Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Why health care will pass (and what it means)

For the last several weeks (months?), each time a major hurdle has arisen in the health care fight, the White House -- often in the former of chief of staff Rahm Emanuel -- has stepped in to placate the squeaky wheel(s) and keep some measure of momentum behind the legislation.

That approach from the Obama Administration has led to deals with the likes of Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) over abortion language in the bill and, more recently, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) over an attempted compromise on the so-called public option. The next deal expected to be cut is with Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson (D) who has publicly struggled to reconcile his own opposition to abortion with a vote for final passage.

While the deal-making has left many liberals cold about the final product, it has also virtually guaranteed that the President will be able to hold a Rose Garden signing ceremony sometime next year, declaring victory in the overhaul of one of the stickiest wickets of social policy in the country.

The broad strategy adopted by the White House toward health care is based on a single fundamental belief: coming out of this extended fight with nothing to show for it amounts to a political disaster not just for the President but for congressional Democrats as well.

"It's a huge problem if nothing gets passed," said one senior Democratic strategist. "Huge."

The problem would be two-fold, according to the source.

First, it would makes a pivot to a focus on jobs and the economy -- the two front-of-mind issues for most Americans -- virtually impossible for Obama as he would be faced with months of "what if" and "what now" questions about the future of his number one legislative priority. (Look back to the aftermath of former President Bill Clinton's failure to reform health care for evidence of how much damage the collapse of a major legislative initiative can have on a president's agenda going forward.)

Second, the failure of a health care bill would substantially erode two basic pillars on which Obama was elected -- "competence" and "change", according to the source.

Obama promised a new way of doing business in Washington, a promise based on a belief that his election could break the partisan gridlock that has gripped the nation's capitol for decades and make government work for the average American again.

With the exception of three Republican Senators casting votes for his economic stimulus package earlier this year, Obama has struggled to make those promises a reality. Without a health care bill, the gap between Obama's statements about changing how Washington works on the campaign trail and what he has accomplished (or didn't accomplish) in office would be broadcast for all the country to see.

Obama has made the case publicly and privately to Democratic Members of Congress that whether they like it or not, their fates are intimately intertwined with his. His successes are their successes and vice versa.

He -- and his senior staff -- are certain to repeat that argument ad nauseam in the coming days to convince liberals in the Congress that any talk of killing the bill on principle amounts to political suicide. (Are you listening Governor Dean?)

It's nearly certain that those Members will ultimately go along with Obama. The bigger question as it relates to the 2010 midterm elections is whether the compromises made by the Obama Administration to pass health care demoralize the Democratic base further -- keeping them at home in a year where Republican base voters are expected to turn out in droves.

By Chris Cillizza  |  December 16, 2009; 1:38 PM ET
Categories:  White House  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Bob McDonnell: Campaign of the Year
Next: Howard Dean, health care reform spoiler?

Comments

Also google Boston Children's Hospital Sex Change Clinic
Also google Dawn Stefanowicz Out from Under
Also Amazon.com You're Teaching My Child What?
Also Planned Parenthood

Progressive Liberals Creating a Diabolical Society!

==

What's the matter, did a black family move into your neighborhood or something?

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 17, 2009 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Liberals Idea of Health Care

http://www.massresistance.org
http://www.drjudithreisman.org
http://www.silentscrem.org
Also google Boston Children's Hospital Sex Change Clinic
Also google Dawn Stefanowicz Out from Under
Also Amazon.com You're Teaching My Child What?
Also Planned Parenthood

Progressive Liberals Creating a Diabolical Society!

Posted by: boski66 | December 17, 2009 9:07 AM | Report abuse

Chris, your "ad nauseum" comment was a bit crude. Maybe you were looking for somer comic relief, but this is too important to make light of.

We are describing the legislative process here, if it makes you sick to think the White House will repeat an important talking point often, then tell us it nauseates you, but to suggest it is a generic disgust we all need to share, is not good journalism, it is your opinion being posed as authority.

"Ad nauseum" might apply to the Bush/Rice?Cheney?Rumsfeld "mushroom cloude meme".

It certainly doesn;t apply to White House eforts to get historic, and typically imperfect laws on the books that open the door for future efforts to protect the citizens of this great nation from the monopolists who would destroy our free enterprise system altogether if they could get the government to help them do it.

What so many of our right wing fellows don;t get is that the monopolists are the biggest threat to our economy, not "the commies" or "the socialists", it is the no-bidders who are wrecking the world markets.

Posted by: JEP07 | December 17, 2009 8:37 AM | Report abuse

Sorry for being late to the mixed metaphor challenge, where intellectually anesthetized Republicans are trying to sink Obamacare to keep us from drowning in the sea of socialism that we may be ideologically overinsured prior to our crash on the rocks of reason before performing elective surgery to remove these spitwad shooting knuckle draggers out of our tree of liberty.

Posted by: optimyst | December 17, 2009 8:27 AM | Report abuse

It is true!

The fate of Democrats and even Republicans in the Congress IS tied to that of the President. Any one of them who votes in favor of Obomba's socialized medicine scheme WILL face the wrath of the betrayed American public. We need men and women who are dedicated to repealing the socialist legislation in America for the past 120 years. The Obomba legislation makes a nice place to start for practice. So, we will HAVE men and women in office who will repeal all that Obomba has done to take over the American economy.
Yes, the political fate of every Democrat and Republican who votes with the current wannabe dictator is sealed!

Posted by: pbeaird | December 17, 2009 7:07 AM | Report abuse

"Competence and Change" would be seriously eroded?


Chris - Obama has been breaking campaign promises left and right.


Why are these two "pillars" so important and everything else Obama campaigned on so not important ???


There appears to be some sort of really bad arrogance - the kind that is more stupidity afoot here.

Obama should listen to the American people - pull the plug on the health care bill -


AND shift to a jobs agenda right away.

This guy also campaigned on how smart he was supposed to be....


Has anyone seen that ?


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 17, 2009 6:19 AM | Report abuse

Howard Dean is right on this. The only ones benefiting from the Senate bill will be the insurance companies with headquarters in Hartford--which perhaps explains Joe Lieberman's flip flopping. He is in big trouble in CT for this, but unfortunately does not have to run for several years. I don't think CT will forget about all of this. Disgusting.

Posted by: yenta1 | December 17, 2009 5:27 AM | Report abuse

The other thing with the health care bill which I believe might be operating on a premise that is incorrect: the idea that once a government program starts, it can not be stopped.


The democrats appear to believe that they are going to jam the health care program down the throats of every American and it will stay there forever.


The law can be appealled. Also, practically speaking, if the finances of the health care bill are not fixed at some point, the health care bill will have to be dismantled on financial grounds.

The arrogance of all these "leaders." These are leaders, these are egomaniacs who are drunk with power.

The democrats appear to believe that they can pass a bill this year WITHOUT having the political will to pass the taxes that the health care bill will REALISTICALLY REQUIRE - and that somehow some future Congress is going to have the political will to pass those taxes.


Somehow, the democrats want to create the conditions that the taxes will have to be passed.


I really doubt that this scenario is going to work very well - the blame has already been pinned on the democrats

Aren't the democrats better off avoiding this peril ???

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 17, 2009 5:15 AM | Report abuse

Has anyone on the democratic side really considered that passing health care against the wishes of the American people is going to hurt the democrats at the polls?


I know they do their polling, polling, polling.


However, passing an unpopular program really does not make sense.


I see the voters digging in their heels on this one - they were willing to give Obama a chance - but if Obama insists on being so tone-deaf.....


What happened in 1994 may not be a good analogy - Clinton's plan was withdrawn later in 1994 - the atmosphere of the country is completely different now vs. then -

We are in the middle of a recession.


We are in the middle of a recession - and Obama's attitude is: "I did not come to Washington simply to manage the country out of a recession, I came here to make history."


Yea.... but the job involves the economy - It is almost as if Obama is refusing to do his job, and insisting on doing the health care bill which no one wants.


This whole idea that all the democrats in Congress have to support this madness is silly -


We need some statesmen to straighten this thing out.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 17, 2009 4:30 AM | Report abuse

@BB:

<voice filter="AM car radio">
"COME OWN DOWN an' seeya MILLION DOLLARS WORTHA LASERS!!"
</voice>

sorry, couldn't resist

6328Å looks like t'me...
G&T

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 17, 2009 2:31 AM | Report abuse

Oh my that was absolutely excellent

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 17, 2009 2:08 AM | Report abuse

Reform, and I use that word loosely, will only pass if they remove the clause to make getting insurance mandatory or be fined.

It will be killed otherwise.

John Dean isn't fringe...he represents much of the Democratic base. For proof, Markos from the Daily Kos said the same thing and he was getting 85% that agreed in a site poll.

But the coup de grace...Keith Olbermann's "special moment" from tonight.

