Obama caves in

[HenryReardon]

I'm not quite understanding how your point is relevant to what I said. I wasn't referencing the quality of these programs just that we as a people think it's important to have universal education and protection. In my opinion universal health is just as important and should be treated as such.

You mentioned three things you thought 'we' should do, citing the fact that 'we' are doing two of them.

The two you cited are being done badly. Why would you want yet another government program that will most certainly also be done badly?

 

[NickCole]

An administration official said tonight that Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius "misspoke" when she told CNN this morning that a government run health insurance option "is not an essential part" of reform. This official asked not to be identified in exchange for providing clarity about the intentions of the President. The official said that the White House did not intend to change its messaging and that Sebelius simply meant to echo the president, who has acknowledged that the public option is a tough sell in the Senate and is, at the same time, a must-pass for House Democrats, and is not, in the president's view, the most important element of the reform package.

http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009/08/administration_official_sebelius_misspoke.php

What a pack of liars.

Sebelius didn't "misspeak," she said exactly what she intended to say and what the White House intended for her to say.

And if the White House wants to clear this up, why does the administration official ask not to be identified? A deceitful secretive administration -- and those traits go some way in explaining why health care reform is such a mess when we had the chance to make a powerful reform bill.

As to this issue, thanks to Obama and Democratic twits in Congress, health care reform has already been watered down to such weak legislation, without a public option there is no reform in this.

What a pathetic performance, matched only by the more pathetic Obamabots who blame the insurance companies, lobbyists, Republicans -- everybody but the people in power who promised to make health care reform. Pathetic.

 

[naked gent]

You mentioned three things you thought 'we' should do, citing the fact that 'we' are doing two of them.

The two you cited are being done badly. Why would you want yet another government program that will most certainly also be done badly?

Your reply still does not answer noah's point unless you are advocating we end the public school system and security because, as you say, we do it badly.

 

[noah617]

You mentioned three things you thought 'we' should do, citing the fact that 'we' are doing two of them.

The two you cited are being done badly. Why would you want yet another government program that will most certainly also be done badly?

The point is not about whether something is being done poorly. The point is about whether we should be attempting to do it at all. You called the desire for health care by people who cannot afford to pay for it "the ultimate selfish whine of the loser". Does this also apply to the people who can't afford to pay for their own schools, police, military and fire? And if not why not? Protection from disease is right up there with protection from criminals, fire, and terrorists in my book. They all can be equally deadly.

As for why I'd want another program that most certainly will be done poorly? I don't agree with your premise that it necessarily will be done poorly. It looks like the insurance companies agree with me too. Otherwise why are they so hell bent to make sure it doesn't happen? Afraid a little competition will cut into their profits?

 

[Apollo]

I give Obama credit for this. He saw that the majority didn't approve of his handling of the health care reform and instead of being a slave to the Democratic party he embraced bi-partisanship. Props to Obama. He has gone as high in the Democratic party as he can and now his only political concern is re-election in 2012. He needs the independents and moderate Republicians to get re-elected. Also I dont think Obama really caved, he compromised, which a good president needs to do sometimes.

Oh he isn't done with a public option. He wants the public option, always has from the beginning.

He will simply try and find a way to get it in there. And eventually, they will just have to ignore the republicans and do it by themselves.

 

[Apollo]

Obama has many controversial political ideas but one thing most agree on is that he is smart. If he wants re-election he will only sign a reform bill that has bi-partisan approval and acceptance by the majority of Independents. Co-operatives are a great compromise. Public option was a compromise for Obama. He has said earlier in his career that he wanted single-payer (which crashed and burned for Hillary) all along. Then he saw public option as more politically viable and now co-operatives. Now, with the majority of Americans dissapproving of his handling of reform, he will be the smart politican he is and pass reform that doesn't endanger his re-election.

If he is able to get a good bill through Congress that really helps, he can easily demonize the republicans for not supporting it, and ruin the party further. One of the reasons he most likely wants this done in his first year as pres is so that the reform has 3 years to ferment and see if it is working.

Bi partisanship isn't necessary if it works.

