ThinkFast: June 26, 2009
ThinkFast: June 26, 2009
The House is likely to vote today on the American Clean Energy and Security Act which would, “for the first time, put a price on carbon emissions” in the U.S. If passed, the law would “reduce emissions to 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020” using a cap-and-trade system. Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is still whipping votes in favor of the legislation.
Despite a veto threat from the White House and against the wishes of Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, Congress yesterday “moved forward with plans to build more Lockheed Martin F-22 fighter jets.”
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is calling the U.S. combat troop withdrawal from Iraqi cities by June 30 a “great victory” making a comparison to “the rebellion against British troops in 1920.” But also, “the Americans are going along with it, symbolically and substantively.”
At a DNC fundraiser with gay and lesbian donors yesterday, Vice President Biden reiterated the administration’s commitment to fighting for LGBT issues. “I don’t blame you for your impatience,” he said, addressing recent tensions on these issues. According to the White House pool report, Biden drew “repeated standing ovations” when he promised to repeal DADT, enact a ban on workplace discrimination, and push for adoption rights for all.
Iranian opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi yesterday “issued a rare attack on supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, accusing him of not acting in the interests of the country, and said Iran had suffered a dramatic change for the worse.” The move indicates that Iran’s “political rift is far from over.” “I am not prepared to give up under the pressure of threats or personal interest,” Mousavi said.
The Obama administration signaled yesterday that overhauling the nation’s transportation infrastructure will have to wait. The White House is letting members of Congress know that planning new spending for transportation “is not a discussion they want to have now, in the middle of a recession and as Washington is consumed with battles over health care and energy.”
After threatening to post pictures and “pertinent information” about the staff of Media Matters on his website, hate radio host Michael Savage has backed off, now saying that he will release only public information “such as the group’s tax filings.” View a Media Matters compilation on Savage’s record here.
Gov. Mark Sanford (R-SC) has acknowledged “that he visited his mistress in Argentina on a taxpayer-financed trade mission to South America early last summer, an admission adding another layer to a scandal that produced increasing calls for his resignation.” “I made a mistake while I was there in meeting with the woman who I was unfaithful to my wife with,” Sanford said. He has promised to reimburse the costs.
60 percent: South Carolina residents who believe Gov. Mark Sanford (R) should resign, after he admitted to having an affair with a woman from Argentina. Just 34 percent said he should stay in office, according to a new SurveyUSA poll.
And finally: The White House held its annual congressional picnic yesterday, and the star of the show was Sasha Obama for sinking chief of staff Rahm Emanuel in the dunking booth. Other administration officials who occupied the “wet seat” were spokesman Robert Gibbs and OMB director Peter Orszag, who was dunked at least 12 times. The President, who grew up in Hawaii, made the outing into a luau with “hula dancers in grass skirts, fire dancers, [and] inflatable sharks floating in the pond.”
Sign up here to receive our daily e-newsletter, The Progress Report.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Any bets on whether Rush Limbaugh will attempt to blame Obama for MJs death?
June 26th, 2009 at 9:01 amAdmittedly, as a musician, I am more of a fan of Quincy Jones and the actual musicians behind MJ than the “king of pop” himself. But the dude could dance very well and his voice was unique. And, regardless of his limited contributions to them, he did have a LOT of really excellent songs.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:04 amThe President, who grew up in Hawaii, made the picnic into a luau with “hula dancers in grass skirts, fire dancers, [and] inflatable sharks floating in the pond.”
Speaking of Mount Rushblow, it appears he was invited to the WH picnic, & spent some time in the pool.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:05 amThe White House held its annual congressional picnic yesterday, and the star of the show was Sasha Obama for sinking chief of staff Rahm Emanuel in the dunking booth. Other administration officials who occupied the “wet seat” were spokesman Robert Gibbs and OMB director Peter Orszag, who was dunked at least 12 times. The President, who grew up in Hawaii, made the outing into a luau with “hula dancers in grass skirts, fire dancers, [and] inflatable sharks floating in the pond.”
Sorry, Mr. President, but this picnic feels like “let them eat cake” to those of us without jobs or healthcare, who are losing our homes and facing bankruptcy.
It’s no picnic on the other side of that White House fence, Mr. President. Get that public healthcare option passed NOW!
Thank you.