It is sure to induce nightmares for Barack Obama, as well it should.

If you haven't seen it, it is a must-see. I have it posted at:
http://leliorisen.blogspot.com/2009/12/keith-olbermann-puts-white-house-and.html

Posted by: leliorisen | December 17, 2009 1:03 AM | Report abuse

In The New Yorker this week, we have a good look at Somalia, last bastion of the perfectly free market, chock a block with religious believers, political soldiers, whatever you want to name them. They are watering the sand with their own blood, their super liberty is kept perfectly free of government with Kalashnikovs and IEDs.

==

Image:

bearded tattooed long-haired Idaho survivalist type kneeling in attitude of prayer, one hand caressing the stock of a high-powered rifle. His face is creased in rage and frustration as he prostrates in reverence of Liberty.

Voice:

"why cain't we have no free market lak' Somailia!"

Live free or dah,
G&T

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 17, 2009 12:21 AM | Report abuse

Sad, but true, Gold...happy holidays, for what it is worth...

Posted by: LABC | December 16, 2009 11:40 PM | Report abuse

As we bed down, loving and caring for others no doubt, we may still consider this,

"I'm presuming that such a temperament would have survival value in this brave new political world."

The political world was always more violent, it has never been so safe as it is right here, now.

In The New Yorker this week, we have a good look at Somalia, last bastion of the perfectly free market, chock a block with religious believers, political soldiers, whatever you want to name them. They are watering the sand with their own blood, their super liberty is kept perfectly free of government with Kalashnikovs and IEDs.

Darwin did not suggest survival per se was the driver of evolution, but rather the survival of offspring. The more babies you have that survive to breed even more babies that survive...the fitter you are.

Aggression might help, but really, creating more creatures that survive to breed more creatures is the standard of evolutionary fitness.

No wonder people would rather believe in Gods, though Goddesses make more sense to me, but that is just whimsy.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 16, 2009 11:29 PM | Report abuse

@DDAWD - Heh. I'll be hoping for a little luck on Friday. A million dollars worth of lasers and we're crossing our fingers for a signal.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | December 16, 2009 11:27 PM | Report abuse

I'd post more, BB, if there were like a real discussion.

Posted by: DDAWD | December 16, 2009 11:24 PM | Report abuse

@LABC: all we regulars are well-acquainted and disgusted with the racism you mention, but be careful .. he gets amnesty on the nastiest and dumbest trolling in the Post for some reason, and calling him on the racism will get you banned, while his expressing it, endless, day in and day out and without any variation, won't.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 11:20 PM | Report abuse

As a service, please be careful of clicking on links from JakeD. This poster's comments reveal a bigot who is not above siding with or supporting radical right wing causes that would threaten public officials, including the president. He has made comments on other message boards on WAPO that could be considered as threats.

Posted by: LABC | December 16, 2009 10:56 PM | Report abuse

As a service, please be careful of clicking on links from JakeD. This poster's comments reveal a bigot who is not above siding with or supporting radical right wing causes that would threaten public officials, including the president. He has made comments on other message boards on WAPO that could be considered as threats.

Posted by: LABC | December 16, 2009 10:55 PM | Report abuse

And, oh, one more thing ... Republicans will howl with glee at liberals' anger at the disappearance of the middle class, happier that liberals are discomfited than aghast that the very same thing is happening to them, too.

Now if we can only talk them into doing the Cybelle thing as an encore .. shouldn't be too hard.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 10:03 PM | Report abuse

From now on, it is going to be all about how the end of the American middle class plays out in electoral politics.

==

Well we've already been fed our canned rationale, haven't we?

"gotta compete inna global marketplace"

If I had a lượng every time I'd heard that, why, I could open an Asian-themed Fort Knox.

"supply an' demand"

.. he intoned with hollow-eyed conviction.

During the Great Depression Americans didn't blame the Wall Street creeps who had made the mess, they blamed themselves, even people who had worked hard, gotten to work early, never took a sick day .. they blamed themselves.

Somehow I don't think they'll do the same this time around. But nooooOOOOoooo, they won't blame the financial caste

"market forces"

.. they'll blame the other political party, or they'll blame whatever bubbleheaded ditz they don't like, or maybe they'll blame themselves. The one thing you can be sure of it that the financial caste won't suffer a moment of discomfort.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 9:59 PM | Report abuse

What exactly would be the competitive advantage of bile ducts the size of fire hoses?

==

Spoken by someone who clearly has never had the damned things clogged up. I did once, medication reaction, three days when I was too weak to stand. Stopped taking the stuff and on day four I went back to being alive.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 9:41 PM | Report abuse

Judging from some of the give and take around here, you may very well be right.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | December 16, 2009 9:39 PM | Report abuse

In Greek and Roman medicine "Excessive bile was supposed to produce an aggressive temperament, known as 'choleric'. This is the origin of the word 'bilious'." (Wikipedia)

I'm presuming that such a temperament would have survival value in this brave new political world.

Posted by: douglaslbarber | December 16, 2009 9:37 PM | Report abuse

@BB: he's referring to an old view of human nature as based on "humors," in which various organs of the body were credited with responsibility for various aspects of temperament. Words like "sanguine," "bilous," etc. were based on the idea.

Personally I think humanity will be extinct before the century is out.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 9:35 PM | Report abuse

"I agree, dummypants.
Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 8:04 PM"

That's the Best Post of the Day! He agrees with dummypants...

Posted by: margaretmeyers | December 16, 2009 9:35 PM | Report abuse

What exactly would be the competitive advantage of bile ducts the size of fire hoses?

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | December 16, 2009 9:32 PM | Report abuse

In days of yore, when the Classicist spirit reigned supreme politics was seen as an affair of the brain; when Romanticism was all the rage it was an affair of the heart.

In this best of all possible worlds it seems to have become an affair of the spleen, possibly also involving the liver and pancreas.

If Darwin is correct, in a few thousand years people will have bile ducts the size of fire hoses.

Posted by: douglaslbarber | December 16, 2009 9:26 PM | Report abuse

Otherwise, it will remain a magic show, business as usual.

==

puppet show, you mean

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 9:22 PM | Report abuse

Seeing all the back and forth, I couldn't resist resurrecting the old Bladometer.

45 JakeD
37 GoldAndTanzanite
14 ZOUK
11 leapin
9 drindl
9 shrink2
7 JRM2
5 DDAWD
4 37thand0street
4 LABC
2 dummypants
2 FairlingtonBlade
1 16 contributors

Ah, just like old times...

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | December 16, 2009 9:06 PM | Report abuse

"Nobody could be more disappointed than I am in Obama but it would take a hell of a lot more than disappointment to compel Americans to be so irresponsible as to vote for a Republican.

Compromse and disappointment don't hold a candle to crazy."

Agree on this except I'd say should instead of would. But no one cares about shoulda woulda.

From now on, it is going to be all about how the end of the American middle class plays out in electoral politics. If there is no follow on, the next bubble boom shower of cash onto the level of people who vote, it will get ugly.

Otherwise, it will remain a magic show, business as usual.


Posted by: shrink2 | December 16, 2009 9:03 PM | Report abuse

Now I hate the whole thing. Meant to provide benefits to millions of Americans who don't have health insurance, we now have twisted right-wingers talking about socialism and wrecking Obama and scum like Joe Lieberman defending insurance companies. Pass it or don't who cares.

Posted by: dudh | December 16, 2009 9:02 PM | Report abuse

I've seen several dozen such stories.

You must be REALLY broke. Need some help?

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 8:58 PM | Report abuse

If only I had a buck or two for every story themed "Why Health Care will Pass," or "Nancy Says She Has the Votes," or even better "Reid Says He Now Has the Votes."

Posted by: Curmudgeon10 | December 16, 2009 8:48 PM | Report abuse

You have created a hostile atmosphere.

==

then go back the warmth and the love at stormfront

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 8:42 PM | Report abuse

I guess that's what you get when you trust someone so inexperienced to the highest office in the world.

==

You almost pulled it off. But you slipped at the end.

1/10

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 8:40 PM | Report abuse

Why do you feel a compulsion to comment on everything everyone says here ??

==

that's what we do here

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 8:39 PM | Report abuse

We voted for change and what we got is chump-change. We thought we voted or someone who would make a real difference and instead we got the second coming of Jimmy Carter, a president who may do some good internationally but useless at home. This health care bill is next to useless. A large boon for the insurance companies. I guess that's what you get when you trust someone so inexperienced to the highest office in the world.

Posted by: Opa2 | December 16, 2009 8:37 PM | Report abuse

G and T


Why do you feel a compulsion to comment on everything everyone says here ??


You don't have to repeat everything that you disagree with - and then state your opinion.


Why can't you accept the fact that other posters have opinions that are different from yours ??


You have created a hostile atmosphere.