 

[MystikWizard]

If he is able to get a good bill through Congress that really helps, he can easily demonize the republicans for not supporting it, and ruin the party further. One of the reasons he most likely wants this done in his first year as pres is so that the reform has 3 years to ferment and see if it is working.

Bi partisanship isn't necessary if it works.

In theory, bi-partisanship shouldn't be necessary.

However, the main problem is with the Blue Dog Democrats. It is being reported today that the problem is that the Proposed HC 3200 can pass in the House, however they do not have the votes to pass it in the Senate. It is being said that they only have 41-43 Senators on board to pass the bill. So, clearly that implies that there are approximately 17-19 Blue Dog Democrats who are not willing to vote for the bill to overcome the inevitable filibuster from Republicans.

The problem that is preventing this bill from passing is actually with the Democrats we already have ... not Republicans.

I would love to know the names of the Democrat Senators who are not willing to pass this bill.


However, there are a number of Democrats who are threatening to actually kill the bill in the House IF a public option isn't included in the final bill. If that is true, that would be a large blow to Obama.

 

[Apollo]

The majority of Americans dissapprove of his handling of reform thus far. Salvaging reform is the best he can do at this point. People want bi-partisanship. The people will elect the next president. The Republician party has gained Independents in the last few weeks. Obama's job isn't to 'ruin' the Republican party but to be a good executive for ALL Americans, not just far left liberals. If he passes a bill that most people don't want it will be he that is 'demonized' and he knows that, he is smart and he sees his approval rating falling. The fact he wanted this reform pushed so soon, so fast, was its undoing. A faux-pas on Obama's part.

The majority of Americans don't know what's in the reform bill because of crazy propaganda. And the crazy people who keep screaming at the town halls. I can understand being heated and angry about something you know nothing about. But when they try to answer the question, you don't listen and keep screaming, sorry, your a crazy bitch/bastard.

He needs to push back at the republitards and insurance companies and keep along the regular plan.

His job is to run the country, and keep his party in power. While I am big of bi-partisanship, I truly am. When they don't want to listen, and they aren't offering their own solutions, then fuck em. And if he can destroy the crazies in the process, hey more power to him.

 

[Apollo]

In theory, bi-partisanship shouldn't be necessary.

However, the main problem is with the Blue Dog Democrats. It is being reported today that the problem is that the Proposed HC 3200 can pass in the House, however they do not have the votes to pass it in the Senate. It is being said that they only have 41-43 Senators on board to pass the bill. So, clearly that implies that there are approximately 17-19 Blue Dog Democrats who are not willing to vote for the bill to overcome the inevitable filibuster from Republicans.

The problem that is preventing this bill from passing is actually with the Democrats we already have ... not Republicans.

I would love to know the names of the Democrat Senators who are not willing to pass this bill.


However, there are a number of Democrats who are threatening to actually kill the bill in the House IF a public option isn't included in the final bill. If that is true, that would be a large blow to Obama.

The Blue Dogs want to keep the cost down, and make sure it is done right. They aren't trying to kill it where it stands and hope it never passes ever (well, I am sure a few do).

Republicans just want it dead. Plain and Simple.

I hate dirty politics, but that is what's needed to get this done right. They are making it seem like the democrats are some demons trying to destroy AMURRIKA!!! Push back with the same mantra, and see what happens.

 

[NW007]

The interesting thing about all of this, is that the Republicans on here and the Right who I take a look at while perusing Right Wing boards seem to treat this whole thing like a God-damned game. It doesn't seem to register to them that this is a serious issue that would help improve the lives of our society .... offering affordable coverage to people not currently insured, while offering alternatives to people who are dissatisfied with their current coverage.

No Pre-existing conditions was a big factor for me, as well as lowering premiums and deductibles. This option would have done that. It wouldn't have eliminated the Private Health Care companies, however it would have forced them to become more competitive with their terms and pricing. Why the Fuck do people want to kill this? Because they are too busy playing games with choosing which team (Republican/Democrat) to root for?

