WP: Yes, it's all about him

[nonniey]

I call the leftists who attempted to "sell" this "snakeoil" of lower costs to the public, "leftist snakeoil salesmen". It's a fact that they sold the public a pack-o-crap, see the bill as exhibit A.

If the truth is insulting, then so be it.

Well, from every report and poll I've seen they in fact didn't sell it to the public. They did sell it to themselves though. They are gambling that the attention span of US citizens remains true to form and they can recover before the elections.

[mardi gras skin]

On CSpan radio about an hour ago, I heard Reid say that he hoped some republican senators would join in supporting the bill, but that he has been focusing his energy on building a consensus among the coalition of the SIXTY democratic senators.

So, he just said what I've been saying.

Now, the reason the Republicans are irrelevant is because they did such a horrible job when they were relevant. They've earned their second class citizenship. But its laughable to claim that the irrelevant Republicans are somehow responsible for this mess.

[mjah]

When this passes, it will cost the Dems both houses for a decade and the White House in 2012.

It's going to be a slaughter that will make 94 and 06/08 look tame.

:doh: Exaggerate much?

2010 will see Democrats losing seats no matter what, because that's what happens to the incumbent party almost all the time. It's normal and healthy (even when this GOP is the party picking up seats). From a short-term point of view it is politically far better for Democrats to have passed a bill than to have seen the effort go down in flames. Now people can argue over the legislation but nobody can level the most damning accusation: "They did nothing; they don't care." No parties will hemorrhage or rise from the ashes due to this bill. That's completely ridiculous, regardless of your personal opinion on the legislation.

2012 will be decided by the economy. The debate over health care will devolve into bickering about the spending and benefits, with neither party finding a clear path between their message and the ear of the American public. Figures, counter-figures, predictions, counter-predictions, etc. Obama will say "30 million people now have health care" and GOP X will say "this will bankrupt the country" and Obama will say "no, GOP wars + tax cuts did that but health care is paid for" and GOP X will say "no, it's a debt-funded insurance handout disaster that needs to be stopped by some method that I can't adequately explain but it starts with tax cuts." Blahblahblah.

The American public will tune it out in favor of saying "it's done anyway; what's next" and they'll focus on issues which have a much greater short-term impact upon their paychecks. Like, say -- the economy. This is the way it always goes.

Okay, 2012 debate on the economy. See talking points above; replace key vocabulary words with other vocabulary words so talking points refer to the economy instead of health care; rinse and repeat. If most people are feeling much better than they were in 2008, Obama stays. If things still look pretty terrible, then say hello to President GOP X.

[Thiebear]

has anyone here even read the bill? Or is eveyrone a blind homer to believe whatever any of the politicians said?

B/c if you haven't read the bill- I don't think you really have much to say- me included.

The problem is, nobody knows whats going to be in the bill, until after its passed. Which is the opposite of what was promised? There were supposed to be 72hours online at least for everyone to see? How is it when we can't follow even the most simple of promises, can you trust them on the insanely detailed ones behind closed doors.

Apparently Senator Reid has put forth the biggest Lie of this "entire" discussion with the 60 democrats comment... geesh...!

[SkinsHokieFan]

Obama is a lock for 2012.

1.5 billion dollar war chest, plus the incumbent party winning nearly every re-election since 1890

As for this bill, eh, nothing left to do but watch what unfolds

[ljs]

So you've read every piece of legislation you've ever commented on? Yes or no? Actually, no need to answer.

read my post again- it clearly says me included.

[ljs]

The problem is, nobody knows whats going to be in the bill, until after its passed. Which is the opposite of what was promised? There were supposed to be 72hours online at least for everyone to see? How is it when we can't follow even the most simple of promises, can you trust them on the insanely detailed ones behind closed doors.

Apparently Senator Reid has put forth the biggest Lie of this "entire" discussion with the 60 democrats comment... geesh...!

thats what is scary- its so different from what we were told the first time, who knows what it really entails now. I have no idea, maybe if I did, I would like it. That's why I can't say much for now except this whole process stinks like poop, and I don't trust anyone. I have no idea whats going to happen.

[Ax]

That's a very cynical thing to say. The least you can do is acknowledge that the man may be actually trying to do some good out there.

Well, one of those quotes was from the article, but since I myself quoted it in my post, then you could say I agree with it.

And I am cynical. Especially when it concerns someone sold as a new kind of politician. I referred to him as a snake oil salesman during the campaign, and nothing to date makes me feel any different today. He's a typical lawyer/politician. Nothing more. Doesn't make him any more of scum bag than most other lawyer/politicians, but he is certainly no better.

Hope & Change? Right.

I realize, of course, this is really Harry and Nancy's Bill. President Obama just wants to sign something big. The little good it may do, doesn't seem to outweigh his need to try and get something done before his poll numbers drop further.

Of course, I could be wrong. Time will tell.