Leave other posters alone.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 16, 2009 8:36 PM | Report abuse

"hold a candle" is an antiquated idiom that reflects my age.

It's pretty easy to identify people who actually are of advanced years and distinguish us from people who only claim to be.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 8:29 PM | Report abuse

As a blue dawg from Vermont

==

not buying it

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 8:23 PM | Report abuse

As a blue dawg from Vermont I can't describe how disgusting I find the Obama administration at this time.

If they ram this through for no other than political reasons there are a lot of Democrats across the country who will not be voting that way in 2010 or 2012.

They had everything going for them and they betrayed their own supporters.

Posted by: buzzsaw1 | December 16, 2009 8:19 PM | Report abuse

He and his advisors think most independent minded persons who voted for him, are stupid enough to forget all the compromises, broken campaign promises, and vote for his reelection. They may be correct, especially if Republicans nominate a right winger.

==

Nobody could be more disappointed than I am in Obama but it would take a hell of a lot more than disappointment to compel Americans to be so irresponsible as to vote for a Republican.

Compromse and disappointment don't hold a candle to crazy.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 8:18 PM | Report abuse

For the record, I would never "threaten to take the life of, to kidnap, or to inflict bodily harm upon the President of the United States, the President-elect, the Vice President or other officer next in the order of succession to the office of President of the United States". In fact, I didn't name ANY specific politician or tyrant, below, unlike "GoldAndTanzanite" who urged that Lieberman be attacked like Berlusconi was ...

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 8:14 PM | Report abuse

No, it doesn't.

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 8:07 PM | Report abuse

The healthcare bill isn't for "personal politial considerations," it's an attempt to head off a fiscal crisis as America spirals into bankruptcy from medical costs.

And even if it was true, it beats the pants off getting the nation into a war just to create an opportunity to wear a flightsuit and call oneself a "war president."

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 8:05 PM | Report abuse

I agree, dummypants.

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 8:04 PM | Report abuse

wow, when obama preaching hope and change during the campaign who would've thought he would be ramming through a health care bill because of personal political considerations?

i dont care how well pressed his suits are--he's utter scum.

Posted by: dummypants | December 16, 2009 8:01 PM | Report abuse

wow, when obama preaching hope and change during the campaign who would've thought he would be ramming through a health care bill because of personal political considerations?

i dont care how well pressed his suits are--he's utter scum.

Posted by: dummypants | December 16, 2009 8:01 PM | Report abuse

Berlusconi's not the only politician needing an attack.

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 8:00 PM | Report abuse

You first

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 8:00 PM | Report abuse

"The tree of Liberty needs to be watered from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

-- Thomas Jefferson

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 7:54 PM | Report abuse

For both Democrats and Republican in government this is no longer the nation of Americans. This is the nation of the special interests.

==

Too generic.

This nation has been financialized, and no nation in history has ever recovered from that, and there is no indication that we ever will.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 7:49 PM | Report abuse

Today is the anniversary of the Boston Tea Party (although I am currently boycotting anything out of Boston, this is one historical event that needs to be "updated and refreshed" today).

"The tree of Liberty needs to be watered from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

-- Thomas Jefferson

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 7:49 PM | Report abuse

bsallamack:

T.axed E.nough A.lready

http://www.nationalteapartyconvention.com/home.aspx

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 7:46 PM | Report abuse

Sen. Burris (D-IL) has not stated that he will join the GOP filibuster of Obamacare:

http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/15/burris-pushes-back/

This is getting interesting ...

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 7:44 PM | Report abuse

Perhaps the only good that will come out of this bill where Americans will be penalized if they do not purchase private health insurance, is that Americans will recognize that this nation can not survive when government only considers the special interests.

The major banks have not been forced out of investment banking and back to lending because of the Wall Street interests to keep the major banks as their customers for Wall Street paper.

There are no jobs for Americans except non-exportable jobs such as caulking and installing insulation, because of the special interest of American companies that want to outsource overseas American jobs and use visas for foreign workers here in the United States.

This government even goes along with the special interest and pretends that Americans are insufficient in education and that this is the reason why an individual in India who can barely speak English is speaking to an American about their account in an American bank, instead of an American.

It is perfectly acceptable for this government to have banks that do not lend and massive unemployment instead of opposing the special interests. And now it will be perfectly acceptable for this government to penalize Americans for not buying from private insurers, instead of opposing the special interests.

For both Democrats and Republican in government this is no longer the nation of Americans. This is the nation of the special interests.

Posted by: bsallamack | December 16, 2009 7:43 PM | Report abuse

Aprogressiveindependent:

You mean a "right-winger" like Sarah Palin (who got almost 60 million votes last time around, knowing full well that a President McCain could have died his first day in office)?

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 7:42 PM | Report abuse

My 7:30 PM is NOT off-topic to "... it has also virtually guaranteed that the PRESIDENT will be able to hold a Rose Garden signing ceremony sometime next year ..." (Emphasis Added).

Besides, without topic drift we would never get more than a dozen or two posts in any one thread. There is only so much one can say about any topic and most people get out their position in one post, the rest is back and forth.

If anyone wants to discuss that part of the topic, please let me know.

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 7:39 PM | Report abuse

G and T

You don't have to comment on everything everyone says - you just end up starting fights.


Why don't you simply state your own opinion and leave all the other posters alone.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 16, 2009 7:38 PM | Report abuse

Obama has flip-flopped on so many issues since being a candidate, those people paying any attention, should wonder if he has any principle. I agree a health care bill will pass, but to describe the Senate bill as reform is being as Orweillian as Obama's pro-war speech, on behalf of receiving an unearned "peace" prize in Oslo.

With Bush II, people knew he had core principles, even if most of them were highly offensive. Obama seems to care above all, as Clinton, with staying in power, hence his eagerness to be subservient to a variety of special interest groups.

He and his advisors think most independent minded persons who voted for him, are stupid enough to forget all the compromises, broken campaign promises, and vote for his reelection. They may be correct, especially if Republicans nominate a right winger.

Posted by: Aprogressiveindependent | December 16, 2009 7:38 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 7:36 PM | Report abuse

Sanders is the chairman of the House Subcommittee on Green Jobs and the New Economy and sits on the Subcommittee on Retirement and Aging (time to kick him to the curb as well).

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 7:35 PM | Report abuse

That assumes that Obama is legally President of the United States

==

Please stop posting this troll, it's infantile and disruptive and nobody wants to read it. You've posted it hundreds of times, there is nothing to gain by posting it again, please quit it.

It's a troll, and it's off-topic.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 7:34 PM | Report abuse

I'm impressed by the anger at Lieberman, it's long overdue, and I think he's overstepped this time and is going to suffer for it. I hope that at the least he's stripped of his Vaterlandsicherheitsamt chairmanship, and it'd be great if he was kicked out of the caucus altogether.

Let him find out just how grateful the GOP is for all he's done for them, how open they are to his eclectic views.

Be great if someone could lock him outside in the snow.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 7:31 PM | Report abuse

Dr. Siguel:

That assumes that Obama is legally President of the United States ; )

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 7:30 PM | Report abuse

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) says "as of this point, I am not voting for the [health care] bill" on Fox Business Network moments ago.

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 7:28 PM | Report abuse

Nonsense, I submit. Neither the Democrats nor the President need to pass new legislation. There are other alternatives for political and practical purposes.
The President has extraordinary power poorly understood by many. The power derives from the Constitution and contracts (including grants). Practically every time the government gives money (trillions) or enforces laws, the President can impose demands to make government more effective and efficient (I reviewed the powers of the executive branch and government contracts for a previous administration).
I know how to use the power to implement major meaningful reforms in health care. The President has multiple contracts that transfer funds to health care entities and governments. They are Medicare, Medicaid, military health, government health insurance, billions for health technology, billions for state programs, etc. He also has HIPAA to modulate payments procedures.
Many of the participants in potential health reform will happily join the President and agree to meaningful reforms WITHOUT any legislation. I submit legislation is likely to be counter-productive (in its current form).
He can “mandate” or otherwise make entities an offer they should not refuse (or else lose $). He can create uniform, standard payment systems. He can create uniform, national standards for medical necessity, essentially determining what payors pay or do not pay. He can recommend standards of care (and every physician who violates them could peril from the risk). He can impose uniform, national continuing medical education and licensing requirements (the government already pays for most of the education via loans, grants, subsidies, etc.).
Every company that has or wants government contracts could be required to comply with simplification and standardization requirements. The government can create exceptions and model projects and subsidies to cover the uninsured (it already does it via coverage mandated from non-profit hospitals, subsidized health clinics, etc.). Organizing the system better would create a vast network of clinics that provide far better health outcomes to the insured than the proposed new legislation.
I created the economic analysis used to support the development of HMOs. I also have more than 25 years clinical experience as a physician at major medical centers, and I lectured to numerous professional medical societies, so I have an excellent understanding of the practice of medicine, health IT, economic analysis and other matters under discussion. Watch for my articles on these matters (this is not the best medium).
Edward Siguel, MD, PhD.