Basically, what I see Republicans doing is simply saying "Well, Obama is for reforming Health Care, and he is a Democrat .... so since I'm a Republicans, I have to take the opposite approach of whatever policy he is for ... regardless if it actually benefits our country or not."

Stupid Fucks. You ought to be ashamed of yourselves. You are a Fucking disgrace.

Responding to your quote here. I was listening to discussions today that one of the outcomes of the possibility of the public option being dead is that the legislation that does come out of this will be focused on insurance reform. in otherwords the insurance companies would have to cover pre=existing conditions plus increased portability would be another result.

This entire process is a fluid process. What we are seeing is the legislative process in action

 

[HenryReardon]

As for why I'd want another program that most certainly will be done poorly? I don't agree with your premise that it necessarily will be done poorly. It looks like the insurance companies agree with me too. Otherwise why are they so hell bent to make sure it doesn't happen? Afraid a little competition will cut into their profits?

Of course it will be done poorly. When has the government ever done anything other than poorly. It is the very nature of bureaucracies to do things poorly.

Government has only three legitimate functions, and healthcare isn't one of them.

 

[Apollo]

Of course it will be done poorly. When has the government ever done anything other than poorly. It is the very nature of bureaucracies to do things poorly.

Government has only three legitimate functions, and healthcare isn't one of them.

You shouldn't be paying taxes then, becuase government is doing a lot more than what you think it should be.

Tell me when you stop paying taxes so I can notify the IRS.

I bet you thought the Articles of Confederation were brilliant.

 

[noah617]

Government has only three legitimate functions, and healthcare isn't one of them.

No interest in saying what the three are and why you don't think health care should be included?

 

[noah617]

^We've had medicare for seniors since 1965. The government is already involved in health care. What's so wrong with allowing every American the option of participating in a similar plan.

 

[Apollo]

Sorry I have to reject your Americans are dumb and can't see beyond propaganda argument. If people were slaves of propaganda than why hasn't Obama's propaganda won them over? Probably because there are more people who don't want big government than do. People on both sides of the debate have been 'screaming' at town halls and both sides of been full of fallacies and half truths.
The original plan was intended to be tweaked. If he and Congress stuck with it they would be guilty of political malpractice.

Then you need to get on the next plane to the real world.

Wonder why the Obama admin isn't getting to these people? Because they aren't getting to conduct a proper town hall meeting and inform people of the real issues.

I mean, how many television broadcasts do we have to watch where uninformed dumbasses are read the riot act about the health care bills REALLY say.

When someone says the word socialism, you immediately got a uphill battle on your hands.

 

[JB3]

The majority of Americans don't know what's in the reform bill because of crazy propaganda. And the crazy people who keep screaming at the town halls. I can understand being heated and angry about something you know nothing about. But when they try to answer the question, you don't listen and keep screaming, sorry, your a crazy bitch/bastard.
.

Well, that and the fact that there isn't a single bill that they can point to for solid details. It left an opening for those crazies to make shit up about it, which is the single biggest failure of the president and congress at the moment. If we get to september and the public is against what they see, this single fact will be the reason why.

 

[NickCole]

Responding to your quote here. I was listening to discussions today that one of the outcomes of the possibility of the public option being dead is that the legislation that does come out of this will be focused on insurance reform. in otherwords the insurance companies would have to cover pre=existing conditions plus increased portability would be another result.

This entire process is a fluid process. What we are seeing is the legislative process in action

Yes I heard Obama say "health insurance reform" in place of health care reform several times during his town hall meeting last week.

While making insurance companies cover pre-existing conditions, and increased portability, are good, that is not reform of either health care or the insurance industry. That's simple legislation, not the broad reform that progressives and liberals have been pushing for for years -- and that the top running Dems Edwards, Clinton and Obama insisted is a top priority, which helped elect Obama.

With a popular Democratic President and major Democratic Congressional majority, and big support for health care reform across the nation, if all we get is a bill that tweaks insurance eligibility, it will be a catastrophic failure. Health care reform is not only a campaign toy, it's become essential to the wellbeing and security of Americans, and to our economy. The opportunity that Obama and Dems have been handed will not come again and he's got to get this right --even if it's not a gold standard reform, it has to at least be authentic reform from which subsequent reform can be built upon-- or there will be increasingly serious consequences.

