nation's business as they should. Instead, they clearly intend to stoke the fires of controversy for their own political advantage for all that their worth. Guys like Pawlenty, Romney and rest of the pack should know better but can't seem to help themselves. What really makes one fear for the future of our country is that a demagogue like Mitch Daniels' name appears int he same sentence as president of the United States. Are guys like him truly the best the Republican Party has to offer?

Posted by: seldoc1 | March 23, 2010 1:58 PM | Report abuse

You think you're cool, jhr1?

Pretty slick to anonymously post racist comments... Can't think of anything else to say but "duh, I'm an idiot, and I'll prove it by being a bigot?" Go back to your trailer and accidently shoot yourself with your firearm...

Posted by: dug2008 | March 23, 2010 1:57 PM | Report abuse

Everyone keep a close eye on our activist 5 Supremes. I'm sure they're currently looking for a way to undermine progress as we speak.

Posted by: theobserver4 | March 23, 2010 1:55 PM | Report abuse

For anyone else:

Florida's lawsuit alleges the new law infringes upon the Constitutional rights of Floridians and residents of the other states by mandating all citizens and legal residents have qualifying health care coverage or pay a tax penalty. By imposing such a mandate, the law exceeds the powers of the United States under Article I of the Constitution and violates the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution. Additionally, the tax penalty required under the law constitutes an unlawful direct tax in violation of Article I, sections 2 and 9 of the Constitution.

The lawsuit further claims the health care reform law infringes on the sovereignty of the states by imposing onerous new operating rules that Florida must follow, some taking effect immediately, as well as requiring the state to spend billions of additional dollars without providing funds or resources to the state to help subsidize the cost of implementation of the law. This burden comes at a time where the Florida faces severe budget cuts to offset shortfalls in an already-strained budget.

Under the new law, Florida will be required to vastly broaden its Medicaid eligibility standards to accommodate upwards of 50 percent more enrollees, many of whom would be forced to enroll or face a tax penalty. Florida’s Medicaid program currently consumes more than a quarter of the State’s financial outlays.

The complaint specifics notes "The Court has subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 because this action arises under the Constitution and laws of the United States. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e)(3) because no real property is involved, the district is situated in Florida, and the defendants are agencies of the United States or officers thereof acting in their official capacity. The State of Florida is a sovereign state and protector of the individual freedom, public health, and welfare of its citizens and residents. Bill McCollum, Attorney General of Florida, has been directly elected by the people of Florida to serve as their chief legal officer and exercises broad statutory and common law authority to protect the rights of the State of Florida and its people; Fla. Const. art. IV, § 4(b). The State, by and through the Attorney General, has standing to assert the unconstitutionality of the Act. He is authorized to appear in and attend all suits in which the state is interested. § 16.02(4) & (5), Fla. Stat."

A copy of the entire lawsuit is available online at: http://myfloridalegal.com/webfiles.nsf/WF/MRAY-83TKWB/$file/HealthCareReformLawsuit.pdf

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 23, 2010 1:55 PM | Report abuse

curious why jh1's 1:48 post is not being removed by the WP? also wonder if the radical right here agrees with jh1's 1:48 post

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 1:55 PM | Report abuse

If some of President Obama's critics want me to stop thinking they're racists, maybe, just maybe they should stop using the "N" word?

You guys are such sore losers. What's next? Crying like that big baby Glenn Beck? Who knew white male neo-cons were such a bunch of silly girls?


The Democrats could roll out Jesus H. Christ and the Republicans will still call him the devil. LOL.


Posted by: tony_in_Durham_NC | March 23, 2010 1:52 PM | Report abuse

stodge:

You are aware that Palin never said "I can see Russia from my house" right?

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 23, 2010 1:52 PM | Report abuse

you know jake any time anyone ask you a serious question you want to play games, I don t have time nor patience for your childish games, my mistake to asume you might want to discuss a serious issue about litigation and standing. you once again prove that you are incapable of serious discussions I won t bother again and will wait to hear from mark in austin. Litigation of mandates is a certainty and worthy of intelligent discussion.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 1:51 PM | Report abuse

it insults pigs to say the gop are pigs.

look at the winger sewage on here. several notches less than human intelligence. too bad they weren't all aborted.

Posted by: drindl
-------------------------------------------
As opposed to the sewage above???

Posted by: leapin | March 23, 2010 1:49 PM | Report abuse

it insults pigs to say the gop are pigs.

look at the winger sewage on here. several notches less than human intelligence. too bad they weren't all aborted.

Posted by: drindl
-------------------------------------------
As opposed to the sewage above???

Posted by: leapin | March 23, 2010 1:49 PM | Report abuse

leichtman1:

No, my answer was that I would gladly provide you said argument if YOU answered my previously-asked questions to you. Apparently I was right that you won't do that, yet demand that I answer your later-asked questions.

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 23, 2010 1:43 PM | Report abuse

so your answer is that you refuse to make your legal argument against HC mandates. I would truly like to know your legal arguments why the issues of Standing and Ripeness are irrelevant 3 1/2 years before mandates go into effect. Apparently I was wrong to try and engage you in rational thought about a legitimate legal issue. apparently I was once again correct that you are incapable of making reasoned arguments w/o it turning into personal ad hominem attacks.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 1:35 PM | Report abuse

There is no way Palin knows the definition of "imperious".

Posted by: twpw | March 23, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse

***
She probably thinks it's Latin for "I can see Russia from my house."

Posted by: stodge | March 23, 2010 1:35 PM | Report abuse

John1263:

Would you sue if you were legally FORCED to purchase handguns?

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 23, 2010 1:32 PM | Report abuse

Sueing with trial lawyers. Trying to get the couts to overturn legislation through judicial activism. Sounds like a principled republicon thing to do.

Or could it just be some grandstanding and waste of taxpayer moneyfor cheap temporary political points?

Posted by: John1263 | March 23, 2010 1:26 PM | Report abuse

leichtman1:

Just as soon as you answer my previously-asked questions to you.

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 23, 2010 1:25 PM | Report abuse

i think he was not much of a lawyer, leichtman. i pity his clients.

Now as to the 'winning strategy' of the gopers:

"For instance, imagine if the anti-war movement, and its highest-profile media supporters, had attacked military families whose sons and daughters were fighting in Iraq as the invasion unfolded. That kind of abhorrent behavior would have been universally condemned as just being beyond the pale. Yet last week, as its opposition to reform grew increasingly futile, the GOP Noise Machine dedicated lots of time and energy to mocking and attacking cancer-stricken patients, as well as a motherless 11-year-old boy who had the audacity to speak out in favor of health care reform.

Limbaugh's immortal words to the boy: "Your mom would have still died, because Obamacare doesn't kick in until 2014."

To me, the attacks indicated a withering of the right-wing media's shrinking moral compass, not to mention common sense. (Mocking the seriously ill is a winning political strategy?) It was another tell-tale sign of the unfolding, and unstoppable, nervous breakdown.

Because how else do you describe this kind of erratic, disturbed behavior? And it's worth repeating: This wasn't coming from minor, fringe players. It's been coming from the supposed leading lights of the conservative media; leading lights who, blinded by paranoia, have suffered a collective collapse and can no longer make sense of their surroundings."

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/eric_boehlert/27525/fox_news_health_care_and_the_right_wing_nervous_breakdown

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 1:22 PM | Report abuse

as a lawyer jake, even a retired lawyer, I would like to hear your logical, nonpartisan argument how State AGs can argue in federal courts against mandates 3 1/2 years before any of their constituents have HC mandates or fines imposed. Are you capable of posting a reasoned rational response to that real legal issue w/o making ad hominem attacks?

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 1:18 PM | Report abuse

cmsatown:

If GWB had signed a law FORCING you to purchase handguns, would you sue about that?

AxelDC:

Massachusetts STATE-level healthcare is not "very similar" to the Senate bill purportedly signed into law today. What happened to the promise to wait FIVE DAYS before signing?

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 23, 2010 1:15 PM | Report abuse

Are you claiming that the 9th Circuit has a SEPERATE exam that lawyers have to pass before arguing in said courts?!

http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/content/view.php?pk_id=0000000133

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 23, 2010 1:12 PM | Report abuse

These Republicants are ridiculous. If you can't beat em sue em eh? Bunch of Rush lovin losers.

Posted by: cmsatown | March 23, 2010 1:10 PM | Report abuse

The GOP reeks of cynicism these days. Their most likely nominee, Romney, is shouting at Obama as a tyrant for signing a bill very similar to the one that Romney signed as governor.