Posted by: coolfoods1 | December 16, 2009 7:28 PM | Report abuse

broadwayjoe:

If the bill that Obama signed was simply naming a post office "Healthcare Reform", that would be good enough for you too?

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 7:26 PM | Report abuse

"While the deal-making has left many liberals cold about the final product, it has also virtually guaranteed that the President will be able to hold a Rose Garden signing ceremony sometime next year, declaring victory in the overhaul of one of the stickiest wickets of social policy in the country."

In the words of S. Kenison, I like the way this guy thinks. I'll have to keep an eye on him.

BTW, very positive performance by the Fix on Matthews' show the other day. Welcome back to the fight. It may cost you a seat at Blow-der's table at the Palm, but so what.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | December 16, 2009 7:11 PM | Report abuse

ZOUK:

The funny part was that the Sanders Amendment had to be withdrawn after 179 pages of it was read aloud. LOL!!!

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 7:04 PM | Report abuse

Okay, we get it that you have very strong political/religious/hygienic views. Derailing a discussion of the benefits of a new computer graphics chip to present those views in inglorious detail may not be the best way to make friends and influence people.

==

Without topic drift we would never get more than a dozen or two posts in any one thread. There is only so much one can say about any topic and most people get out their position in one post, the rest is back and forth.

And I would rather read any amount of asides on the existence of God or whatever than read the same troll about Obama's birth certificate or Barry or the "ped" or Jake's golf game or donation boast.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 6:46 PM | Report abuse

Caution, liberal cognitive dissonance ahead:

Single-payer health care plan dies in Senate (AP)


AP - The liberals' longtime dream of a government-run health care system for all died Wednesday in the Senate, but Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont vowed it will return when the realization dawns that private insurance companies "are no longer needed."

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

Why health care will pass (and what it means)


Silly Libs. thoughts are for R's...

Posted by: ZOUK | December 16, 2009 6:44 PM | Report abuse

@BB: sounds like like one of those folks who refuses to vote and likes to think that not voting indicates rebellion, or strength of character, or induhvidualism.

"they're all crooks," the very height of sagacity

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 6:39 PM | Report abuse

@rm8471 - You'll have your opportunity in 11 months. Just remember the names of your Congressfolks.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | December 16, 2009 6:35 PM | Report abuse

Betrayal. Nothing less than that.

By congress, and at this point, Obama, too.

Fire the blasted lot of them.

NOW!

Posted by: rm8471 | December 16, 2009 6:32 PM | Report abuse

"awwww...Christmas time...a time to spend reading the spittle laden tripe of "living on 37th and O street", JakeDuh(Sign this petition and give some money to Alan Keyes) and Zouk (my mommy is calling me for dinner)."

Really... glad I checked out and missed this rightwing 'christian' orgy of hate and slime.

Posted by: drindl | December 16, 2009 6:28 PM | Report abuse

Overall a decent summary. Wavering Democrats in the Senate should remember 1994. Ironically, I remember hearing speeches in the Senate where Republicans say they agree on 80% of what's in the bill. It strikes me as (a) illogical that the remaining 20% will cause the death of democracy, capitalism and world peace and (b) the notion that this is the last word on health care reform is quaint.

And since the topic train has gone merrily off track, I thought I'd post another rule from MacWorld's 8 Rules to Internet unpopularity:

2. Passionate cluelessness Okay, we get it that you have very strong political/religious/hygienic views. Derailing a discussion of the benefits of a new computer graphics chip to present those views in inglorious detail may not be the best way to make friends and influence people.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | December 16, 2009 6:27 PM | Report abuse

Proof of god: The guy appears in front of me and starts performing miracles like making my damn experiments work the first time I try them.

Posted by: DDAWD | December 16, 2009 6:23 PM | Report abuse

And a thoughtful atheist also has to harbor some doubt. I don't know what happens when we die. I don't know that there isn't a cosmic entity out there. In fact, the existence of god is far more provable than the existence of no god.

==

Then give it a shot. A demand to prove a negative is a logical fallacy so yeah, it's really hard.

I know what happens after we die: we decompose. I believe life is thermodynamic and molecular and that we have no undying part. Death is the end of homeostasis and the end of thought, and "souls" are nothing more than the basis token of theological blackmail.

For me the question was finally settled, endit, first time I had pentothal for a wisdom tooth extraction. If a few CCs of clear fluid can completely remove 90 minutes from my life the idea that something survives the destruction of the brain is just laughable.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 6:02 PM | Report abuse

I don't think being agnostic and being religious are mutually exclusive. It's the braindead idiots who refuse to harbor doubt, but the more thoughtful people are more than willing to acknowledge they are wrong. Test of faith is based on harboring doubt. It's easy for me to have faith that there's a telephone next to me since I can see it and touch it. Not so easy for a thoughtful religious person to believe in god. Even Mother Theresa had her doubts.

And a thoughtful atheist also has to harbor some doubt. I don't know what happens when we die. I don't know that there isn't a cosmic entity out there. In fact, the existence of god is far more provable than the existence of no god.

I tell people I'm an atheist just because it's a reflection of my lifestyle, not a reflection of certainty. I don't go to church, I don't read religious texts, I don't pray, my behavior isn't guided by fear of cosmic retribution against immorality. That's just how I live. I'm not militant about it and I certainly don't berate people who do believe because 1) I could be wrong and 2) it's just an azshole thing to do.

Posted by: DDAWD | December 16, 2009 5:56 PM | Report abuse

JakeD - don't get too cute about your links - you know perfectly well I am not discussing Cambridge. And if 37andO is allowed to post his screed, I would say your little threats mean nothing.

I would like to come here once and not have your dishonest, bigoted based nonsense on every third post.

Posted by: LABC | December 16, 2009 5:53 PM | Report abuse

That being said, there are several alleged humans rat cheer in this blog who are clearly less valuable than a single sparrow.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 5:50 PM | Report abuse

See now John Lackey will get $82 million dollars to throw a baseball every few days for five years (I thought he could have gotten the new Gold Standard, $20m/yr, but he was not greedy). Stay with the Xmas spirit, if you keep giving money away, you keep getting more to give. It is working.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 16, 2009 5:50 PM | Report abuse

I wasn't aware that Cambridge University was a "racist organization". YMMV : )

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 5:48 PM | Report abuse

You are arguing with someone who actually believes that birds are more valuable than humans.

==

I'll leave the opener untouched.

A pity you lack basic reading comprehension skills, but if you can't distinguish a single human from an entire species, well, I feel sorry for you.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 5:47 PM | Report abuse

JakeDuh, you are a bully and troll who has been linking people to racist organizations and has been irresponsibily flacking lies about the President's birth place for months. If anyone needs to be removed from a board, you would be a prime candidate.

Posted by: LABC | December 16, 2009 5:47 PM | Report abuse

Back on topic:

The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) backed out of an event with other organizations promoting the Senate healthcare reform bill Wednesday over concerns about changes made to the legislation to accommodate centrist Democrats.

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 5:46 PM | Report abuse

LABC:

Careful with the "personal attacks" (see 12/11 post from Chris Cillizza below).

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 5:44 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 5:41 PM | Report abuse

and uhhh, JakeDuh, just because you live on this board doesn't make you any less of a troll...

Posted by: LABC | December 16, 2009 5:41 PM | Report abuse

And, one data point: never knew a beast who voted Republican.
Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite
--------------------------------------------
And a counter data point, I know a lot of poops who voted Democratic.

Posted by: leapin | December 16, 2009 5:41 PM | Report abuse

awwww...Christmas time...a time to spend reading the spittle laden tripe of "living on 37th and O street", JakeDuh(Sign this petition and give some money to Alan Keyes) and Zouk (my mommy is calling me for dinner).

Posted by: LABC | December 16, 2009 5:39 PM | Report abuse

You are arguing with someone who actually believes that birds are more valuable than humans.

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 5:33 PM | Report abuse

The same agency that has caused thousands of deaths in the third world by banning the substance that can limit malaria.

==

Ahistorical paranoid nonsense.

DDT was already ineffective on mosquitos when it was banned, and it was killing birds.

Not banning DDT might have saved a few lives, that's very debatable, but it would have made entire avian genera extinct.

Compared to the extinction of even a single vertebrate species I am not shedding a single tear for a few overpopulated humans. Don't expect someone like you to agree, of course, being a religionist who believes human life is "sacred."

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 5:26 PM | Report abuse

leapin and shrink2:

You see, it's no use trying to reason with him.