PEACE
June 26th, 2009 at 9:09 am“I made a mistake while I was there in meeting with the woman who I was unfaithful to my wife with,” Sanford said.
Republics just don’t get it. Your ‘mistake’ wasn’t meeting with the woman on State time; your mistake was seeing the woman ANYTIME. You’re married, you idiot. Your apology was a rambling, incoherent stream of weak excuses.
No one is to blame but you, Mr. ‘we can’t afford to take any stimulus monies’ Sanford.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:10 amZimzone Says:
Speaking of Mount Rushblow, it appears he was invited to the WH picnic, & spent some time in the pool.
Really? Was he rubbing elbows with the muslim socialist fascist terrorist that he hates? Was he there to observe in person the failure he so wished upon the party? Did the sharks jump out of the pool when he got in?
At least he got his yearly bath out of the way. Now he can go back to hating America, with the smell of clorine on him instead of pee, for a day or two at least.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:13 amSanford’s personal failures should only concern his family.
His dereliction of duty, abandonment of post, and general irresponsibility demand that he resign.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:16 amAll the best to the families of Farah Fawcett & Michael Jackson.
You’ll always be in our memories.
It’s really weird how that old adage about celebrities passing away in groups of 3 works, though. It gives me shivers.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:17 amThe Obama administration signaled yesterday that overhauling the nation’s transportation infrastructure will have to wait.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:18 amSorry, but this is dumb as dirt. Our roads and bridges need repairs. Every congressional district in the country has roads and bridges, so it could be a counter argument to the veto of the F 22 which has it’s claws in 43 states, It would put people to work, make the economy move more smoothly, and Obama talked about these kinds of projects when he was pushing for the stimulus bill. WTF?
Zimzone Says:
All the best to the families of Farah Fawcett & Michael Jackson.
You’ll always be in our memories.
It’s really weird how that old adage about celebrities passing away in groups of 3 works, though. It gives me shivers
So who’s nest? A certain corpulent, prescription drug abusing, perpetually angry right=wing gasbag?????
June 26th, 2009 at 9:20 amThe personal impact on me is this: Ed, Mike, and Farrah all represent an era of my youth that is now gone, which serves to remind me of my own mortality. Mike was only 10 years older than I am now.
Life is short. I will now renew my commitment to enjoying every moment, as those moments are slipping away, seemingly faster every day.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:21 amRantingTommy, I agree that the personal issues are his problem. The fact that Sanford actually booked his flight on 6/10 and was planning to be gone for 10 days, not five, that he left the country without notifying anyone, not transferring power to his Lt. Gov and that he was incommunicado are grounds for impeachment.
This lying asshat needs to resign now and get his family out of the public eye. There are four sons to think about, Mr. Family Values.
PEACE
June 26th, 2009 at 9:21 amWe can only hope, Bobwurst.
I was thinking Ed McMann as the third, but the inflatable shark doll works for me, too.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:22 amRantingTommy Says:
Sanford’s personal failures should only concern his family.
His dereliction of duty, abandonment of post, and general irresponsibility demand that he resign.
And his blatant hypocrisy should draw immedieate attention to every succeeding right-wing moralist who supports “family values” and claims that gay marriage damages “traditional” marriage.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:22 amSanford’s personal failures are of public concern, because he made them so. By being a spokeman for the Promise Keepers, by attacking Clinton, Edwards and others for their personal failures, he put his own life in the spotlight. He who lives in glass house’s, should’nt throw stones. Sanford threw boulder’s.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:23 amOh, I forgot about Ed, my bad. Of the three, I liked Ed the best, from his Carson days. Although, he still owes me a giant check and a balloon bouquet…
June 26th, 2009 at 9:23 amZimzone Says:
It’s really weird how that old adage about celebrities passing away in groups of 3 works, though. It gives me shivers.
I imagine by the time the Sunday newspaper lands on our doorsteps, some cartoonist will do one of a heavenly setting, amidst the fluffy clouds…Farrah, MJ and Ed McMahon all sitting around a 70’s style phone…with God calling in, “Good Morning, Angels…”
June 26th, 2009 at 9:23 amOverhauling the nation’s transportation plan will have to wait. A ticking clock on America’s aging infrastructure helps private equity underwriters with billions in infrastructure funds ready to invest. Obama loves PEU’s.
http://peureport.blogspot.com/2009/02/obamas-national-infrastructure-bank-to.html
The FDIC works toward non-TARP deals, where PEU’s get billions in subsidy to buy bad banks. The Carlyle Group et al got BankUnited with a $4.9 billion gift.
http://peureport.blogspot.com/2009/06/carlyle-bid-for-bankunited-wasnt.html
June 26th, 2009 at 9:23 amRantingTommy Says:
Sanford’s personal failures should only concern his family.