The GOP AGs are lining up to get activist judges to overturn the work of Congress and the White House. Republicans don't want the courts to legislate, unless they are out of power but still control the courts.

Republicans have banked their entire strategy on a Party First, slash & burn campaign that is designed to regain power, not to fix any of the nation's problems.

Posted by: AxelDC | March 23, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

the sky is falling!

"Listening to the calamitous warnings (i.e. "the end of America as we know it"), it's not that unreasonable to think that at some point one of the media mob leaders is going to suggest that life itself just is no longer worth living.

After all, late last week the nation stood on the precipice, just three "days away from the United States of America being over as we've all known it," according to Rush Limbaugh, who warned that reform would drive every private insurance company out of business. Glenn Beck also went full tilt, warning that the bill represented a "turning point," like the Civil War and Peal Harbor, while colleague Sean Hannity pinpointed the health care vote as the "very hour" that America turned "completely towards socialism."

The Washington Times likened reform to the "Black Plague," and the online reaction was somehow even more unhinged. It was "RIP USA," because with the vote, America would become "occupied by a hostile foreign power." Indeed, a "socialist putsch" had been sprung and "America's Day of Wreckoning [sic]" was at hand."

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 1:05 PM | Report abuse

I presume you are familiar with the federal doctrines of Standing and Ripeness you learned when you were licensed to practice before the 9th Circuit

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

leichtman1:

The ATTORNEYS GENERAL are not bringing lawsuits in their individual capacities. BTW: what "federal exam" did you have to take?

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 23, 2010 12:55 PM | Report abuse

Tell us Mr. Radical Right how the radical right aka the GOP paid for POTUS Bush's:
1. $1.2 Trillion Dollar 2001 tax cut 2. Medicare Part D $850 billion 3. 2 wars costing over $1 Trillion. I asked the radical right aka zouk how his radical right party paid for those programs months ago; his response, throw out more personal insults. Priceless. Those are the facts Mr. Radical Right, live with it.


2 months and still waiting.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 12:55 PM | Report abuse

Romney, Pawlenty, Daniels,Thune, and Palin lined up against the health care bill? Heavens to Mergatroid! Obama better run. He doesn't have a chance now. If one or two others line up with them, say, Lamar Alexander and Jim De Mint (he's already almost had Obama on the ropes at Waterloo), oh boy, there'll be no hiding from them..

Posted by: dudh | March 23, 2010 12:55 PM | Report abuse

When I hear some of the words Republicans are using about the health care bill it is coded. Romney talks about "abuse of power"; Thune talks about "arrogance; etc. I see a lot of white mad men who don't want to see a black man and white woman make changes - maybe I'm wrong but their words and actions are so un-American.

Posted by: rlj611 | March 23, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

hey king of zouk, christelle over at Model Mayham is calling you... check it out leichtman.

he's got a real interesting hobby.

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 12:52 PM | Report abuse

it will take an individual who has actually been mandated to buy HC and fined to have standing to challenge the new mandate that does not go into effect until 2014; to attack that mandate in 2010 constitues GOP lawsuit abuse

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/standing


"The mandate contained in Article III of the Constitution that requires an appellate court to consider whether a case has matured into a controversy worthy of adjudication before it can hear the case.

An actual, current controversy worthy of adjudication must exist before a federal court may hear a case. The court determines if a controversy between parties with adverse legal interests is of sufficient immediacy and reality to warrant judicial intervention (Lake Carriers' Ass'n v. MacMullan, 406 U.S. 498, 92 S. Ct. 1749, 32 L. Ed. 2d 257 [1972]).

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/ripeness

"The rationale behind the ripeness limitation is to prevent the courts from entering a controversy before it has solidified or before other available remedies have been exhausted. In disputes involving regulations or decisions promulgated by administrative agencies, a controversy is not considered ripe until the agency's decision has been formalized and the challenging parties have felt its effects. "

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 12:51 PM | Report abuse

The health care reform bill to be signed Tuesday by President Obama would give the IRS a new mandate to enforce some of the initiative's key provisions -- but apparently not the means to do so.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
so typical of Libs. YOU must. not us. We will work out the details on a case by case basis depending on the type of letters I read at night. we can worry about paying for it tomorrow or the next day.

Posted by: Zouk_is_King | March 23, 2010 12:50 PM | Report abuse

translation of the finance whiz reply:

I dunno.

Posted by: Zouk_is_King | March 23, 2010 12:48 PM | Report abuse

leichtman1:

Quote said "shocked" post of mine then.

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 23, 2010 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Mitt Romney's statement is the type of hate-speech that we need to move away from. When you say that something is an "unconscionable abuse of power" and that someone is betraying his oath to the nation, you should have something to back this up.

Unless I am wrong, this is what has happened:
1. In 2008, Obama ran with a promise to reform the health care system, so it's not like he pulled this out of nowhere.
2. He was democratically elected, along with all of the House Representatives and some Senators.
3. He did what he said he would do. If anything, the health-care reform was tailored to satisfy the Republicans as well.

Am I missing something?

The only abuse of power was applied by the Republicans inciting the Tea Party and other unruly crowds to resort to name calling and awful insults, which has unfortunately turned some people away from the process and thus the reform.

Posted by: sharedgum | March 23, 2010 12:43 PM | Report abuse

unlike you zouk I actually took Con Law and Federal Procedure in law school,and passed State and Federal Licensing exams; how about you did you learn con law in jr. high school civics class?
To hear the radical right talk about spending and the deficit is hilarious. Tell us Mr. Radical Right how the radical right paid for POTUS Bush's:
1. $1.2 Trillion Dollar 2001 tax cut 2. Medicare Part D $850 billion 3. 2 wars costing over $1 Trillion. I asked the radical right aka zouk how his radical right party paid for those programs months ago; his response, throw out more personal insults. Priceless. Those are the facts Mr. Radical Right, live with it.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 12:42 PM | Report abuse

Speaking of Pawlenty, the Wall Street Journal reports that his 'star is dimming' in Minnesota. Hey, national Repubs, he's fouled up our state long enough - why don't you guys take him for a while...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748704534904575132070071528804.html

Posted by: bsimon1 | March 23, 2010 12:40 PM | Report abuse

America’s “low” life-expectancy doesn’t have much to do with health-insurance. Yes, obviously it has something to do with it. And of course there are plenty of anecdotes that feed into this argument. But the simple fact is that when Americans die has a lot more to do with diet, alcohol, guns, cars, genes, and culture. Britain’s life-expectancy is a whopping 79.4. America’s is 78.2. Cuba’s is 78.3. Britain and Cuba have had socialized medicine for half a century or more. America hasn’t, until this week. What I love is the idea that we need to have this wrenching transformation of the system in order to move our standing a few tenths of a percent up the charts (I’m stipulating that nobody believes Obamacare is really about bending the cost curve downward. After all, nobody argues we need to extend life-expectancy to cut costs).

Still, I suppose you could predict that improved access to healthcare will close this horrendous gap. But I doubt that. Consider that Robert Ohsfeldt and John Schneider factored out injuries (intentional and unintentional) from life-expectancy statistics and found (in The Business of Health) that Americans who don’t die in car crashes or homicides live longer than people in any other Western country. That would partly explain why American life-expectancy at age 65 is higher than Britain’s.

According to the 2006 study Eight Americas, Asian American women have a life-expectancy of 87 (in Bergen County, N.J., it is 91 years). Asian Americans as a group have a life-expectancy of 84.9 years. Their per-capita income is $21,556. Second-generation Asian American women live three years longer than women in Japan — the longest-living national group.

Meanwhile, American Indians in South Dakota, have an average life expectancy of only 58 years (and they already have access to the Indian Health Service, run by HHS). Black inner-city men do almost as badly, living to 66.7 years. White folks in the Northern Plains live longer than most other whites, especially whites from Appalachia and the Mississippi Valley.

Now maybe you can look at all that and say, expanding coverage will iron-out the discrepancies. But I can’t.

Oh and, just to be clear, the report found that the variation in life-expectancy was significantly greater than the variation in health-insurance or access to medical care. In other words, there are bigger things at work.

Another silly liberal claim destroyed by fact.