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 5:25 PM | Report abuse

If I had to bet, I would say there are forces well beyond human understanding.
If you tried to work with any animal on understanding the rationale behind the mechanism by which toilets empty and fill, you would realize they are incapable of understanding things we think are pretty obvious (poo stinks).

==

Hmmm, cats cover their offal without being trained too and even a kitten catches on about the box.

I have a counterexample for you: parrots. No arboreal bird has to worry about being tracked by their droppings, it falls from the canopy and to the ground, so defecation is all but insensible .. yet a parrot can learn not to poop in the car. I take my cockatoo on long drives, he holds his poop .. hold him out the window and plop! he's been saving it all along.

And, one data point: never knew a beast who voted Republican.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 5:23 PM | Report abuse

G+T:

Along with DDAWD, I'm not sure what you think you're accomplishing here. Everyone else was fine with just ignoring the trolls ; )

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 5:21 PM | Report abuse

while children die of Third World ailments.
Don't think that's what the framers had in mind and only the most despicable Americans would call that "beautiful."
--------------------------------------
Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite |
That reminds me, If Obama doesn’t get his way he threatens the nation that he will govern through the unaccountable EPA. The same agency that has caused thousands of deaths in the third world by banning the substance that can limit malaria.

Posted by: leapin | December 16, 2009 5:19 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 5:19 PM | Report abuse

"I firmly believe that there is no God."

Well that is too easy. What about the Kami?

If I had to bet, I would say there are forces well beyond human understanding.
If you tried to work with any animal on understanding the rationale behind the mechanism by which toilets empty and fill, you would realize they are incapable of understanding things we think are pretty obvious (poo stinks). Similarly, unless we entertain the conceit that we can know anything given enough study, we have to deal with this fact: the human brain can pose questions beyond its ability to generate answers.

And what about the Goddess(es?) of Parking Karma!? Most of my parking experiences are like a Doris Day movie, I drive up to where I want to park and there it is...the space.
But I work with the Goddess, I never get entitled, nor depend on her power, it is a love thing. The Greeks talked a lot about working with Gods and Goddesses.

Confusionism is more fun than religiosity, atheism included.


Posted by: shrink2 | December 16, 2009 5:17 PM | Report abuse

G and T,

I'm not interested in legislating who threw the mud first. All the people I named are now covered in it. And, if you read through the previous comments, it's clear the majority of people have had enough of it.

Act civilly. Or leave. If you don't, I'll have to ban you.

Consider this a last warning.

Chris

Posted by: Chris_Cillizza | December 11, 2009 5:07 PM

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/the-line/friday-governors-line-an-embar.html

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 5:15 PM | Report abuse

Checks and balances, huh?

A million people a year going bankrupt from healthcare costs, Democrats trying to do something about it, Republicans siding with rapacious insurance companies and against the insured, while children die of Third World ailments.

Don't think that's what the framers had in mind and only the most despicable Americans would call that "beautiful."

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Neglecting to mention yet again that Republicans stand firmly in the way of doing the nation's business, and that their only hope for getting back into power is that the electorate will mistake their intransigence for Democratic ineffectualness.
It'll work on Some of the People, of course.
Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite
-------------------------------------------
Checks and balances. The three branches of government. Still beautiful things from the framers despite the efforts of Dems to subvert them through judicial activism and gross overplay of executive powers. The three branches are to be equal. Obama is not to be more powerful.

Posted by: leapin | December 16, 2009 5:10 PM | Report abuse

Obama is the one who said that he would bring bi-partisanship to Washington - THAT is one thing that Obama was elected on - that is what the American people were voting for.

To blame the Republicans is more of the same.


It is also LYING.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 16, 2009 5:02 PM | Report abuse

According to data in the new Washington Post-ABC News poll, MAJORITIES believe the costs of their own health care as well as the nation's overall health care will rise if the bill becomes a law. Just 37 percent believe the quality of care they receive will be better under the new plan as compared to 53 percent who said the care would be superior if the status quo was maintained.

(Emphasis Added)

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 5:00 PM | Report abuse

Health Care is a HUGE problem for the democrats IF IT DOES GET PASSED.

No one wants it.

==

A lie. Majorities want it.

Your own position of course is mere opposition, nothing to do with the merits, and lacking recognition that healthcare in the USA is already in crisis.

Obama needs to get the bill passed with no compromises with Republicans, nada, nothing.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 4:57 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Cillizza:

Instead of posting the "Fix Song of the Day" on your Facebook page, how about re-visiting your "final warning" from Friday?

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 4:53 PM | Report abuse

...the gap between Obama's statements about changing how Washington works on the campaign trail and what he has accomplished (or didn't accomplish) in office would be broadcast for all the country to see.

==

Neglecting to mention yet again that Republicans stand firmly in the way of doing the nation's business, and that their only hope for getting back into power is that the electorate will mistake their intransigence for Democratic ineffectualness.

It'll work on Some of the People, of course.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 4:52 PM | Report abuse

Chris:

Health Care is a HUGE problem for the democrats IF IT DOES GET PASSED.


No one wants it.


In poll after poll, the American people have been saying that they do not want the health care plan - they do not trust Obama with such a massive expansion of the federal government.


What part of that do they not understand?

ON Obama's promises to be be BIPARTISAN - THAT IS WHAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE VOTED FOR.


Obama should have made a massive effort to include the Republicans - and kept on making that effort.


Obama is a FRAUD to his own campaign last year.

Obama would have been much better off to concentrate on the economy - and put forth a limited centrist agenda which he could have gotten the Republicans to endorse.


THAT is what he promised last year - to bring a different story to Washington partisan politics.


Instead, Obama has been HYPER-PARTISAN


A Fraud is a Fraud - people can see that.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 16, 2009 4:52 PM | Report abuse

Just cut it out. It's you and only you. Even drindl has been ignoring.

Posted by: DDAWD


Only one problem, no one will talk to him. He is as desperate for a friend and someone to chat up as Barry is for the first sample of anything he could call a success.

In his hour of need, even being ridiculed by "the Trolls" will have to suffice for the mountain of attention needed for the frozen-in-adolescence personality.

Posted by: ZOUK | December 16, 2009 4:43 PM | Report abuse

Want [your] job [sent to India or China]? Vote R. Simple.
==
Fixed your post for you
Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite
-------------------------------------
They will come right to your place of employment on a work visa. I believe there was another campaign promise to limit such situations but, alas, more broken campaign rhetoric.

Posted by: leapin | December 16, 2009 4:43 PM | Report abuse

Only agnostics are intellectually honest.

I am a militant agnostic, "I don't know and neither do you!" Just not here, with the militant that is.

==

I'm not a militant atheist but I find casual references to God to be offensive. The presumption that such an absurd idea is real strikes me as the world's biggest apron for the world's largest children to hide behind.

I'm not agnostic, I firmly believe that there is no God. Our ancestors were illiterate herders with the ability to think about times other than the present and with no understanding of how they or the world got here. We have those understandings now, and Cæser gets it all. There is nothing left over to render unto God.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 4:43 PM | Report abuse

how about vietnam with limited connectivity?

==

You're daft.

I've posted on here from a hotel lobby in Phu Quốc Island, remote as it gets. There are internet cafes even in Chau Đoc Province, and connectivity in the cities is excellent.

What's with the "red and green" stuff? Doesn't map to anything I see in my work.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 4:38 PM | Report abuse

Checked back and...oh well, it is silly time. Too bad, this money for the health industry stimulus bill is awfully important and the subject was not exactly exhausted by the foregoing.

But silly time it is...Religion? Atheism? Atheists believe too.

Only agnostics are intellectually honest.

I am a militant agnostic, "I don't know and neither do you!" Just not here, with the militant that is.

Actually, I am a Confusionist, an autistically derived derivative of religiosity which holds as its central assumption (we don't know):

The more important a question is, the less likely we are to know the answer.

Confusionists can only entertain creation myths, they are too important to understand. We can't know why we are here and we can't know the meaning of life or any of that whooooo whooo stuff. We just know what happy people do, they love each other, they give more than they get, happy people are really pretty homogeneous. The Miserables, on the other hand? Oh the diversity.

Even if the assumption is not true, it is easy to ignore religion and spirituality and Big Questions in general and still live happily ever after being a good person. The I AM does not need to be rationalized; it is fun to stay confused, plus, you never have to argue with believers.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 16, 2009 4:35 PM | Report abuse

Oprah is an *entertainer* on *daytime television*

grip <-- get one

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite
---------------------------
Yes she is and a close and personal house guest of B and M Obama who helped introduce him and endorsed him to the general public. What Oprah endorses, people buy.

Posted by: leapin | December 16, 2009 4:35 PM | Report abuse

I suppose a career distinguishing red from green could be sent overseas easily enough. how about vietnam with limited connectivity?

all you can eat schoolyards.

Posted by: ZOUK | December 16, 2009 4:33 PM | Report abuse

Want [your] job [sent to India or China]? Vote R. Simple.