His dereliction of duty, abandonment of post, and general irresponsibility demand that he resign.
I agree with this wholeheartedly.
But I also believe that the hypocrisy should not be overlooked nor dismissed out of hand (I’m not saying that you are doing so, but it seems that the rhetoric about this is quickly focusing away from the hypocrisy). This is a man who targeted political opponents based on his “moral” stance, who campaigned on his “moral superiority”, and coaxed (foolish) voters into believing that he was a firmly “moral” Christian, practicing his faith devoutly.
The pretense of “superior morals” was not just a personal aside that he lied about — it was a political lynchpin, and a poiltical tool he used against his opponents. This makes it significant in these regards.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:23 amZimzone, this time, it’s a group of 4: Carradine, McMahon, Fawcett and Jackson.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:24 amBriseadh na Firefly Says:
Zimzone, this time, it’s a group of 4: Carradine, McMahon, Fawcett and Jackson.
Damn, I’m getting old. The first three are all linked by TV celebrity, Maybe Jackson is starting the second round, this time it’s iconic entertainers who had drug and child molesting allegations, which definitely brings rush back into the mix.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:30 amZimzone Says:
It’s really weird how that old adage about celebrities passing away in groups of 3 works, though. It gives me shivers.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:17 am
______________
I think this demands further study. I bet if you did a thorough analysis of the timing of celebrity deaths you’d find that the “groups of three” adage was just a myth perpetuated by our own perceptions.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:31 amBriseadh na Firefly Says:
Zimzone, this time, it’s a group of 4: Carradine, McMahon, Fawcett and Jackson.
Thanks for that reminder. (Now I stopped shivering.) All 4, as Tommy notes, were a part of my life, too. I always thought Jaclyn Smith was the ‘real knockout’ on that show, but Farrah sure got the Nation’s attention with that hair & those teeth.
Carradine’s show was just offbeat enough to stay interesting, and HE was a character!
June 26th, 2009 at 9:32 amDespite a veto threat from the White House and against the wishes of Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, Congress yesterday “moved forward with plans to build more Lockheed Martin F-22 fighter jets.”
Congress is challenging the President. They want to see if he will use his veto.
That, and they want their lobby money for the fighters.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:38 amThe House is likely to vote today on the American Clean Energy and Security Act which would, “for the first time, put a price on carbon emissions” in the U.S.
____________________________________________________________
I kind of view our environment as a boat, out in the middle of the ocean. It’s all we have, with no land or other boats in sight.
When it develops a slow leak, it makes sense to find a way to fix the leak and eliminate the onboard activities that are weakening the hull, causing it to leak in the first place. When the leak is ignored to the point where the boat starts taking on water, it makes sense to fix the leak AND start bailing.
We’ve been spending far too much time trying to determine if the boat is in danger and what should be done about it. Meanwhile, the boat is sinking.
The American Clean Energy and Security Act is a positive step. It won’t solve all the problems — we still have to bail out the boat. But it’s a good start, and long overdue.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:43 amIranian opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi yesterday “issued a rare attack on supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, accusing him of not acting in the interests of the country, and said Iran had suffered a dramatic change for the worse.”
Boy, do I have respect for this guy and his guts to stand up to the powers in Iran. Not that he’s one of the good guys, but at least he’s trying to change the status quo.
Sadly, I think he’s going to become a martyr for the cause. No way the Ayatollah or Ahmadinejad allows him to continue having a voice.
No breath = no voice.
PEACE
June 26th, 2009 at 9:43 amCageyCretin Says: Congress is challenging the President. They want to see if he will use his veto.
That, and they want their lobby money for the fighters.
Agreed. It would have been cheaper to just buyout Lockheed.
This exemplifies the power & influence the corporate military industrial complex has. They will NOT take No for an answer. Logic & fiscal responsibility take a back seat to greed & congresscritter’s campaign funds.