Posted by: Zouk_is_King | March 23, 2010 12:38 PM | Report abuse

That is some resounding victory:

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. - Attorneys general from 13 states are suing the federal government to stop the massive health care overhaul, claiming it's unconstitutional. The lawsuit was filed seven minutes after President Barack Obama signed the overhaul bill Tuesday. It names the U.S. departments of Health and Human Services, Treasury and Labor. Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum is taking the lead in the lawsuit. Attorneys general from South Carolina, Nebraska, Texas, Michigan, Utah, Pennsylvania, Alabama, South Dakota, Louisiana, Idaho, Washington and Colorado are joining in. Other GOP attorneys general may join the lawsuit later or sue separately.

Posted by: Zouk_is_King | March 23, 2010 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Now the finance whiz is a 'constitutional scholar'. I knew that title had sunk to new lows of qualifications lately but now it seems utterly meaningless.

Hey finance whiz, why aren't you complaining that this bill is not paid in full in year one? wasn't that your talking point recently?

In fact is is likely to cost over $$4 trillion in the next 15 years.

You Libs sure know how to spend.

Posted by: Zouk_is_King | March 23, 2010 12:33 PM | Report abuse

Watching the GOP implode is so much fun, it's only a year in and they are like rapid dogs foaming at the mouth.

Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | March 23, 2010 12:30 PM | Report abuse

GOP to challenge mandates 4 years before that portion of HC reform goes into effect is nothing short of Lawsuit Abuse. The legal doctrines of Ripeness and Standing will lead to summary judgments against this Lawsuit Abuse by GOP lawyers.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 12:26 PM | Report abuse

no jake you were the one who seemed shocked to learn last week that to override a POTUS veto takes 67 Senate votes. Your comment to my post was what are you talking about. Again you and the GOP need to learn basic civics about how the Veto process works.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 12:21 PM | Report abuse

it insults pigs to say the gop are pigs.

look at the winger sewage on here. several notches less than human intelligence. too bad they weren't all aborted.

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 12:14 PM | Report abuse

jckdoors:

I am 76 years old and not a Republican (how about you?).

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 23, 2010 12:13 PM | Report abuse

Whenever barry needs to avoid facts, he churns up some racial incident:

TROLL ALERT: BLACK CONGRESSMEN WHO PLAYED THE RACE CARD PROVEN TO BE LIARS

The most despicable smear to come out of weekend rallies in Washington were unsubstantiated charges that Obamacare protesters shouted racial slurs at black members of Congress walking from the Cannon House Office Building to the Capitol. No evidence backs this up.

This story was first peddled by Rep. Andre Carson, Indiana Democrat, who seemed "almost giddy" telling the tale to the press, according to a Washington Times reporter who was there. Many news organizations reported these charges uncritically even though the people making the claims were the primary political beneficiaries of the tales.

No such epithets can be heard on video posted by Kerry Picket on The Washington Times Water Cooler Blog, which shows the representatives in question during their walk.

In another incident, Rep. Emanuel Cleaver II, Missouri Democrat, who is black, claimed a protester spat on him, and that the assailant was arrested by Capitol Police. Mr. Cleaver said he declined to file charges, but police spokesman Sgt. Kimberly Schneider said no arrests were made that day. Beatrice Wilson and Lori Macomber, hosts of Blogtalkradio's "All Fired Up," spoke to someone standing next to the alleged spitter, who said, "They were chanting 'Kill the bill' but no one spit on [the congressman]." Police didn't take witness statements, which they would do if they were investigating an incident.

Posted by: Zouk_is_King | March 23, 2010 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Al Sharpton: Obama Is a Socialist

I guess Reverend Al Sharpton is a right-wing, teabagger kook now.

The American public overwhelmingly voted for socialism when they elected President Obama.

Posted by: Zouk_is_King | March 23, 2010 12:05 PM | Report abuse

Just how old are some of you? Sheesh.

Posted by: jckdoors | March 23, 2010 12:00 PM | Report abuse

Is Soros throwing the party?
His money has aided Obama in overthrowing the country.

Hope everyone remembers that the Congress members who collapsed to get this through disregarded their constituents' wishes.

This is a victory for two hundred twenty people in Congress.
Not for America.

This is corruption at its blatant worse.

Posted by: pjcafe | March 23, 2010 11:58 AM | Report abuse

The GOP is tiresome.

Posted by: jckdoors | March 23, 2010 11:56 AM | Report abuse

drindl, now there is an intelligent comment. typical of the know-nothing, freeloading nanny-staters who put this monkey in office to begin with.

==

what a jerk

and what a predictable blog post from GOP shill Cillizza. Pawlenty again for godssake

Posted by: Noacoler | March 23, 2010 11:56 AM | Report abuse

the racists don't even try to hide it anymore. the full ugly face of it comes out.

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 11:56 AM | Report abuse

"drindl, now there is an intelligent comment. typical of the know-nothing, freeloading nanny-staters who put this monkey in office to begin with."

Nothing I could say could begin to be low enough to suit a slimesucking pr8ck like you.

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

When claims defy logic, we should be concerned. To wit,
Will insurance premiums go down? Of course not. Premiums reflect actual healthcare costs, which are not addressed by this plan. Plus the promised price control provision was yanked. So the billions in new costs and taxes for insurers will be passed directly onto consumers.
Bottom line: For at least the next four years, the 87% of people who currently have insurance will see their premiums rise higher than if there had been no reform at all.
True, there will be some important policy changes during this period. But these consumer protections could have been enacted without this massive backdoor tax on all payers.

Posted by: mtpeaks | March 23, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

..........

from his lips to god's ear...


On CNBC Tuesday, former General Electric CEO Jack Welch warned Republicans expecting big gains in the midterm elections this fall that they'll "get an awful shock."

Citing improved economic indicators, Welch said, "I don't think [the Democrats] are going to be wiped out," and said he expects them to have enough votes in Congress following the election to move forward on other parts of their agenda, like cap and trade."


......

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 11:51 AM | Report abuse

the wingers who post on here are getitng stupider and more thuggish!


god, who knew that was even possible?

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 11:49 AM | Report abuse

Hey cilizza:

How about an article on the entire list of dirty deeds and bribes used to ram this monster through:

the judge appointment
the water rights
the ethics complaints
the cash compensations
the primary challenge threats
the bribes
the offers of positions

It might take some actual journalism, but let's see if you can do it?

Posted by: Zouk_is_King | March 23, 2010 11:47 AM | Report abuse

"
If this baboon and his monkey-see-monkey-do followers can wipe the sh*t eating grin off their faces for a minute, they'll see that when you lie, cheat and bribe your way to hurt America like this, we will get you for it."

why don't you go f*ck yourself, treasonous racist slime?

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 11:47 AM | Report abuse

jaxas70:

Your post at 10:00 AM brought up "virtue" as well as other characteristics you now lament not seeing in John McCain, Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani, etc. My only "point" was that you would probably enjoy Gormley's book.

leichtman1:

You really seem confused (I've never posted anything about Obamacare and the Dow Jones Industrial Average; I know how the veto process works too). Are you sure you weren't "arguing" with JakeD3?

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 23, 2010 11:37 AM | Report abuse

Wow, jahoby, that really added to the discussion. BTW, you can't spell Republican without "pubic."

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | March 23, 2010 11:35 AM | Report abuse

Spelling Lesson

The last four letters in American? I Can

The last four letters in Republican? I Can

The last four letters in Democrats? Rats

End of Lesson

Test to follow in
November

Posted by: jahoby | March 23, 2010 11:27 AM | Report abuse

"Shrink. The market is reacting to the virtual assurance that the congress will now flip back to R and that American socialism has reached it's high water mark.

It is a forward looking mechanism. The effect of impending liberalism was the huge drop we experienced. And to this point, it was right. Liberals are smothering a recovery in it's crib.

Recovery will ensue once pelosi leaves in Jan.

Posted by: Moonbat | March 23, 2010 10:21 AM | Report abuse"

The stock market "analysis" posted by this idiot never fails to amuse.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | March 23, 2010 11:23 AM | Report abuse

Which Party Will Benefit From Health Care Reform In 2010? Vote

http://www.youpolls.com/default.asp

.

Posted by: usadblake | March 23, 2010 11:23 AM | Report abuse

' What they are, yet I know not: but they shall be the terrors of the earth.

It makes for great theatre. Politics? Not so much. '

thanks for the literary touch, margaret. one could also say the Rs words are 'full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.'

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 11:19 AM | Report abuse

Jaked, I have not read Gormley's book. I have seen him on the cable chat shows. But, aside from the fact that we have always had leaders and politicians who lacked virtue but still managed to be effective leaders what is his point?