==

Fixed your post for you

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 4:29 PM | Report abuse

Wow, a liberal shirker advising someone else how to keep their job.

Funniest of the day.

Ranks up there with "pass this pork today or the world ends."

I thought liberals specialized in eliminating jobs, except government and donors of course.

Want job? Vote R. Simple.

1 of 7 households know exactly what I am talking about.

Posted by: ZOUK | December 16, 2009 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Oprah is not a Repub or a conservative.

==

Oprah is an *entertainer* on *daytime television*

grip <-- get one

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, cut it out, G+T!!!

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 4:20 PM | Report abuse

Shemp attacks Moe. Was that an eye gouge or a round the world hammer head?

Posted by: ZOUK | December 16, 2009 4:19 PM | Report abuse

The only ones I've heard calling him "The one" or "The messiah" are Republicans or conservatives.

Posted by: JRM2
------------------------------
Oprah is not a Repub or a conservative.

Posted by: leapin | December 16, 2009 4:15 PM | Report abuse

G+T, everyone else was fine with just ignoring the trolls. I'm not sure what you think you're accomplishing here. I'm an atheist too, but I don't feel the need to bring it up every time someone mentions god.

Just cut it out. It's you and only you. Even drindl has been ignoring.

Posted by: DDAWD | December 16, 2009 4:15 PM | Report abuse

Every post of mine (except my 3:39 PM clarification to ZOUK and this instant aside) has been ON TOPIC, civil, and devoid of any prohibited "name-calling". Hopefully, Mr. Cillizza DOES read this thread and starts banning asap.

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 4:11 PM | Report abuse

cilizza, look at the morning versus afternoon blog to determine the cause and effect. It is clear as day and night, so to speak.

Posted by: ZOUK | December 16, 2009 4:11 PM | Report abuse

I found the grade that brings up the average:

closing gitmo in one year, well moving it actually because the location is the problem.

Semester grade keeping campaign promises: D+

Posted by: ZOUK | December 16, 2009 4:09 PM | Report abuse

Hey, Chris Cillizza. Read your own blog once in a while, would you?

The experienced among us can PgDn past all this crap but most people who wander in here from the front page are going to be repelled, costing you the hits you need to keep your job. Remember Dan Froomkin?

You can proscribe certain specific practices like "name-calling" but that isn't the problem here. Between the infantile goading and trolling from JakeD and the *palpable* sickness coming from every zouk post, this place is turning into a sewer.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 4:06 PM | Report abuse

Barry's prediction about unemployment:
won't go above 8%
actual figure - 10%
Semester grade economics:F

Barry's decision on military:
released in March
Re released in December
Semester grade military science:D-

Barry's diplomacy in Iran
Predicted to suffer consequences in april
Actual result: hillary admits total failure and wasted year
Diplomacy grade: F

Barry's energy cap and tax:
passed by the house in March
Actual result: nothing since
Energy grade:D

Now a little Liberal math to average out all these subjects:

Overall grade : B+

cool huh. Same way he got through Harvard. I have his secret transcript here. no one else has ever seen it. Wonder why?

Posted by: ZOUK | December 16, 2009 4:05 PM | Report abuse

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/16/gibbs-lashes-back-at-dean_n_394596.html

The White House today suggested that Dr. Dean is "irrational" : )

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 4:03 PM | Report abuse

"I don’t believe that Obama is “the one” or “the messiah”. For one thing he only graded himself as a “B+”. God would be an “A”.
Posted by: leapin | "
--
The only ones I've heard calling him "The one" or "The messiah" are Republicans or conservatives.

Posted by: JRM2 | December 16, 2009 3:59 PM | Report abuse

Back on the topic of healthcare reform:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/HealthCare/health-care-reform-senate-joe-lieberman-ben-nelson/story?id=9351342

Now, all of a sudden FAILING TO PASS THIS BILL by Christmas will "bankrupt" the federal government! Talk about "scare tactics". GOP: delay this bill as long as you can!!!

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 3:59 PM | Report abuse

I don’t believe that Obama is “the one” or “the messiah”. For one thing he only graded himself as a “B+”. God would be an “A”.

==

Not what I asked. I've already read your screeching about Obama and I don't give a crap. I asked you if you believe in a God, in a giant eternal invisible spirit who control the cosmos and can be telepathically petitioned to grant favors.

I harbor no such belief and haven't since I was 12.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 3:58 PM | Report abuse

the blog posting "genius" will try to discredit economics and scholarship and end up discrediting itself, as usual.

how utterly Pavlovian.

Have a biscuit.

Posted by: ZOUK | December 16, 2009 3:58 PM | Report abuse

Zouk, you've got that wrong. FDR spoke of the Four Horsemen of the Republican Apocolypse: Destruction, Delay, Deceit and Despair. They are all still busy parts of a tired Republican playbook.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | December 16, 2009 3:55 PM | Report abuse

As far as I can remember, Buchanan won a Nobel prize in Econ for clearing up public goods and choice, based on Austrian theories which include selfishness.

Note, this was a real nobel prize, not one of those fake peace prizes

==

The "Nobel Prize in Economics" isn't a real Nobel, it's a Swedish banking prize.

The Peace Prize is an authentic Nobel.

Alfred Nobel didn't think economics was rigorous enough or useful enough to merit such a distinction, and he was right. And still is.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 3:55 PM | Report abuse

Do you believe in God too?
Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite
---------------------------
I don’t believe that Obama is “the one” or “the messiah”. For one thing he only graded himself as a “B+”. God would be an “A”.

Posted by: leapin | December 16, 2009 3:55 PM | Report abuse

As far as I can remember, Buchanan won a Nobel prize in Econ for clearing up public goods and choice, based on Austrian theories which include selfishness.

Note, this was a real nobel prize, not one of those fake peace prizes

note 2 - the moonbats on this site have no understanding of basic economics whatsoever and will probably try to find a way to minimize the brilliant conclusions contained in this theory.

note 3 - the ped pollutes this environment daily, spreads around his "disease" and leaves his garbage opinions lying around for all the rats to consume. Make that democRATS.

note 4 - expect the usual histrionics and hysteria as is typical with a teenage girl fraught with a busy signal on the line.

the blog posting "genius" will try to discredit economics and scholarship and end up discrediting itself, as usual.

Posted by: ZOUK | December 16, 2009 3:51 PM | Report abuse

I don’t think ZOUK believes in what Obama has to sell.

==

Do you believe in God too?

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 3:50 PM | Report abuse

wouldn't go around letting people know I believe in the supernatural if I were you.
Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite
-----------------------------------------
I don’t think ZOUK believes in what Obama has to sell.

Posted by: leapin | December 16, 2009 3:48 PM | Report abuse

Not if it is free, requires no new taxes or fees, and doesn’t add to our crushing debt which is only “possible” under liberal utopianism.

==

typical rightwingnut, expects government to wait on him hand and foot but doesn't want to pay for it.

In another time we called that "stealing"

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 3:47 PM | Report abuse

a wise God

==

I wouldn't go around letting people know I believe in the supernatural if I were you.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 3:45 PM | Report abuse

Robotian totalitarianism.

==

Common resources.

Monsanto efforts aside, nobody owns the atmosphere, nobody has a right to spread disease, nobody has a right to leave trash laying around to attract rats that spread plague.

I wouldn't expect a wingnut to understand, of course, selfishness being a virtue in RandWorld.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 3:43 PM | Report abuse

Please donate today:

The Fund for Personal Liberty
7190 Windflower Pl NW
Seabeck, WA 98380

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 3:43 PM | Report abuse

so there is indeed evil in the world.

On the other hand, a wise God prohibited the passing on of demented notions to another generation of fools in this case.

Unfortunately, Darwin works a little slow for my tastes.

Posted by: ZOUK | December 16, 2009 3:42 PM | Report abuse

I say mandate away.
Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite

----------------------------
Robotian totalitarianism.

Posted by: leapin | December 16, 2009 3:41 PM | Report abuse

ZOUK:

If think he was referring to leaving the USA (not here) next year. 2010 can't come soon enough!!!

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 3:38 PM | Report abuse

I take it that JakeD and his Randian Bircher nutjobs oppose mandated water and sewer.

==

Americans are suckers for "choice," the wingnuts most of all.

"Don't FORCE me to pay for other peoples' utilities!"

It really gets annoying when it comes to advertising. A tax-prep ad shows a young woman with a nose-wrinkling smile .. "Taxes MY way!!"

Xmas tree lots that distinguish themselves by offering "custom flocking". "Little more over there .. put it on thick."

A hundred fifty bloody varieties of aspirin.

Try to walk around someone blocking the escalator .. he'll frostily remind you that it's his "personal choice" to ride up passively.