Oh, & the F-22 sucks as a fighter plane.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:44 amThe Obama administration signaled yesterday that overhauling the nation’s transportation infrastructure will have to wait.
___________________________________________________________
I don’t mind waiting for transportation infrastructure overhaul. I can even handle waiting for gays to get the equal rights they are long overdue for (as well as a host of other issues), if we really do get some action on the recession, health care, and energy — all issues I am in complete agreement with the President that they should be at the top of the list.
But the waiting would go a lot easier if we really did see some action on the top issues. Please?
June 26th, 2009 at 9:47 amWait, inflatable sharks ?
NOW Michael Steele makes sense !
If I’m ever drowning, someone please throw me one of those.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:49 amHe (Sanford) has promised to reimburse the costs.
___________________________________________________________
Well, isn’t that special? If I stole resources from my employer for my own personal use on this scale, I’d be fired. And possibly prosecuted. I doubt very much I’d be permitted to just pay it back.
I suspect nobody’s making that big a deal out of Sanford’s personal travel on South Carolina’s dime because his abandonment of his post is a much more serious offense. If the travel cost is being ignored, it probably means an effort to nail him another way is being considered.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:54 amRe Sanford and hypocrisy..the truly nasty part of this all is that we as democrats are accused of not expecting much of our officials yet when ours fail, they resign. Republicans on the other hand, all high and mighty and setting themselves up as examples…when they fail they believe a empty apology should suffice.
Who then is the true party of accountability?
June 26th, 2009 at 9:55 amA quick thought on the photo above the ThinkFast thread…
160 years ago, settlers out here on the prairie relied on the wind to pump water. Many of these old windmills remain standing a century & a half later, & remind us of those simple, hard working pioneers.
Today’s wind turbines serve the same purpose. We can’t survive without bringing alternative energy to the forefront. Clean energy is the key to mankind’s survival.
Corporate interests won’t allow ‘free energy’ on the market. They will buy, cheat or steal any method or regulations that will allow them a proprietary means of ‘owning’ energy.
The Federal stimulus monies should have included wind turbines for small towns, say less than 5,000. That would have covered all their electricity needs, taken that load off an overly taxed grid and allowed these communities to shed some of the burden of costs associated with buying from monopolistic for-profit energy utilities.
Combine that with solar panels on the turbine masts, and perhaps we could move forward on a democratic base instead of capitalistic energy models.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:56 amWe went to war without adequate body armor for our soldiers, and Congress, under Bush, did not insist on rectifying that. Same goes for up-armored Humvees (didn’t some soldiers get court-martialed for improvising their own up-armor?).
But Congress will insist on paying for a fighter jet the military says it doesn’t need.
It’s time to ignore the D or R and start voting I.
June 26th, 2009 at 10:02 amCongress is acting against the best interests of the people, the economy, and fiscal health of the government in order to reap returns from Lockheed’s lobbyists.
June 26th, 2009 at 10:09 amI just listened to Limbaugh’s rant about Sanford’s affair being Obama’s fault on MediaMatters. Maybe Sanford should bring Limbaugh to divorce court with him to explain it all to the judge.
June 26th, 2009 at 10:11 amwatchdog Says:
Obama struggled to explain whether his health care reform proposals would force normal Americans to make sacrifices that wealthier, more powerful people — like the president — wouldn’t face
Thanks for the link, puppy. But you missed a few bits:
June 26th, 2009 at 10:16 am
And Palin had to reimburse Alaska for expenses for the travel of her children that wasn’t legitimate. If a Democrat had done the same thing the Reich would be buying commercials to let us all know. The Democratic Party needs to get tougher.
June 26th, 2009 at 10:27 amhttp://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/26/opinion/26fri1.html?_r=1&ref=opinion
NYT editorial pointing out the false ($3000) economic costs bandied about by republicans on the energy bill; how the dems have bent over backwards; how the savings to the public was not even noted by the CBO. The Times recommends that voters watch to see what they do.
Look for Bill-o and the Faux News bloviators to condemn the NYT.
June 26th, 2009 at 10:28 amwatchdog Says:
gummble-bee-itch Says:
Haw can a private business compete with another business that makes the rules and prints money?
By providing better service?
What has “printing money” got to do with health care?
June 26th, 2009 at 10:30 amMaybe the CEOs can stop taking billion dollar bonuses.