 

[NickCole]

Well, that and the fact that there isn't a single bill that they can point to for solid details. It left an opening for those crazies to make shit up about it, which is the single biggest failure of the president and congress at the moment. If we get to september and the public is against what they see, this single fact will be the reason why.

Exactly. That, and because he doesn't have a clear plan in his own mind, Obama has not been clear about what's in the reform bill. Obama has never approached health care reform from a principled position, as Edwards and Clinton did, and with Kennedy out of the picture none of the big power brokers in Congress has either, and that's why it's a mess.

Of course Republicans and insurance and pharma are trying to mold this reform the way they want. That's a surprise to anybody? The outrage over that from Obama supporters is so ridiculous it's pathetic. The job of Obama and health care reform advocates in Congess is to use their power to override those who don't want health care reform and make it happen. That's what they were voted in to do. If they can't do it --especially with their popularity and big majority-- it's their failure.

 

[NickCole]

I think that is what is really frustrating the die-hard liberals. They want a new mandate. A new 'social order' if you will. Obama was a possible leader of that new order. However, his stumbling on this issue after the dissappointing results of the stimulus pushed the majority back in line with the original premise of the United States, limited gov't and power to the people and private enterprise.

I would argue that Obama wants justice and has a naive faith in gov't (somewhat admirable) whereas most other Democrats want power and see gov't as a way to get it. If he thinks it is best to go co-operative rather than public option to gain wider support he'll probably compromise. The real question is wether he'll have to cave to his own party that insist on a public option. I hope he goes bi-partisan so we can get reform without fundamentally redefining America.

Capitalism is the best system there is but that doesn't mean it's perfect, and we have to grapple with when capitalism doesn't work. The question is what Republicans or Democrats define as not working.

Empty promises aside, let's not pretend the Republican approach is ultimately much different from Obama's. Obama's response to the economic crisis was essentially the same as Bush's. Both Bush and Obama bailed out the financial services industry and the auto industry -- neither Republicans nor Democrats let capitalism play out. The only thing Obama did that was different from Republicans was pile on a few "stimulus" programs that didn't stimulate much of anything.

And as the health care "reform" conversation continues, Obama is yet again leaning closer to the Republican "solution" than to the Democratic, or liberal, one. It's not that Republicans don't want government involvement in health care, it's that they want that involvement to be beneficial to the insurance and pharma industries rather than protect consumers. It was, afterall, Bush and Republicans who put through that prescription drug legislation. And if health care reform doesn't include a public option and the ability to negotiate drug prices, for instance, that's once again Obama doing what Republicans do: protect private insurance and pharma profits.

The notion of health care reform that won in the last election was universal health care and reduced costs to consumers. Anything short of that means that all the squawking about Obama being hope and change versus more of the same was bullshit. That's the bottom line.

 

[Apollo]

I'm good on the plane trip. Speaking of plane trips. Obama has been flying all over conducting town halls and people have been respectful. He has made good points but he has also further propagated fallacies which hasn't helped his position.

The reason socialism has a bad name is because governments built on Socialism have destroyed liberty. Cuba, Soviet Union, China, North Korea, Eastern Europe are/were awful. When government assumes power it is near impossible to get it back. Therefore, concern about Socialism and big government are justified. This country was built on freedom from big government. With all the government take over recently people are becoming defiant and anti-gov't. The vast majority of people want the unspent stimulus money returned to the people, for example.

They have been respectful because he is the president, and anyone daring to get out of hand would be shot by Secret Service. So to prevent bloodshed, the secret service put the crazies outside his town halls.

But that still isn't stopping people trying to get into a town hall of the Presidents with guns. You have your freedom to bare arms, but if you bring one next to the president and you're a angry citizen, don't be surprised if they try and gun you down.

Canada, Britain, Switzerland, Denmark, Holland all have some strong socialist tendencies, and they live happy lives. They have a higher life expectancy, I would argue higher quality of living. Low crime, etc. etc.