I say mandate away.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 3:33 PM | Report abuse

"Enjoy your free market sh*thole, I'm outa here.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | "


who ever said there was not a God and that He was not a good God?

Posted by: ZOUK | December 16, 2009 3:33 PM | Report abuse

"Any mandate to purchase health insurance is an invalid exercise of the powers granted to Congress by Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution of the United States," says Kent Masterson Brown, lead counsel for The Fund for Personal Liberty (TFPL), adding that the fund "will promptly challenge the Constitutionality of any mandate to purchase health insurance."

TFPL currently is underwriting and providing legal counsel in Hall v. Sebelius, an October 2008 lawsuit in which five senior citizens are challenging HHS and Social Security Administration policies forcing elderly American citizens to participate in Medicare, Part A, the hospital insurance benefit program, or lose their Social Security benefits.

http://promotionsforlife.wordpress.com/2009/11/20/contact-your-2-senators-today-to-kill-the-health-care-bill-here-is-why/

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 3:32 PM | Report abuse

I take it that JakeD and his Randian Bircher nutjobs oppose mandated water and sewer.
Posted by: MerrillFrank
-----------------------------------------
Not if it is free, requires no new taxes or fees, and doesn’t add to our crushing debt which is only “possible” under liberal utopianism.

Posted by: leapin | December 16, 2009 3:29 PM | Report abuse

MerrillFrank:

No, I don't.

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 3:29 PM | Report abuse

"Enjoy your free market sh*thole, I'm outa here.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | "
---
They want a free market except for when it comes to purchasing pharmaceutical drugs.

That is called a rigged market.

Posted by: JRM2 | December 16, 2009 3:28 PM | Report abuse

I take it that JakeD and his Randian Bircher nutjobs oppose mandated water and sewer.

Posted by: MerrillFrank | December 16, 2009 3:24 PM | Report abuse

Drindl: First, I have followed this VERY closely, that is why I am angry.

Secondly, one word: RECONCILIATION

Republicans used it to pass tax breaks for the rich, even without a public mandate, but the Dems won't use it even WITH a public mandate for some kind of Govt. run healthcare.

Posted by: JRM2 | December 16, 2009 3:24 PM | Report abuse

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2009/12/16/us/politics/politics-us-usa-healthcare.html

The bill is being watered down and larded up at the same time, the bill is a mixed metaphor, it is headed for disaster.

It is time for Democrats to look at themselves in the mirror and say, "You are a weakling, you won't do what is right if it means you must fight and corruption is not something you really worry about because everyone does it so why bother to be mean and after all, so long as everyone had a seat at the table and felt included, we can feel good about the process." Then prepare for many more years of wringing your hands and knotting your brows as the people who enjoyed crushing your feeble attempts at reform, retake, the power.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 16, 2009 3:23 PM | Report abuse

The one guy I trust on this issue is Dr. Howard Dean, remember about a week ago he called this bill "Real Reform" when the medicare buy-in was in the bill?

Last night he basically said to junk this bill, that it would more than likely exacerbate the very problems it is trying to solve.

Posted by: JRM2 | December 16, 2009 3:19 PM | Report abuse

are small children allowed on this board?

Posted by: drindl | December 16, 2009 3:19 PM | Report abuse

the flaming troll having arrived, the blog will now observe a few hours of idiocy, ranting and general miasma.

See you tomorrow Reason, Intellect, Debate and Sanity, aka, the four horsemen of the liberal apocolypse!

Posted by: ZOUK | December 16, 2009 3:18 PM | Report abuse

Wooooo... Today is the Anniversary of the Boston Tea Party ! wooooooooo

A day for all eastern elites, free lunchers, and other government dependents to change into their CCCP tee-shirts and go to the lowest point in their residence and hide until tomorrow when the pain of the memory of this American history passes.

woooooo

Posted by: leapin | December 16, 2009 3:16 PM | Report abuse

I sympathize with you and your baby, especially. I sincerely hope he is ok.

"But Drindl: Until ALL politicians get the message that unless they work for the American people and not the lobbyists or special interests then they will be voted out , "

But how is letting republicans win, who are even more industry owned, going to do that? You are angry with the wrong people. If you have followed this closely, you will see that the reason we are where we are is that repubicans, including lieberman. always intended to kill reform. Democrats have tried and been held hostage by the fact that we don't have the numbers to block a filibuster. We need at least 3 more reliable Dems in the Senate, for one thing.

If we get no bill now, the insurance industry will have a huge win. they will understand they can get away with anything they want, that they have all the power and complete immunity and impunity -- and if you think they screwed you before, just wait.

Posted by: drindl | December 16, 2009 3:14 PM | Report abuse

@drindl - Because, as I explained they will have to accept people with pre-existing conditions and they will also be able to greatly increase premiums for older people such as myself.

I would feel really great if you could point out anything in this bill that benefits the consumer, anything at all.

Yes, they are jacking the rates anyway but the whole point of this bill is to keep costs down. Please show me some evidence that it will achieve this goal, I see none..

A super-majority in congress, nearly a year exhausting wrangling and THIS is the best they can come up with?, it is a joke and not a very funny one at that.

They need to earn my vote, not assume it will be there.

Posted by: JRM2 | December 16, 2009 3:14 PM | Report abuse

Gotta love the 'We'll pass anything to show we're doing something even if it's really bad and won't work" mentality.

==

Uh, what we have now is severely broken. We spend more than anyone on health care and we get less buck-bang than anyone, and the costs are rising every year.

Enjoy your free market sh*thole, I'm outa here.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 16, 2009 3:12 PM | Report abuse

Of course the health care bill will pass - after it's watered down enough to please the usual thieves and crooks: the republicans, big pharma, and the insurance companies. In America, nothing is ever enacted that doesn't benefit business and parasites such as Lieberman, who lives inside the bowels of the insurance companies that are headquartered in Connecticut. American business and its promoters are busily destroying America for profit and don't care if people croak for lack of medical care and medicines, or for lack of work that the traitor businesses have shipped off to China and India. What's important is the profit, come hell or high water, so business happily gouges anyone they can. Please give me a call when the revolution comes so that I can volunteer to operate the guillotine. The business-traitors and their parasites will be first in line.

Posted by: faszfeju | December 16, 2009 3:09 PM | Report abuse

"and I will bet you right now that it will greatly increase our premiums to a point where I may not be able to buy insurance for my critically ill infant son, it may cost him his life."

why would it increase premiums? or how? mine are already going up 20% a year alomg with the copays and deductibles. I pay more every year for less, and I am sure you do too. keeping things the way they are is more likely to cost lives than doing nothing.

Posted by: drindl | December 16, 2009 3:07 PM | Report abuse

Gotta love the 'We'll pass anything to show we're doing something even if it's really bad and won't work" mentality.

Posted by: FLvet | December 16, 2009 2:59 PM | Report abuse

"Don't let your anger betray you into becoming a fool.

Posted by: drindl | December 16, 2009 2:38 PM "
---------
Let's see:
Crap health care bill- nothing in there that benefits the consumer, nothing to eliminate the lifetime cap, nothing to keep the insurance agencies from jacking the rates (for having to accept people with pre-existing conditions) and I will bet you right now that it will greatly increase our premiums to a point where I may not be able to buy insurance for my critically ill infant son, it may cost him his life.

Not withdrawing from Iraq - increasing "blackwater" type private contractors

"Moving" Guatanamo instead of "closing" it

No financial or Wall Street reform

Nothing being done about global warming, just a cursory visit from Obama to Copenhagen.

The Dems are not doing what they were elected to do. I will vote for the best candidate regardless of party though I doubt I will find a single Republican in that category.

But Drindl: Until ALL politicians get the message that unless they work for the American people and not the lobbyists or special interests then they will be voted out , we will always get the same result.

So don't let your ideology betray you into becoming a fool.

Posted by: JRM2 | December 16, 2009 2:54 PM | Report abuse

terrapin31590us is right. An alienated base will not turn out.

Democrats were the good dogs, the dog that did not bark during the Bush Cheney years (a searing Oliphant cartoon). Now we have the Blue Dogs.

It the tent gets too big, the center can not hold. (3 4 3!)

Apart from the bipartisan disaster of crony capitalism, the problem of the mushy, ineffective agenda is greater for Democrats than for Republicans.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 16, 2009 2:50 PM | Report abuse

ZOUK:

He'd better get (Acting) President Biden to sign it, just in case, too.

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 2:46 PM | Report abuse

That's right, JRM2 (and terrapin31590us):

"Don't let your anger betray you into becoming a fool."

Here's another petition to sign:

http://www.freeourhealthcarenow.com/

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 2:43 PM | Report abuse

Of course SOMETHING will pass. As with all liberal efforts it will not address the "problem" it set out to correct and instead will be laden with pork, big government interference in everyone's lives and the inevitable unforeseen consequence.

this present ident is so desperate to show a first, scant notion of a success in his pitiful career as the know nothing, do nothing, golf playing, apology making, speech reading loser that he is, that he would sign a banana peel if they sent it up Penns av.