June 26th, 2009 at 10:31 amwatchdog Says:
Haw can a private business compete with another business that makes the rules and prints money?
So… you believe that the public option is going to be run by a joint venture of the treasury department and congress? Are they going to morph into some horror-show conjoined twin?
But… I thought you all were in support of DeLay when he diagnosed Schavio as part of his public duties in office? I mean, you all trusted elected officials to make health decisions in those instances (and didn’t Bush himself weigh in on the matter? What’s HIS medical qualification?)
June 26th, 2009 at 10:32 amspencer’s mom
June 26th, 2009 at 10:36 amI disagree that the picnic compares to a let them eat cake scenario — I think this summer there will be a lot of back yard parties because so few people can afford to do anything except gather outside with their neighbors and cook hot dogs.
watchdog Says:
The problem comes in when government drives out all private health care providers and we only have one choice.
If private health care providers are as much better as “conservatives” claim, they will thrive. It’s people like you who claim, in spite of all the evidence, that “socialized medicine” leaves people with poor service and long waiting periods. Obviously, if this is true, no one will choose the public over the private. Of course, it isn’t true, which has long been established in Western Europe, Canada, etc.
June 26th, 2009 at 10:42 amwatchdog Says
June 26th, 2009 at 10:20 am
Haw can a private business compete with another business that makes the rules and prints money?
___________________________________________________________
The same way FedEx and UPS manage to compete with the U.S. Postal Service.
June 26th, 2009 at 10:44 amwatchdog Says:
The problem comes in when government drives out all private health care providers and we only have one choice.
But if the other choices out there are better, as you claim, then the public option will fail.
If the public option is better, and the other providers go out of business, that is the fundamental principle of free market capitalism. People will not continue to pay inflated prices for poor service IF they have an option that is better.
And that is what the big corporations (and their lackey-dogs, like yourself) fear: the capitalistic model will crush them when properly applied (note: current big corporations of all flavors DO NOT and DO NOT WANT to operate in free market capitalism — you cannot make obsecene profits in a fair, honest, free market operating along capitalistic ideology).
Why do you hate capitalism? (Corporatism is not capitalism)
June 26th, 2009 at 10:45 amIf the private insurers are so good, why are they worried about what they deem is a cumbersome, inefficient government alternative?
It has all to do with protecting the insurance companies’ profits, CEO bonuses, and stock value — it has nothing to do with health care for Americans.
People who like to pay high premiums for decreasing coverage are welcome to continue to do so — but the rest of us working blokes need an alternative.
And if the gilded coverage enjoyed by some is particularly costly to employers, the recipients of such coverage will be taxed on this valuable “perk.”
Medicare operates at a 3% overhead and everyone is covered. Insurance companies operate at a 23% overhead, with the ability to deny coverage at any time, and to disallow persons who have a chronic condition. (I, a healthy, no-prescription drugs person, was denied coverage by BC/BS because I was treated for a bladder infection ten years previous.)
June 26th, 2009 at 10:48 amIf you want that kind of insurance, you can keep it, but give everyone else an option.
Scalise has big credit card debt, data show
Fiscal watchdog has thousands to pay
Friday, June 26, 2009 By Jonathan Tilove Washington bureau
WASHINGTON — Rep. Steve Scalise, R-Jefferson, an ardent advocate of fiscal discipline, had between $55,000 and $165,000 in credit card debt on four different cards at the end of last year, according to his congressional financial disclosure statement.
Scalise also had an outstanding personal loan for between $15,000 and $50,000, according to the statement filed with the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct. The annual reports require members to report their outside income, as well as assets and liabilities, in broad numerical ranges.
June 26th, 2009 at 10:54 amwatchdog Says:
If there is a problem with companies getting to big then the government should bust them up. The government should provide a fair playing field not take it over.
Ah, so you do approve of government intervention. This is known as “trust busting” and I would wholeheartedly agree. Unfortunately, the US government has moved farther and farther away from this for decades.
June 26th, 2009 at 10:56 amAbsolutely, CTH. It’s a function of the human impulse to seek patterns.
But for every trio like we’ve seen this week that seems to confirm the rule, we simply overlook ten isolated passings, like the aforementioned Mr. Carradine’s.
June 26th, 2009 at 10:57 amThe puppy’s not having too good a time of it this morning, is he?
Ah, well, he should be used to that by now.