I always look askance at broad terms like "American Virtue". It makes us sound like we here in America are more virtuous than people born in other cultures and countries and I simply do not buy that.

Indeed, I think this entire argumet about American "exceptionalism" is just an excuse for us to go around the world doing things that we would never tolerate some other country doing. The truth is that we are no more exceptional than anyone else except maybe for our capacity to arrogantly think that we will always be the most powerful advance nation on earth.

I am quite certain that Egypt, Greece, Rome and Great Britain also entertained hubristic notions that they were destined to rule the earth forever.

Posted by: jaxas70 | March 23, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse

There is no way Palin knows the definition of "imperious".

Posted by: twpw | March 23, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse

Republicans, for I am one, should work towards making this law compatible, and work for cooperation. Democrats not cooperating with Republicans is nothing new; Republicans going off in some lunatic fringe manner must stop -- we are one country, one people, and still the longest lasting democracy. Will we continue to be if we all go off like cannons in every direction?
Posted by: shuppy
--------------------
Welcome Shuppy! Thanks for writing a reasonable comment from an admitted republican. Though the dig at Democrats was egregious, compared to what is normally written by people from your party it gave a chuckle.

I will read whatever you have to say with interest.

Posted by: joebanks | March 23, 2010 11:00 AM | Report abuse

If there is one giant hypocrisy on the right that supersedes all others it is this inconsistent view they have on dissent. Indeed, the very origins of the conservative movement that nominated Barry Goldwater and successfully propelled Nixon and Reagan into office had it greatest momentum from an irrational hatred of the Peace Movement in the 1960s.

At least, the Anti-War dissent in the 60s was grounded in a legitimate concern about an undeclared war founded on a bogus incident alleged to have occurred in the Gulf of Tonkin that led to the slaughter of 55,000 young American lives. What is propelling the sotrt of dissent we see with the Tea Party protests is more than anything an anger and resentment of a President who does not look, think, act and smell like the old, fat, white, Limbaughesque southerners they are so accustomed to.

Posted by: jaxas70 | March 23, 2010 11:00 AM | Report abuse

This week the GOP is making me think of King Lear's threat. After he has found that his two daughters have bested him, and stripped him of all power he says:

I will have such revenges on you both, That all the world shall--I will do such things,-- What they are, yet I know not: but they shall be the terrors of the earth.

It makes for great theatre. Politics? Not so much.


Posted by: margaretmeyers | March 23, 2010 11:00 AM | Report abuse

Here is what a liberal victory looks like:

bought with corrupt bargains
rammed through without a single Repub
Will cost trillions
Most likely to be overturned by courts
Ransacked Medicare
Raised taxes
vastly unpopular with voters
a product of the far leftist house with harry and barry tagging along
loss of individual freedom
government tryanny at its worst
will result in loss of majority
Present ident now branded as socialist and partisan for good

Can you imagine what a liberal loss looks like if this is a win?

Posted by: Zouk_is_King | March 23, 2010 10:59 AM | Report abuse

Within a few months the polls are going to show a majority support the health care reform package. This will occur because the more left respondents who opposed because of the lack of single payer or public option will move into the support column. Hardly a winning position for the Republicans. In fact yesterday Frum of the American Enterprise Institute on CNN called health care the Republican Waterloo. Looks like the Republican Lemmings are headed over the cliff en masse.

Posted by: chucko2 | March 23, 2010 10:59 AM | Report abuse

we are a Great Nation jaxas that was exhibited by our actions in Haiti and Thailand.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 10:58 AM | Report abuse

"Some sober-minded GOP politicians, like former Sen. Bill Frist (R-TN), have cautioned against a repeal effort and have said it is unlikely to be successful. Rep. Phil Gringrey (R-GA) told CNN’s Rick Sanchez yesterday afternoon that he “does not want” to repeal everything in the bill, noting there are many things — including the exchanges, electronic medical records, expanded coverage for dependents, expanded Medicaid, and expanded consumer protections — that he supports.

Even Rudy Giuliani, speaking on MSNBC this morning, said that he is against repealing health reform. But as former Bush speech writer David Frum has observed, Republicans are now captive to a base that perceives reform as an effort to “murder grandmother.”


So Rs are going to run on repealing exchanges, electronic medical records, expanded coverage for dependents, expanded Medicaid, and expanded consumer protections?

Sounds really smart...

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 10:58 AM | Report abuse

Every empire thinks it is exceptional.

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 10:54 AM | Report abuse

'drindl, I tried last week here to explain to jake how the veto process works and why IF Rs take control of the Senate which is still doubtful, the GOP would need 67 votes to override a certain veto. His answer just like jake's was what are you talking about I don't understand. Perhaps they have a plan to strip Obama of the veto power, or the more likely explanation is that they just failed basic high school civics."

the wingers' understanding of government function and the constitution is abysmally slight, as they constantly demonstrate. they are not only uninformed, but disinformed.

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 10:52 AM | Report abuse

and the GOP actions should be tarred with the phrase:
LAWSUIT ABUSE

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 10:52 AM | Report abuse

Jaked, I have not read Gormley's book. I have seen him on the cable chat shows. But, aside from the fact that we have always had leaders and politicians who lacked virtue but still managed to be effective leaders what is his point?

I always look askance at broad terms like "American Virtue". It makes us sound like we here in America are more virtuous than people born in other cultures and countries and I simply do not buy that.

Indeed, I think this entire argumet about American "exceptionalism" is just an excuse for us to go around the world doing things that we would never tolerate some other country doing. The truth is that we are no more exceptional than anyone else except maybe for our capacity to arrogantly think that we will always be the most powerful advance nation on earth.

I am quite certain that Egypt, Greece, Rome and Great Britain also entertained hubristic notions that they were destined to rule the earth forever.

Posted by: jaxas70 | March 23, 2010 10:50 AM | Report abuse

Get ready for Republicans to tie up the court system with frivolous lawsuits. They'll go to courts to block legislative actions. Both activities they insist only liberals ever do. Except of course when they want corporations or the courts to choose the POTUS.

What whiny hypocrites.

Posted by: thebobbob | March 23, 2010 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Here's where the real need for "health care reform" resides -- in a callous bureaucracy that violates a basic precept of humanity: "FIRST, DO NO HARM."

HOMELAND-RUN 'FUSION CENTERS' SILENTLY ASSAULT, TORTURE, IMPAIR, SUBJUGATE U.S. CITIZENS WITH CELL TOWER MICROWAVE/RF WEAPON SYSTEM, FINANCIAL SABOTAGE, 'COMMUNITY WATCH' VIGILANTE DOMESTIC TERRORISM: VETERAN JOURNALIST

* Thousands of Americans slandered as "dissidents" or undesirables, targeted by Bush legacy program for debilitating, cell tower- based precision-targeted microwave//laser assault, held hostage in their homes to fed-supported vigilante "community policing" stalking units equipped with warrantless GPS devices, who vandalize and terrorize as local police look the other way.

* Electromagnetic radio frequency microwave/laser/RF weapon system -- a nationwide installation employing cell towers and satellites -- silently, invisibly induce weakness, exhaustion, mood changes, pain, head and body aches, physical and neurological impairment, strokes, aneurysms, sickness, cancer -- and many victims do not realize what is making them sick.

===== POLITICAL LEADERS MAY BE AMONG TARGETS =====

* Regional Homeland Security- administered "fusion centers" reportedly serve as command centers for covert electromagnetic radiation attacks, pervasive surveillance, financial sabotage of those identified as "dissidents," "trouble-makers" or slandered as threats to society.

* Use of microwave weaponry to torture and impair political opponents recently confirmed by deposed Honduras President Manuel Zelaya.

"These are crimes against humanity and the Constitution, being perpetrated under the cover of national security and 'safe streets' by multiple federal and local agencies and commands -- an American genocide hiding in plain sight, enabled by the naivete of those who think 'it can't happen here.'" -- Victor Livingston, former reporter for WTXF-TV Philadelphia, Phila. Bulletin, N.Y. Daily News, St. Petersburg Times; producer/host, MSG Network Sports Business Report; columnist, NowPublic.com/scrivener.

http://nowpublic.com/world/u-s-silently-tortures-americans-cell-tower-microwaves

BUCKS COUNTY, PA- BASED MAGLOCLEN FUSION CENTER -- "Centom of a Mid-Atlantic States Fed- and Police-Protected American Gestapo."

http://nowpublic.com/world/gestapo-usa-govt-funded-vigilante-network-terrorizes-america

OR NowPublic.com/scrivener (see "stories" list).