Posted by: ZOUK | December 16, 2009 2:42 PM | Report abuse

Well, I wouldn't call it 'fixed' really, Andy, but it's a step in the right direction, and there will be other incremental steps till we get to a robust public option.

Right now, if there will no longer be any death panel recissions by insurance companies -- the real death panels -- that is an improvement. If they have to accept you regardless of preexisitng conditions, that is an improvement.

To me, something is better than nothing. JRM2 -- you want Rs back in power, you want an even more corrupt and clueless president than GW Bush, someone as incredibly mediocre as Sarah Palin? Don't let your anger betray you into becoming a fool.

Posted by: drindl | December 16, 2009 2:38 PM | Report abuse

shrink2:

You will only answer my questions when (if) an actual law is enacted?

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 2:37 PM | Report abuse

APPARENTLY CENSORED AGAIN -- AND I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE IT LAYING DOWN.

To fellow Fixistas:

My repeated attempts today to post a comment here on the status of the health care reform legislation have been unsuccessful. The evidence strongly indicates that The Washington Post had nothing to do with the "held for blog owner" message I received each time I tried to post. (I am also blocked from the blog pages at ACLU.org, where I have posted many essays and commentaries in the past.)

It appears that a rogue government surveillance program operated out of the Homeland Security- administered fusion center located in Newtown, PA is responsible for what I believe to be blatant and unconstitutional censorship.

What words and opinions have triggered such an Orwellian response to my commentary? Here's why I say "Orwellian." Strange as it seems, the apparent censors allowed the posting to be published at http://poynter.org, in the "reporting and writing" blog section.

The fact that the comment passed through the apparent censorship filter one one media site, and was rejected on The Washington Post's web site, says to me that a real-time censorship regime just showed its hand -- that there is absolutely no justification for this apparent censorship under any rationale whatsoever. If there were legitimate grounds for such censorship (and I frankly can't think of any), the censorship would be evenly applied.

If any lawmakers are reading this, hear my words: My repeated experiences demonstrate that unconstitutional, draconian, Orwellian censorship is happening in the United States of America, and that those officials and operatives who are responsible for this censorship regime think they are above the law.

Congress, Team Obama (special attention, Atty. Gen. Eric Holder):

Are these apparent censors above the law? If not, why is their apparent censorship so blatant, malicious and ham-fisted? When will our lawmakers and other public officials restore civil and human rights in America?

See also: http://NowPublic.com/scrivener re: "GESTAPO USA"

Posted by: scrivener50 | December 16, 2009 2:35 PM | Report abuse

The key political point missed by the President is that off year election R voters will give him no credit for any of this and the alienated D base will not turn out. Having compromised many core beliefs of the Democratic party in furtherance of the empty goal of passing "something" 2010 will be a foisting on our own petard. Just another (sad) example of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

Posted by: terrapin31590us | December 16, 2009 2:32 PM | Report abuse

It really is a health care industry stimulus package, that is the only thing we know for sure.

We are all already paying into the health care industry, use it or not. We will continue to create and consume lots more health care and we will all pay more for that.

America needs new jobs. But health care reform?. Like Dean and every doctor I know, we can't call it that.

None of the rest of it is worth debating at this point until it actually emerges as law with all of its numbers, including time numbers attached.

Remember, the larding process is never over until the fat industry sings.

2 4 2!


Posted by: shrink2 | December 16, 2009 2:31 PM | Report abuse

The thing about the GOP turnout that CC mentions is that there is no guarantee that they will turn out for the GOP if they nominate moderate candidates like Crist, Hutchinson, etc. The kicker is that if the GOP nominate the Red-blooded TEA party favorites then they will alienate the moderate independent voters. IF that happens and the democrats can pass Healthcare, climate reform, and bank reform then the Democrats will not only not lose seats, but will most likely pick up a few as well.

If the senate GOP was smart (which I doubt with McConnell in charge) they would release Snowe and Collins to vote for the Senate's bill and make the argument that it was their opposition to the Public Option that kept the bill from being the third pillar of the Soc Sec, Medicare group.

Also it should be pointed out that 7 presidents have tried to fix healthcare in this country and this was the first one that looks like they might pull it off.

Posted by: AndyR3 | December 16, 2009 2:27 PM | Report abuse

Thank you, JRM2. Please sign the petition below:

http://www.patriotupdate.com/obamacare

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 2:25 PM | Report abuse

This bill is junk and I hope the Dems get routed for it.

Abandon your supporters and they will abandon you.

Posted by: JRM2 | December 16, 2009 2:24 PM | Report abuse

Everyone else who wants to kill this bill now, call Congress and sign the petition today!

http://www.patriotupdate.com/obamacare

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 2:22 PM | Report abuse

"why do you think that healthy 21-22 year olds or older Americans who get all of their medical needs met in Mexico"

How sad it is that even rightiwngers admit that the Mexican medical system is now better than ours and yet they work to prevent Americans from getting the same level of care as Mexicans do.

Posted by: drindl | December 16, 2009 2:20 PM | Report abuse

best ever, shrink!

We can now have an award called the Mixie, for the best mixed metaphors. You're the first winner and you will be hard to top.

Posted by: drindl | December 16, 2009 2:17 PM | Report abuse

"I love mixed metaphors"

Thank you, I can get out of my cringe.
I love them and I hate them.
But I only love them when someone else does it.

In The New Yorker, I always search for the 'Block that Metaphor' piece in tiny font at the bottom of some random page.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 16, 2009 2:17 PM | Report abuse

shrink2:

Besides this being a healthcare industry stimulus package, why do you think that healthy 21-22 year olds or older Americans who get all of their medical needs met in Mexico should be FORCED BY LAW to purchase healthcare insurance? What's next, mandatory auto insurance even if you don't drive a car?

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 2:15 PM | Report abuse

"Of course you know he is not serious, that was a warning shot, he is trying to stop the bleeding.

Posted by: shrink2"

Yeah, I think so too.

I love mixed metaphors, by the way.

Posted by: DDAWD | December 16, 2009 2:11 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 2:10 PM | Report abuse

Pat Boone? LOL! Is he still alive? Or is this his mummified remains?

60 Plus is a front group for in the insurance industry. What a surprise that will be fighting as usual, for the right to screw people.

Posted by: drindl | December 16, 2009 2:10 PM | Report abuse

I am sorry, I hope that was the stupidest mixed metaphor I will ever employ.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 16, 2009 2:08 PM | Report abuse

So, let me get this straight: just when public opinion is tanking for Obama and healthcare reform -- see "Polling Shows Democrats Losing Healthcare PR Fight" thread below -- that's exactly when these Democrats are going to shove this down our throats?

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/morning-fix/1-2-cross-missouri-democratic.html

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 2:07 PM | Report abuse

"I love Howard Dean for all his efforts on the health care front, but I think it would be wrong to scuttle the bill."

Of course you know he is not serious, that was a warning shot, he is trying to stop the bleeding.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 16, 2009 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Pat Boone and the 60 Plus Association already have plaintiffs lining up:

http://www.60plus.org/

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 1:56 PM | Report abuse

It seems more and more like the final bill isn't going to have the public option. But the bill will still have very substantial reform. Preventing insurance companies from denying coverage because of preexisting conditions is HUGE. It's really a game changer in the world of health insurance and I think will have more of an impact than a PO. To have something close to universal health care will also be huge. Of course it's ideal if the PO was included, but this will still be some incredible reform. What would be nice is if Democrats could get in a state opt out for the PO. Within a few years, every state will opt in. Some will do it sooner than others, of course.

I love Howard Dean for all his efforts on the health care front, but I think it would be wrong to scuttle the bill. The public option can be its own fight for another day.

Posted by: DDAWD | December 16, 2009 1:53 PM | Report abuse

I have spoken to a lot of people about this. A lot of the DEm base is angry. But the specter of a return to Republican rule -- and a republican party that is now even more irresponsible and whacked out, even more intellectually vapid, that is unthinkable.

A war with Iran, more tax cuts for the rich and REALLY exploding deficits, destroying Medicare and Social Security, more deregulation and financial disaster, more jobs outsourced, higher insurance premiums and less coverage every year, more power of corporations over citizens -- this is what more repubican rule will mean.

I truly hope my Democratic compatriots will realize that could well mean the end of this republic as we know it and think twice.

Posted by: drindl | December 16, 2009 1:52 PM | Report abuse

Yes, hopefully, it keeps them home AND on top of that if any watered-down but "mandated" Obamacare is purportedly signed into law, expect a huge Constitutional law battle in the courts.

Posted by: JakeD | December 16, 2009 1:46 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company