June 26th, 2009 at 11:00 amralph the wonder locust Says
June 26th, 2009 at 11:00 am
The puppy’s not having too good a time of it this morning, is he?
Ah, well, he should be used to that by now.
_____________________________________________________________
As well he should. He comes in here every morning with a list of cut-and-paste wingnut talking points, but when he gets called on them, he has difficulty defending them in his own words. It pretty much happens every morning.
June 26th, 2009 at 11:07 amThe filthy cur says:
“The problem comes in when government drives out all private health care providers and we only have one choice.”
But B-i-n-g-o I thought the talking point for the right was that a public option would be horribly inefficient and racked with bureaucrats standing between you and much needed medical care. Your scenario could only occur if the government program is a success(which Republicans, Democrats and the rest of the general population seem to all feel it will). So which is your arguement exactly? That a public option would not be successful or that it would be so successful as to push existing companies out of business?
Either way it comes down to the simple fact that the current system is unobtainable as costs skyrocket far past the rate of inflation and so many millions cannot even obtain healthcare for themselves and their children. People belonging to a HMO are constantly being denied the care they and their doctor’s agree are needed due to the HMO’s bottom line.
As the nation has witnessed this past year, banks, lenders and wall street have abused their dear free market to the point of neccesary government intervention. The healthcare industry is just the next over-abuser of the free market to bring on it’s own demise through rampant greed.
June 26th, 2009 at 11:10 amwatchdog Says:
If there is a problem with companies getting to big then the government should bust them up. The government should provide a fair playing field not take it over.
As noted, the anti trust laws are supposed to do this, but the laws have been so weakened and so many loopholes created that they are ineffective.
And that itself is government intervention into the private sector.
You also give credit to this ambiguous “government” to determine WHEN some company has “gotten too big”, and needs to be “broken up” (BY the government). But IF you heard of the government doing just this, would you not cry “foul” and argue that the government is putting its nose into the private sector?
And why did this not happen with the banks that were “too big to fail”, which Bush bailed out at ENORMOUS and UNPRECEDNETED taxpayer expense? The BIGGEST WELFARE HANDOUT EVER? So — why were they allowed to continue to exist as “too big to fail”, and under a republican?
And as to “the governemtn should provide a level playing field” — first, what is the determinator of “level”? You can’t literally take a level out and see if things “square up” in the business world. ANY such actions by the “government as referee” are the governmetn doing PRECISELY what you are here complaining that the government should NOT be doing.
You really are a dog chasing it’s own tail: circular logic in the most classic sense. Textbook circular logic.
Do you REALLY know where you stand on these issues, or is your confusion based on your limited sources?
June 26th, 2009 at 11:11 amFreeMarketLiberal Says:
You Jim Jones Soros zombies should have a disclaimer on all your articles..
WARNING: The article you are reading contains radical far left loon spin. Read at your own thought level. For more info go here
http://24ahead.com/s/thinkprogress
…to read radical and stupid far right loonie spinning like a top. No thanks, I already looked there and had to take a long shower afterward.
June 26th, 2009 at 11:20 amI hope they named the sharks Limbaugh and Hannity.
June 26th, 2009 at 11:33 amwatchdog Says:
Because something is cheaper doesn’t mean its better. And the government will make health coverage cheaper but not necessarily better.
“cheaper” means “affordable”
The point is that millions of Americans cannot afford adequate health care because the current system is based entirely on profits — big ones, especially in the case of Big Pharma.
Pay attention, puppy.
June 26th, 2009 at 11:35 amwatchdog Says:
Because something is cheaper doesn’t mean its better. And the government will make health coverage cheaper but not necessarily better.
True: cheaper in a conumer product does not mean better. However, the MOST expensive items and serives are also not necessarily better: they are usually overpriced for their quality.
If the coverage is “cheaper but not better”, then it would fail. Would it not? The essence of this free market capitalism thing — JUST because a competitive product is cheaper does not mean it will ruin the more expensive products sales IF that cheaper product is clearly inferior.
Same in the insurance field. People will look into it, people will try it, people will closely watch the results. If it is less expensive but more limiting in what it allows (higher co-pays, less doctor choice, less payment on procedures, less payment on meds, etc.) then people will NOT stay with it JUST becuase its cheaper. The essential ingredient in capitalism.