Posted by: scrivener50 | March 23, 2010 10:48 AM | Report abuse

apparently to the Radical Right, only GOP radicals are allowed in this country. And they delusionally think that was the attitude of the founding fathers? I will stick with my earlier thesis that these folks either slept through or failed basic high school civics. They have no concept of the creation of this country.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 10:45 AM | Report abuse

"Today's Liberals are not True Americans. They are Faux Americans"
==
"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism"
-Benjamin Franklin

Assuming we can all agree that Franklin was a patriotic American, I think what he's saying is that YOU are a faux American. What do you think?

Posted by: elijah24 | March 23, 2010 10:39 AM | Report abuse

drindl, I tried last week here to explain to jake how the veto process works and why IF Rs take control of the Senate which is still doubtful, the GOP would need 67 votes to override a certain veto. His answer just like jake's was what are you talking about I don't understand. Perhaps they have a plan to strip Obama of the veto power, or the more likely explanation is that they just failed basic high school civics.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 10:38 AM | Report abuse

I was just thinking that, margaret. I figure you can gauge the ED of a guy by how much time he spends grousing about pelosi.

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 10:33 AM | Report abuse

'Just for kicks, I listened to a few minutes of El Rushbo yesterday. His first call after a long tirade about how “no legislation is permanent in DC” was from a serious young dittohead who asked how, exactly, repeal was going to work if Obama still has a veto and Republicans don’t have a veto-proof majority. I really don’t think the guy was trolling: he was expecting Rush to have an answer.

Rush blathered on for a few minutes on that one, saying that a real revolution could occur and get veto-proof Republican majorities in the House and Senate. But even he seemed to admit that was magical thinking. Of course, left unsaid was the fact that getting a veto-proof majority in the Senate is impossible, and entitlements like Social Security and Medicare have not been, and will never be, repealed.

I really think that it’s hard to understate how stupid and ineffective the “repeal the bill” strategy will be as an election message. '

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 10:31 AM | Report abuse

last Friday Cramer,moonbat and jake predicted the sky falling and the DOW collapsing if HC passed. That was their prediction whihc was 100% wrong; moonbat its bizzare you and jake now want to take credit for your incorrect predictions. Curious what you would be posting today if the DOW were down 200 since HC passage. We all know the answer.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 10:30 AM | Report abuse

There are NO 'substantive' differences between MittyCare and ObamaCare.

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 10:28 AM | Report abuse

I posted a comment yesterday for the first time and was told that it would not be posted as I had posted too many....

So if I post a second will it be "two" many?

Anyway, it is time for accord and not discord. Republicans, for I am one, should work towards making this law compatible, and work for cooperation. Democrats not cooperating with Republicans is nothing new; Republicans going off in some lunatic fringe manner must stop -- we are one country, one people, and still the longest lasting democracy. Will we continue to be if we all go off like cannons in every direction?

Posted by: shuppy | March 23, 2010 10:26 AM | Report abuse

I posted a comment yesterday for the first time and was told that it would not be posted as I had posted too many....

So if I post a second will it be "two" many?

Anyway, it is time for accord and not discord. Republicans, for I am one, should work towards making this law compatible, and work for cooperation. Democrats not cooperating with Republicans is nothing new; Republicans going off in some lunatic fringe manner must stop -- we are one country, one people, and still the longest lasting democracy. Will we continue to be if we all go off like cannons in every direction?

Posted by: shuppy | March 23, 2010 10:26 AM | Report abuse

The GOP hates Pelosi because she is so effective in her role. "It's her fault," they cry! Yeah, it's her fault the Boehner and McConnell keep getting their heinies spanked.


Moonbat would like to photograph Nancy in those pants and giving that spanking.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | March 23, 2010 10:26 AM | Report abuse

It looks like Cramer and the GOP's predictions that Monday would see the sky falling and the DOW crashing if HC passed,were totally wrong. The DOW appears to be up 200 points since the passage of HC on Sunday. Cramer's predictions have about as much credibility as jake2's.

I wouldn't hold my breath about KBH retiring mark unless Perry loses at which time he would want to control the interim appointment.

Posted by: leichtman1 | March 23, 2010 10:25 AM | Report abuse

'Obama is not a socialist or a communist. But the republican party is dangerously close to becoming something that only a lunatic would bargain for.'

You're right about that, jaxas.

They're not thinking, they are only acting out like small children.

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 10:25 AM | Report abuse

I live in MA and the health care reform here has been excellent. The fact is what we pay extra in Fed taxes will be offset by the slowing of increases in insurance payments. The right seems to be so caught up in its own greed that it has lost touch with reality. It is a shame that the right has so much money to throw at discrediting something that will improve the quality of life for so many Americans. There are so many people who believe anything that comes out of their TV.

Posted by: THazlett1 | March 23, 2010 10:22 AM | Report abuse

Shrink. The market is reacting to the virtual assurance that the congress will now flip back to R and that American socialism has reached it's high water mark.

It is a forward looking mechanism. The effect of impending liberalism was the huge drop we experienced. And to this point, it was right. Liberals are smothering a recovery in it's crib.

Recovery will ensue once pelosi leaves in Jan.

Posted by: Moonbat | March 23, 2010 10:21 AM | Report abuse

Today's Liberals are not True Americans. They are Faux Americans that see it the responsibility of the Federal Govt to care for them, to take from others and give to them. They are the anathema of what America stands for. They will give up their Freedoms and willingly be subservient to the Govt. They are the opposite of what the Founding Fathers believed what the Govt and the US Constitution's function is. They are not True Americans. They are a mutation created by Far Left Ideology and a Political Sect that enslaves them for their own purposes. The Faux Americans are Useful Idiots of today's Liberal Socialist Totalitarian Govt. They suck the life out of today's American Society.


Posted by: jas7751 | March 23, 2010 10:19 AM | Report abuse

'Now it turns out that it is Nancy peloony that wears the pants in the dem party. '

aaah, that projection stuff again. so terrified of being emasculated, unmanned, once again.

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 10:19 AM | Report abuse

bsimon@946, I snorted when I read that. The Fix's logic would seem to be "Look how lucky the Republicans are! They have only a few seats to defend!"

Right you are if you say you are.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | March 23, 2010 10:19 AM | Report abuse

'Now it turns out that it is Nancy peloony that wears the pants in the dem party. '

aaah, that projection stuff again. so terrified of being emasculated, unmanned, once again.

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 10:18 AM | Report abuse

I fear that the long wait to feel the benefits of the bill will make it tough to campaign on. What's more, the bitter fight should have changed the rhetoric of the Democrats touting the accomplishment. I got an email saying "this is what change feels like." Stupid, stupid. Change feels like bitter in-fighting? That's probably true in practical terms... but you want hopefulness, not frustration, associated with the word that was co-opted by Obama.

Democrats desperately need to get on the game, PR-wise. The White House has actually accomplished a lot over the last year... but the fact that you're reading this and saying 'like what' in your head is evidence that they've been pathetic at proving that. Compare to Bush who did nothing but acted like he was saving the world, and got plenty of nutjobs to subscribe to that claim.

The key: Moving people is an EMOTIONAL proposition, not a logical one. They don't give a high hooey about charts and numbers. They want someone who sounds as worked up about things as they are, who can prove they're doing something about it too.

Democrats right now shouldn't be patting themselves on the back. They should be pissed -- at the Republicans who almost derailed this train and who are even now gearing up to derail it again, ready to rip away from nearly 40 million voters the safety measures this bill put in place.

What's next? Taking away your Social Security to because FDR was a hated Democrat? Taking away civil rights because Republicans never liked LBJ? Screw politically ambitious, self-centric politicians... you want a revolution that's going to save America from itself? Then expose these charlatans for who they really are... a bunch of crowd-manipulating, career-protecting bureaucrats who will say anything you'll believe if it means guarding their own privileges... even if it means they need to find a way to eliminate yours, while distracting you so you'll look the other way.

Posted by: washpost56 | March 23, 2010 10:17 AM | Report abuse

"If you need to know all of the substantive differences between Massachusetts and Obamacare, let me know"


Please share your wisdom with us, Oh Enlightened One.


Will this include memories of contortionists school in a travelling carnival during a misspent youth?


.

Posted by: bsimon1 | March 23, 2010 10:15 AM | Report abuse

Now it turns out that it is Nancy peloony that wears the pants in the dem party. Pretty sad that she is the toughest in the party

Her approval rating is down to 11 while her congress hovers at 14.