[sacase]

blame yourselves... and the foolish need to compromise with red dogs, conservatives, and republicans in order to gain that magic threshhold of 60. The Dems have taken something difficult and made it even more difficult. If I were Obama (well, first I would read the sucker, but based on impressions) I'd veto and send it back to the drawing board and give me something better.

This was a noble quest, it didn't deserve the torture of a thousand cuts.

What partisan BS. DEMS OWN IT. You have no one to blame but yourself and your fellow liberals. They were leaping at the chance to buy each other off in this one. Get used to it, a smart democratic senator is going to continue to hold out so they can be bought off because they know that the Dem leadership needs thier vote on any issue that comes up. This congress is a friggen joke.

[alexey]

They are gambling that the attention span of US citizens remains true to form and they can recover before the elections.

... or that the public opinion was not based on actual content of the bill.

For example, some people may appreciate that now they can keep their dependent children on their health plan until the age of 26. Others may wake up the next morning, see the sun shining, and realize that "government takeover of health care" either didn't happen or wasn't so bad.

[twa]

Why in hell would I want to keep my kid on my ins till 26?

Get a job ya bums

[Ax]

Why in hell would I want to keep my kid on my ins till 26?

Because I'll be helping you pay for it?

[twa]

Because I'll be helping you pay for it?

I'm not greedy,I'd settle for ya just paying for me and the old lady:silly:

You can already keep full time students on your policy,why the hell should I subsidize some lazy video game playing punk's bad health?

It's bad enough I gotta pay for all the govt workers to surf the net all day:evilg:

[alexey]

And I am cynical. Especially when it concerns someone sold as a new kind of politician. I referred to him as a snake oil salesman during the campaign, and nothing to date makes me feel any different today. He's a typical lawyer/politician. Nothing more. Doesn't make him any more of scum bag than most other lawyer/politicians, but he is certainly no better.

I see some key differences between Obama and most other lawyer/politicians in background, personal history and choices, career path, priorities, geekdom, family life, and a number of other areas.

Heck, simply not being born into a life of wealth and privilege already sets him apart from many (most?) other lawyers/politicians.

Of course you may view it all as a set up for the "ultimate" snake oil sale that he managed to accomplish in 2008. I, on the other hand, do not see the trajectory of his life resembling a trajectory it would have if Obama were the kind of person you consider him to be.

[Ax]

I see some key differences between Obama and most other lawyer/politicians in background, personal history and choices, career path, priorities, geekdom, family life, and a number of other areas.

Heck, simply not being born into a life of wealth and privilege already sets him apart from many (most?) other lawyers/politicians.

Of course you may view it all as a set up for the "ultimate" snake oil sale that he managed to accomplish in 2008. I, on the other hand, do not see the trajectory of his life resembling a trajectory one may have if he were the kind of person you consider him to be.

Oh, I don't see him as bad as you think I do. I just don't see him as good as his supporters do.

And ALL lawyer/politicians have two things in common that tend to be more of a liability in my eyes, when it comes to being honest and forthright.

They are lawyers. And, they are politicians.

[alexey]

Oh, I don't see him as bad as you think I do. I just don't see him as good as his supporters do.

In that case I'm sure you would agree that it's not appropriate to call his HC initiatives something like a "self-indulgent crusade for a liberal holy grail".

The man's mother was sick with cancer and she spent her has days fighting with health insurance companies about pre-existing conditions, for God's sake.

And ALL lawyer/politicians have two things in common that tend to be more of a liability in my eyes, when it comes to being honest and forthright.

They are lawyers. And, they are politicians.

Some of these people are actually out there trying to do good. Let's try to tell them apart from the real crooks, why don't we? Lumping them all in one category does not do anybody any good.

Cultivating distrust of government and politicians has been a deliberate political strategy of the right.

[Ax]

In that case I'm sure you would agree that it's not appropriate to call his HC initiatives something like a "self-indulgent crusade for a liberal holy grail".

While certainly over the top, it's not completely unwarranted. All Presidents are self indulgent to a certain degree. Not necessarily a bad thing, if you stand by your convictions regardless of political fallout. When you seem too quick to compromise on damn near anything, as I feel he is, just to get SOMETHING done, it could reasonably be argued that his intentions are more symbolic, than substantive.

And again, the quote was from the article, so the "liberal holy grail" tag was not mine. I try not to blindly categorize people into liberal-left-right-neocon. But I get the meaning when people use the terms.

The man's mother was sick with cancer and she spent her has days fighting with health insurance companies about pre-existing conditions, for God's sake.

With his money, he could have written a check, taken the burden off her shoulders, and fought the insurance companies himself. But, according to the likes of Howard Dean, it is the insurance companies that stand to reap the benefits of the Senate version of this BS.

Some of these people are actually out there trying to do good. Let's try to tell them apart from the real crooks, why don't we? Lumping them all in one category does not do anybody any good.

Well, it's easier to pick the few good ones out, when held up to the backdrop of the majority, who are not.

Cultivating distrust of government and politicians has been a deliberate political strategy of the right.

May be. But living long enough to witness them at work is a much better barometer.