YOU are arguing that there should be no government option because it will be preferred over the private coverage, and thus cause the collapse of private insurance companies. Thus, you do not want a new major player to enter into competition with private insurance because that competition might actually be preferred by the conummer.
If its NOT as good as or better for less cost, then no one will bother with it.
You fear that it will work.
So do the big insurance companies.
June 26th, 2009 at 11:36 amNo, but isn’t that one of the goals of the “free market system”… to encourage competition to keep prices down?
So cheaper is absolutely one critical element of a working free market system.
Oh, and by the way, more expensive isn’t necessarily better, either.
June 26th, 2009 at 11:40 amI nominate FML for “fart czar” seeing as he has some much experience with spewing malodorous heated gas out of his bunghole.
TP regulars may recognize these emissions as FML’s comments.
June 26th, 2009 at 11:42 amIsn’t that how the free market system works? People choose a product or service, and if it doesn’t satisfy them, they choose another from another vendor.
Why are you so afraid of people trying out something that you’re sure will not work?
Why do you think competition in the marketplace is so dangerous?
June 26th, 2009 at 11:45 amwatchdog Says:
I have no fear that it will work. My fear is that people will make the switch without seeing the long term damage this will have on our country.
??
Please provide evidence to support this. You can start with Canada, the UK, Scanadavia and most of Western Europe. Explain how they have been “damaged” by their socialized health care. Keep in mind that most of them have a higher standard of living than the US and all of them have a lower mortality rate, and a lower infant mortality rate than the US.
I’d like a little of that “damage”.
Open up your eyes instead of blundering around spouting right-wing talking points that have no foundation in reality.
June 26th, 2009 at 11:47 amYou beat me to it Cagey. The regressives fear for the future of lobby bucks from their corporate masters not the needs of the people. They know full well that a public option would be a success, hence their typical lies and distortions. If it fails then it fails and people will return to their HMOs.
June 26th, 2009 at 11:52 amwatchdog Says
June 26th, 2009 at 11:21 am
Because something is cheaper doesn’t mean its better. And the government will make health coverage cheaper but not necessarily better.
____________________________________________________________
So if a public health plan from the government will be as crappy as you claim it will be, many people opt to pay more for insurance they believe will serve them better.
Just as some people prefer to spend more money on a car because they would rather drive a Rolls-Royce than a Kia. But Kia fills a need. They make economical cars with fewer bells and whistles that meet the needs of many who can’t afford a Rolls-Royce. And if Kia didn’t make cars that met enough people’s expectations, they would go the way of the Yugo. And Rolls-Royce manages to survive without being threatened by Kia, because there are enough people out there who want a high-end car.
However, if Rolls-Royce made cars that really weren’t any better or fancier than a Kia, they’d be right to be concerned about the competition. And private health insurance companies don’t have to be worried about a public alternative if their products really ARE better.
Why are you afraid of an affordable option arriving in the marketplace? Why are you afraid of people being allowed to choose? Why are you afraid more people might actually be able to be insured? Why are you afraid of the invisible hand of the free market?
June 26th, 2009 at 11:52 amLiberal Hypocrisy.
“I believe Olbermann’s critics sensed that the coverage was too focused on Sanford’s personal failings, trying to use the situation to generate humor and sensationalism at Sanford’s expense. It seems to me that the critics of Olbermann’s treatment of Sanford have sensed the irony of left-leaning commentator taking delight in reporting a Republican politician’s personal problems,” McCall tells Newsmax, “when the response by many on the left to the troubles of [former President] Clinton and [Democratic presidential contender John] Edwards, for example, was to play the story down as ‘just sex,’ or that a personal problem of a government official should remain a personal matter.”
June 26th, 2009 at 12:01 pmwatchdog Says
June 26th, 2009 at 11:42 am
I have no fear that it will work. My fear is that people will make the switch without seeing the long term damage this will have on our country.
___________________________________________________________
You seem to have this vision of a mass exodus from private insurance companies happening overnight once a public plan gets approved. And your fantasy also seems to include private companies dropping like flies in an instant, as a result.
There will be a lot of signups for a public plan from people who are uninsured now, since it will be the only option open to them. That wave won’t affect the private companies.
However, the private companies will spend a LOT of money and effort marketing their product and claiming how much better it is than the public plan. They will go to great lengths to keep the customers they have, which will slow down the rush. Private companies won’t disappear overnight, so if people who switch to the public plan are dissatisfied with it, they’ll have the private companies to go back to.