Must be the stooges on this blog ONLY that still like her.

Posted by: Moonbat | March 23, 2010 10:14 AM | Report abuse

Whoa Nelly!

The Dow just went to 10823 before dropping back a bit. Looks like another day of people placing bets America is on the right track.
I wonder if they know something Republicans' don't? Naaahh, couldn't be. When there is a correction though, watch Republicans come out of the woodwork and blame everything with a D on it.

Posted by: shrink2 | March 23, 2010 10:12 AM | Report abuse

Political Wire: Is Romney Toast in 2012?

Brad DeLong makes the observation that neither Democrats nor Republicans "have an incentive to discuss the Republican roots of Obama's health-care plan. But that doesn't mean they're not real -- and deep."

In fact, Mitt Romney's version of health care reform for Massachusetts -- signed into law in 2006 -- is very close to what just passed the House over the weekend.

This is why Josh Marshall suggests that Romney's strong reaction to the passage of health care reform is a sign that "the passage of this bill pretty much ends his chances to be nominated for the presidency."

"If the Republicans want to make Obama's signature piece of legislation a centerpiece of their 2012 campaign (and it's hard to imagine they won't since what else will they run on?), they can't very well run a candidate who supported and passed close to an identical bill [in Massachusetts]. It's a no-brainer."

Posted by: omaarsblade | March 23, 2010 10:09 AM | Report abuse

The republicans will continue with their lies, distortions, support for big business and win at any cost.
The American people are getting sick of their hypocritical, unAmerican actions.
They are well on their way to becoming our country's most dangerous domestic terrorists, out to destroy everything.

Posted by: kathlenec | March 23, 2010 10:07 AM | Report abuse

jaxas70:

Have you read Ken Gormley's latest book on Bill Clinton "Death of American Virtue"?

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 23, 2010 10:05 AM | Report abuse

@ skrillnet: How can you claim to be coming from an objective point of view? Fact: The additional spending in this bill represents a very small fraction of what the government will spend on its existing healthcare obligations (See Ezra Klein's column yesterday). Fact: this is NOT a government takeover of healthcare- the system will continued to be based on individuals and businesses buying insurance from private companies. Any real expansion of the government role is in terms of regulation, which is the rightful role of the government. I wish people would consider the FACTS of the bill and stop throwing around loaded terms with no understanding of what they actually mean. Fact: The bill isn't perfect, but I'm not hearing much from the opposition in terms of substantive debate- accusations of socialism are not going to improve our healthcare system!

Posted by: NatinFallsChurch | March 23, 2010 10:04 AM | Report abuse

John McCain, Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani--there was a time when I admired these republicans. But let's face reality. These three men used to be paragons of honesty, decency, civility and virtue. They once embodied what was best about the republican party--they were sure enough conservatives but not of the far right extremist nihilist version that typically make up the typical Tea Party gathering these days.

Some journalists have remarked that they no longer recognize John McCain as the principle maverick he once was. Now, in a desperate bid to keep his Senate seat, he has tried to get to the right of his primary opponent who is about as extremist in his views as one can get.

Mitt Romney is nothing short of a vile hypocrite who has now gone over to right wing kook territory in his bid to out-Palin Sarah Palin and a rank flip flopper of world class dimensions as he condemns a health care bill he himself invented and passed as Governor of Massachusetts.

And Giuliani? Good God! Whatever became of the moderate republican who worked so well with democrats in New York to turn the state and the city into a model of centrist progressive policies?

There was a popular old saying after candidates Barack Obama and John McCain went to the White House to meet with President Bush to come up with a policy to address the financial collapse: "We're all socialists now!" It was said in jest of course because everyone knew that this was a temporary measure to get us through this period of collapse. But now, it appears for the GOP it appears that we are all Nazis, interested only in capitulating to the slime of humanity at the far right fringes of conservatism.

Obama is not a socialist or a communist. But the republican party is dangerously close to becoming something that only a lunatic would bargain for.

Posted by: jaxas70 | March 23, 2010 10:00 AM | Report abuse

elijah24:

If you need to know all of the substantive differences between Massachusetts and Obamacare, let me know.

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 23, 2010 9:59 AM | Report abuse

haha, for people who claim to be so pro-capitalist, Republicans sure seem to hate money. As for me? I think I'll be happy with over a trillion dollars in deficit reduction.

But then again, I don't hate money.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 23, 2010 9:57 AM | Report abuse


2nd generation wingnut welfare recipient and Sprio Agnew clone:


Jonah Goldberg:

But on another level, this legislation is a superconducting super collider of culture-war conflagrations.

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 9:57 AM | Report abuse

Mitt Romney:
'His health-care bill is unhealthy for America. It raises taxes, slashes the more private side of Medicare, installs price controls, and puts a new federal bureaucracy in charge of health care. It will create a new entitlement even as the ones we already have are bankrupt. For these reasons and more, the act should be repealed. That campaign begins today.'

Thanks for introducing us to this exact insurance reform model by the way, Mittens. (But seriously, does this end frontrunner Mitt Romney’s presidential bid, assuming Republicans still make this their lead primary issue in 2012? It’s *impossible* for him to lie his way out of this.)


Read more at Wonkette: http://wonkette.com/414383/a-childrens-treasury-of-national-review-onlines-most-comical-sentences-from-the-past-24-hours#ixzz0j0XfHVcD

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 9:54 AM | Report abuse

NMaybe the Fix wants to bring on as guest bloggers some other nonsenical Dem doomsayers:

"Political scribes at National Review’s The Corner — the #1 Internet blog — have displayed a range of reactions to the passage of last night’s abortion mandate. Mark Steyn and John Derbyshire, for example, are pretty sure that the entire world (America) will start disintegrating into barbarism, Jonah Goldberg believes something about a super-collider (?), and Mitt Romney thinks that he isn’t really really screwed.

Mark Steyn:
If you take the view that the U.S. is an imperialist aggressor, congratulations: You can cease worrying. But, if you think that America has been the ultimate guarantor of the post-war global order, it’s less cheery. Five years from now, we’ll be getting used to announcements of defense cuts to prop up the unsustainable costs of big government at home. And, as the superpower retrenches, America’s enemies will be quick to scent opportunity.

Longer wait times, fewer doctors, explosive debt, the end of the Pax Americana, and global Armageddon."


Read more at Wonkette: http://wonkette.com/414383/a-childrens-treasury-of-national-review-onlines-most-comical-sentences-from-the-past-24-hours#ixzz0j0W1DFRt


LOL.

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 9:52 AM | Report abuse

elijah24 (per our gracious host yesterday):

WINNERS

"John Boehner/Mitch McConnell: The Republican leaders of the House and Senate, respectively, kept unanimity within their conferences -- although we heard that Rep. Joseph Cao (R-La.), who had voted for the health care bill last November, was a possible "yes" up until the end. Preserving their unanimous opposition allows Republicans -- at a national and a race-by-race level -- to make the case that Democrats and Democrats alone pushed through a bill that, they will argue, the American people don't want."

You hopefully read the dire 2012 Senate predictions above at least?

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 23, 2010 9:51 AM | Report abuse

The fix writes
"The 2010 cycle isn't looking great for Senate Democrats -- surprise retirements in North Dakota and Indiana coupled with a difficult national environment have made things tough -- but Roll Call's Shira Toeplitz says the 2012 cycle isn't any better."


That's a pretty stupid 'news' item. Of course the Dems are defending a lot of seats in 2012 - that's the class that they won, to most analysts' surprise, in 2006. If you want more news of this caliber, take a look at the 2014 election - Zowee!! Another class with majority Dems!! Bad news! Polling in early 2010, with the country slowly climbing out of recession, shows the majority party is only slightly less hated than the minority party - lets start projecting how that will influence an election in 4 1/2 years!!

.

Posted by: bsimon1 | March 23, 2010 9:46 AM | Report abuse

Both DougJ and I have been posting on the brick throwing in Rochester, where Congresswoman Louise Slaughter’s office and the local Democratic headquarters had windows broken. Here’s the note that was attached to the brick that went through the Democrats’ window.


EXTREMISM IN DEFENSE OF LIBERTY IS NO VICE


Now local TV station 13-WHAM reports that Slaughter received a death threat: “Assassinate is the word they used…toward the children of lawmakers who voted yes.”

http://www.balloon-juice.com/


OVER EXPANDING ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE

Degenerate morons and freaks.