It’s called competition. One of our capitalist values — remember?
June 26th, 2009 at 12:03 pmAndrea Nill of ThinkProgress offers a discussion of Michael Savage using hyperbole and, rather than admitting that he’s correct to a good extent she makes several misleading statements (wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/06/23/california-immigration-michael-savage).
1. She says “Savage, whose inflammatory rhetoric recently got him banned from entering the U.K.”, without providing any context or mentioning that he was lumped in with terrorists and the like. Many “liberals” (i.e., the current variety) have a problem with free speech and are more than willing to try to silence their opponents. I don’t think it’s unfair to assume that Nill wouldn’t mind silencing Savage; the organization she works for certainly wouldn’t. See the Fairness Doctrine summary for background information.
June 26th, 2009 at 12:07 pmI see our plagiarist troll is back, trying to pass off other’s writing as its own, or at least failing to properly attribute its sources.
the fact that it pays a lame homage to one of the more bombastic TP regulars only serves to heighten the silliness of its attempt.
meanwhile, it appears that watchpuppy has abandoned his sisyphean quest for today.
June 26th, 2009 at 12:14 pmThere’s a crack in the consensus on climate change coming from Australia. Here’s a decent article that communicates the objections of skeptics:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25400914-7583,00.html
June 26th, 2009 at 12:40 pm
Another less well known musician died yesterday…Sky Saxon in 60’s…Lead singer and founder of The Seeds. a garage type band popular in the 60’s..”Pushing to hard” and a few other hit’s….FYI……I wonder how many lost their live’s because of war’s yesterday?…The saddest of all loses are those that could be prevented by ending war’s….P.B. & J
June 26th, 2009 at 12:47 pmWell, watchpup… your paranoia is perfectly understandable, given your conservative leanings.
June 26th, 2009 at 1:07 pmBecause when its to late there will be no more competition.
You mean how UPS went out of business after FedEx starting offering Ground service? Oh wait…
June 26th, 2009 at 1:09 pmInteresting article in WaPo on Congressional rent house on C Street. It’s a bipartisan, but secretive renter.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/25/AR2009062504480.html?hpid=topnews
June 26th, 2009 at 1:24 pmGoldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley are salivating over carbon trading.
June 26th, 2009 at 1:25 pmHow is it apples to oranges?
It’s pretty close to an exact comparison.
You’re talking about a public enterprise competing with private. That’s exactly what USPS does. It’s a public enterprise; a branch of the federal government. Moreover, it competes at a disadvantage, since FedEx and UPS aren’t required to carry the lower-profit general mail, but the Post Office is. And it still competes well with its rivals in parcel delivery.
June 26th, 2009 at 1:37 pmObama really seems to understand the pulse of things. To get health insurance he knows that he needs to pay for it and with the huge deficit being a barrier he is asking that transportation infastructure spending be slowed down. He can do that now because the economy is already showing signs of responding to the stimulus. Combined this means tax revenues will come in ahead of projections and spending will come in under projections. So far I am really liking what Obama is doing as President. We just need to be patient and allow for things to unfold, whether it is the economy or Iran.
June 26th, 2009 at 2:21 pmPay for performance:
26% of federal workers said the rating and pay process in their organization was equitable.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/25/AR2009062503913.html?hpid=sec-nation
This is what Obama wants to use to cure the ills of health care and education.
June 26th, 2009 at 2:26 pmwatchdog Says:
June 26th, 2009 at 2:55 pmAnd you’re acting like the corporations do play fairly.
Evan Bayh and moderate Democrats came out for pay for performance in health care. It fits with their push for a nonprofit health insurance co-op.
Over 70% want something else. Congress/White House won’t deliver in a government run public plan or an equitable pay system
June 26th, 2009 at 6:16 pmMrs. John Conyers plead guilty to accepting a bribe from a Carlyle Group affiliate, Synagro Technologies.
http://peureport.blogspot.com/2009/06/carlyle-group-affiliate-bribed-rep-john.html
June 26th, 2009 at 11:38 pmThank you..
Sesli Chat
June 29th, 2009 at 11:05 amSesli Sohbet
Sesli Chat
Sesli Sohbet
Sesli kent
SesliChat
SesliSohbet