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 9:45 AM | Report abuse

I do not put much stock in the CNN poll because it was taken before passage of the health care bill. Of more interest to me was the 7 point surge for Obama in the Gallup tracking survey.

I don't think we are going to have an accurate estimate of the impact for several weeks. I suspect that the base of the democratic party was party responsible for Obama's lower poll ratings and once they begin to drift back, those numbers will level off around 56%.

Posted by: jaxas70 | March 23, 2010 9:39 AM | Report abuse

'Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH), “who will lead Republican efforts” to block health care reform, said he hopes to spark a “backlash against Democrats that will rival the town-hall meetings that almost sank the measure last year.” “It will make last August look like a love fest,” Gregg told Bloomberg'


These scumbags won't be happy until they incite another Timothy McVeigh.

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 9:37 AM | Report abuse

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/22/AR2010032203729.html?hpid=topnews

The front page article in the WaPo. it details how Obama and Pelosi proceeded with the health care bill after Scot Brown's election. Sort of the cajoling and the coaxing that went on in order to get the votes.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 23, 2010 9:35 AM | Report abuse

drindl:

You keep using that word "precisely". I do not think it means what you think it means.

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 23, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

Don't you get tired, CC, of the same old tired shill for republicans every single day?

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 9:31 AM | Report abuse

I wonder why the Republican officials are not talking about highlighting their accomplishments during the Obama tenure? We all know the answer. Though against unions they used union tactics and went on strike against the American people.

Posted by: tmd678 | March 23, 2010 9:31 AM | Report abuse

Please, can you look at this from an objective point of view.

Party politics are going to destroy this country. This bill is going to cause the national debt to go through the roof! Not to mention, even if it does work and it doesn't raise the national debt by trillions of dollars, how can they do that without lowering the pay of the people providing the services? Do you think someone will want to go to college for 14 years to make $50,000 a year working for a "nationalized" health care system? This will be seen as one of the worst decisions in the history of America, and the people who are pushing it are so dead set on making it happen no matter the cost, that they cannot see the consequences. Same situation with the 'bailouts'. I don't know if I am just an exception to the rule or what, but usually when I am running a little short on cash, I don't go on a shopping spree. And most of the time I don't light my money on fire and watch it burn (bank bailouts). Would you give money to the person who stole your car, house, and lifestyle? If you think the banks in this country were not fully aware that they were making terrible credit decisions just to get sub-prime mortgages, you are delusional.

This turned into a lot longer rant than I intended, and it probably won't do any good, but at least I have spoken my mind while we still can.

Posted by: skrillnet | March 23, 2010 9:31 AM | Report abuse

Casey1:

If the Dems RAHM-ed through a bill giving away free 300 million GM cars, would that be "safe" fir the GOP to campaign against?

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 23, 2010 9:30 AM | Report abuse

If thing goes to The Supremes, it will likely be chewed up and spit out in pieces.

Ramesh Ponnoru once said Kennedy "is commonly acknowledged as the dimmest of the Court's intellectual lights". I disagree, Clarence Thomas, who has not asked a question from the bench since 2006(!), is as dumb as a box of rocks. Kennedy is once again, the likely swing voter on health reform. He is a states' rights guy and a catholic. Could get ugly.

Posted by: shrink2 | March 23, 2010 9:28 AM | Report abuse

Romney is ridiculous. The new HCR bill is precisely what he pushed in MA - could his supporters really be stupid enough to swallow what he's saying now?

Posted by: drindl | March 23, 2010 9:26 AM | Report abuse

elijah24:

The GOP do not need to get veto-proof majorities. There are other ways to stop him.

Posted by: JakeD2 | March 23, 2010 9:25 AM | Report abuse

This abuse of power ruse is ridiculous...Bush..2 wars....tax breaks for the rich and uber rich...thousands of soldiers dead and over 100,000 maimed and trillions paid to such reputable companies as Blackwater and Cheney's boys, graft so bad that when you heard about 6 million dollar bribes you became numb....Tom Delay....the hammer....meeting in closed doors, no Dems welcome.......many times...So how can Mitt The (fecal) say these things. Now Repugnicans Senators and attorney generals will use millions of tax payers money to try and stop something that most of their constituents need and want. The Tea PArty turnout tells you how many Americans think this way....these rats estimated 1-3000 which is still a joke, the police estimated 3-500, typical we will lie about anything just to say it repugnicans.

Posted by: rosenfan1 | March 23, 2010 9:22 AM | Report abuse

"

Did any of these passed without opposition?
- Emancipation Proclamation by Lincoln
- Women's suffrage by Wilson
- Lend/Lease by FDR
- Desegregation of the military by Truman
- Civil Rights Act by Johnson

Who would stand against those today?

Posted by: RainyDayIntern "

The teabaggers and the Republican Party.

Posted by: thrh | March 23, 2010 9:20 AM | Report abuse

Come on, come on, come on. Do it you ignorant, bought and paid for Republicans. DO IT!

Keep right on whining and complaining and lying and spitting and race-baiting and all the other blsht that Republicans are so good at.

DO IT you losers! Shut down the Senate for week while you desperately try to stop progress and stop reform and stop anything good coming out of Washington.

Come on, DO IT you piggies. Let's have anther show. Keep yelling blood libels from your perches in Congress. Yeah! Keep right on shaming yourselves with ridiculous, childish attacks. Why don't you all take little craps at your seats to?

Let's hear it! Healthcare is communism! Yeah! Yell that. Let's see more of that red-faced, spittle-covered, bone-headed Boehner. Oh yeah, more of him!

Just keep up all the ignorant, lying, hysterical blsht all the way to November. Yes! You go Republicans!

Go for the substance you brain-dead lying sacks of sht. Yeah! Substance! Clammer for a whole year to repeal healthcare for 30 million fellow citizens. Yes! Put a cork in the works to prevent people with preexisting conditions from getting insurance!

And the frosting on the cake? Come on you rimrods! Repeal healthcare for kids in or out of school who can't get a job! Show the country what Republicans are made of.

Yeeaaahhh!

Posted by: Casey1 | March 23, 2010 9:20 AM | Report abuse

"2,012 Republicans?" What's that, another Fox News poll number?

Posted by: thrh | March 23, 2010 9:13 AM | Report abuse

bradcpa,
I agree, and there are polls that showed that when they asked the 48% of people who were against HCR 30% of that group said that the legislation didn't go far enough. Those are the most liberal members of the Democratic party and its not like they are going to all of a sudden vote for some pro-life, pro-gun, anti-environmental republican over Healthcare reform. The GOP knows this too, which is why they were hoping for the HCR bill not to pass.
In the end, about 35% of our country is strongly opposed to reforming healthcare at all, they are called Republicans.

Posted by: AndyR3 | March 23, 2010 9:13 AM | Report abuse

The new health care bill is not perfect - far from it - but as the old Chinese saying goes, "The journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step." There will be improvements made on it down the years - there absolutely needs to be - but this is a fairly good first step. We're on our way! The Conservatives will whine, but that's what they do best. They'll whine just as they whined when Lyndon signed into law the Voting Rights Act of 1965, or the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Just as they whined when Harry Truman desegregated the army in 1947, or when Franklin D. Roosevelt brought Social Security into being in 1935. They'll whine just like they did when Woodrow Wilson tried to form the League of Nations in 1919 - or when Abraham Lincoln ended the institution of slavery in 1863! They whine a lot. Did you ever notice that?

There's gonna be a whole lotta obstruction goin' on between now and Election Day, you can be certain of that. The success of health care reform in America can only spell trouble for the GOP. They will do everything humanly possible to see to it that it fails completely. Count on them trying to get it declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of John Roberts. This is going to get really interesting.

http://www.tomdegan.blogspot.com

Tom Degan

Posted by: tomdeganfrontiernetnet | March 23, 2010 9:12 AM | Report abuse

Guess we'll all see now how the judicial process works in protecting the Constitutional Rights and Liberties of the People and for the People are protected. This will be dragged out in the courts for months. While you're at it: STOP FUNDING TO ALL COMMUNITY, REFORM, ORGANIZATIONS ACROSS THE NATION. They are frauds and thieves.

Posted by: kevina2 | March 23, 2010 9:04 AM | Report abuse

Not too concerned about Obama's drop in the polls about handling domestic issues. About 10% of this people on the left who thinks he mishandled health care. Those people will be rushing back on board.

Posted by: bradcpa | March 23, 2010 9:02 AM | Report abuse

Only Fox News, Republican AM-Hate Radio and it's Delusional Followers can take Poll Numbers and use that as Solid Evidence that....

300 Million Americans Agree with Republicans on Opposing Health Care Reform.


Reality: 300 Million Americans were Never, Ever Polled.

Nowhere Near 10 Million Americans were Polled.

Nowhere Near 20-50 Million Americans were Polled.

Nowhere Near 100 Million Americans were Polled.

Nowhere Near 200 Million Americans were Ever Polled, In these Surveys.

It was in the 1-5,000 Mark and they were Splintered Or [UnDecided]


So Much for Majority Of America was Against This Bill, The Mass media Is One Hell of a Processing Center For [Deceptions & Illusions]

The Illusion Did Not Work, At All.

Posted by: omaarsblade | March 23, 2010 8:58 AM | Report abuse

Sunday was a very interesting day. I was glued to the tv for hours from C-Span to CNN. It was good to hear the many speeches but the behavior from the republicans was absolutely despicable. You cannot even have your children watch history unfold to know we have men/women on the hill who have detestable behavior to shout out lies only and bully name calling. We do not have leaders in the republican party who should be working for the American people we have troublemakers and dissenters who care nothing about the people but their own pockets.

Posted by: mac7 | March 23, 2010 8:56 AM | Report abuse

Please stop all funding of new Community Organizations formerly known as ACORN.

"Meanwhile, the Obama administration is gearing up to begin funding ACORN again despite a congressional ban and an unresolved lawsuit. In a March 16 memo Office of Management and Budget (OMB) director Peter Orszag quietly ordered federal agencies to resume funding the group whose employees were caught on hidden camera videos last year apparently encouraging illegal behavior. The memo came after federal judge Nina Gershon of the Eastern District of New York, a Bill Clinton appointee, made permanent her temporary injunction prohibiting Congress from cutting off funding for ACORN. Gershon found the denial of funding to ACORN to be an unconstitutional “bill of attainder.”"

dailycaller dot com/2010/03/19/from-little-acorns-new-state-level-organizations-grow/

Posted by: kevina2 | March 23, 2010 8:53 AM | Report abuse

"Obama remains quite popular personally with seven in ten people in the CNN poll approving of him as a person."

That is a high number. I wonder what the personal approval numbers are for Palin, Romney, Pawlenty (who?) et al. Personal popularity plus economic recovery will equal a rollover in 2012.

Posted by: shrink2 | March 23, 2010 8:35 AM | Report abuse

how could we live without our daily dose of GOP talking points and POV? It's amazing how this column and the Post in general reflect a GOP-dominated worldview

Posted by: hohandy1 | March 23, 2010 8:28 AM | Report abuse

Did any of these passed without opposition?
- Emancipation Proclamation by Lincoln
- Women's suffrage by Wilson
- Lend/Lease by FDR
- Desegregation of the military by Truman
- Civil Rights Act by Johnson

Who would stand against those today?

Posted by: RainyDayIntern | March 23, 2010 8:16 AM | Report abuse

Do these morons running the GOP (which is to say that the leadership of the Republican party are morons, not that all Republicans are) honestly think that they can take enough seats in congress to repeal this health-care legislation? I mean, even if they could take back both chambers, which is a pretty big stretch, how are they gonna take back enough seats to over-rule a veto? They'er delusional.

Posted by: elijah24 | March 23, 2010 8:07 AM | Report abuse

I'm sure the MSM better known as Obamamedia will make sure that Obama gets lots of positive press to try to bump up his lousy poll numbers. But I'm not sure how much more they can do. Rasmussen says that 60% of Obama's press lately has been positive. It's all about marketing the One.

Posted by: RobT1

Rasmussen takes a random sampling of the RNC for it's polling. If a picture of Obama in a casket isn't included in the article it's considered a positive story.

Rasmussen is consistently out of whack with all the other polling agents. Which indicates there is either an orchestrated global conspiracy or Rasmussen puts it's thumb on the scale.

You clearly have been convinced that there is an orchestrated global conspiracy of biblical proportions.

I wouldn't be surprised if you also believe there was a 50 year global conspiracy to conceal that Obama was born in Kenya so he could be installed as POTUS.

I recall getting an e-mail originating from Wasilla, AK that if Obama was elected he would have an all black cabinet and enslave the whites. And the person that sent it actually believed that was going to happen. But then again, when they wake up in the morning they turn on Fox News and it stays on continuously until they go to bed.

Posted by: James10 | March 23, 2010 8:00 AM | Report abuse

If I was a Republican I would focus on the fact that the Democrats have just passed the largest tax increase in the nation's history.

The National Debt and the deficit are at record high numbers and must go higher after the "Doctor's fix" is passed.

Already liberal pundits are talking about enacting a national sales tax (VAT) to pay for all of this spending.

The Democrats are back to their "tax and spend" mentality!

Posted by: mwhoke | March 23, 2010 7:51 AM | Report abuse

CC, any poll that talks about Obama's approval ratings on saturday are completely meaningless today. The media has been overwhelmingly positive of the HCR bill. I would bet that by next weekend Obama will get a 10% bump and if he can get passage of the Bank Reform bill in the next month or so that will help to bolster those numbers going into the lull of the summer months.

On that same note, I completely disagree that the Senate democrats are headed anywhere but up after this weekend. They have a renewed sense of authority and are starting to sound like the majority party they should be. I think they know that the Republicans can't block the bank reform bill and not take a major hit in the polls so it will pass with maybe one or two amendments from moderate GOPers. On top of that I would look for Kerry to start to apply pressure on Liebermann and Graham to move forward with the Environmental bill they have been working on. It may not make it to the committee process until June. With HCR out of the way (mostly at least). The rancor on the hill should disapate some and they can get back to work on the more moderate proposals floating through the chambers now.

If the Democrats pass cap and trade, and bank reform on top of the HCR they will be in a pretty safe position going into November. On top of that if unemployment continues to go down than the Republicans may be the ones that need to start to worry. I said after Scott Brown was elected that I thought the GOP had peaked with that election since they now had to govern. The events of the past weeks have strenghtened my view that they have peaked and it will only be up for the Democrats from now on.

Posted by: AndyR3 | March 23, 2010 7:41 AM | Report abuse

Republicans - remember that fighting this bill now that it has passed is fighting to TAKE HEALTH INSURANCE AWAY FROM MILLIONS OF CHILDREN, and you are supposed to be the party that protects life. You're about to be caught in your own net, but that never bothered you before, so, nevermind......

Posted by: Brooksroberts | March 23, 2010 7:31 AM | Report abuse

Republicans line up in opposition...

That's news? They've been lining up in opposition to everything since Obama was elected... Including voting against the stimulus package after he gave them 35% of it in tax cuts...

Would anyone, please, tell the Republicans, that their mantra of "NO" is getting very, very, old?

Posted by: Gatsby10 | March 23, 2010 7:28 AM | Report abuse

I like GOP threatening to take the Senate and House and get rid of this bill.Yea Right just like they effectively have rid us of S.S.,federal bank.Medicaid,or Medicare, or SHIP,Unemployment.GOP is useless unless they are exporting jobs to China or getting Wealth Americans tax breaks while handing out Corporate Welfare and starting wars.Once DNC start talking about Bank regulations,Trade negotiations,and tax the super Rich,people will back them up again.

Posted by: faeyth | March 23, 2010 7:28 AM | Report abuse

Adding a thought to #5, KBH has yet to announce her "resignation". That may deny John Sharp[D] the boost of being the only D in a special election before 2012.

The owner of the dearly departed Seamus - see

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/specials/romney/articles/part4_main/

- will not be able to sound credible attacking his own health care plan writ large. Seamus' owner is a bright, well educated, articulate and in many ways gifted man, but he has a serious problem with credibility, on many issues. This may be the worst case for him.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | March 23, 2010 7:23 AM | Report abuse

I'm sure the MSM better known as Obamamedia will make sure that Obama gets lots of positive press to try to bump up his lousy poll numbers. But I'm not sure how much more they can do. Rasmussen says that 60% of Obama's press lately has been positive. It's all about marketing the One.

Posted by: RobT1 | March 23, 2010 7:19 AM | Report abuse

Romney is a laughingstock. A nearly identical bill to what he championed is what????? He must have less respect for Republican voters than most.

Posted by: steveboyington | March 23, 2010 6:34 AM | Report abuse

You can find full Medical Insurance coverage at the lowest price from http://bit.ly/c78ZsC

Posted by: victorlowe23 | March 23, 2010 6:11 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company