ThinkFast: October 26, 2009
ThinkFast: October 26, 2009
Following reports that President Obama was “actively discouraging Senate Democrats in their effort to include a public insurance option with a state opt-out clause as part of health care reform,” White House Deputy Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer wrote on the White House blog that “those rumors are absolutely false.” “President Obama completely supports” the Democratic leadership’s efforts, Pfeiffer wrote.
A new report from Thomson Reuters has found that the U.S. health care system wastes up to $800 billion ever year. “The average U.S. hospital spends one-quarter of its budget on billing and administration, nearly twice the average in Canada,” the report notes.
Democrats are discussing ways to speed up key benefits in the health reform bill to 2010, “eager to give the party something to show taxpayers for their $900 billion investment in an election year.” “We want to be able, within the cost framework and the implementation framework, to have as much start as early as possible, even though we know all of it can’t,” said Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI).
Congress and the Obama administration are getting ready to address the issue of banking institutions that are “too big to fail.” A measure that could be introduced this week “would make it easier for the government to seize control of troubled financial institutions, throw out management, wipe out the shareholders and change the terms of existing loans held by the institution.”
Sen. Russ Feingold said Sunday during an appearance on CBS’s “Face the Nation” that he is working with his colleagues to block any increase in U.S. troops levels in Afghanistan. “There will be resistance to [a troop increase] if necessary…We will do what we can to prevent this mistake,” the senator told host Bob Schieffer.
Abdullah Abdullah, the challenger to Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai, “is considering boycotting the upcoming runoff if his demands are not met to remove the leaders of Afghanistan’s election commission who he believes are biased against him.” An Abdullah pull-out “could create a new political crisis and throw the legitimacy of any new government into question.”
Twin car bombs “devastated three government buildings,” killed at least 160 people, and wounded at least 540 more on Sunday in Baghdad, marking the deadliest attacks in Iraq since 2007. The blows were “aimed at destroying faith in Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s ability to secure the country as the United States withdraws” ahead of January’s elections.
The Denver Post reports that simply by checking the “female” box when buying health insurance “is likely to cost extra — perhaps up to 50 percent more than a man would pay for the same coverage.” Federal health reform legislation would ban gender-rating and require maternity coverage.
The American Energy Alliance, a corporate-funded front group for Big Oil, is running ads against Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) because he has indicated support for clean energy legislation. Graham accused the AEA of lying. “People can say what they want to say,” Graham told McClatchy. “It’s a free country, but they can’t make stuff up.”
And finally: First Lady Michelle Obama went on The Jay Leno Show on Friday, where the host asked her about the President’s annoying habits. “He has no annoying habits, right Jay, none. He’s perfect,” Mrs. Obama said with a laugh. “But you know what, when he beats me in tennis that gets to be pretty annoying, and he beats me quite often.” Leno also asked her to name all the Brady Bunch children in under 10 seconds, which she did in eight.
Follow ThinkProgress on Twitter.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
A new report from Thomson Reuters has found that the U.S. health care system wastes up to $800 billion ever year. “The average U.S. hospital spends one-quarter of its budget on billing and administration, nearly twice the average in Canada,” the report notes.
Of course it does. It’s the healthcare “industry” now
October 26th, 2009 at 9:01 amGraham told McClatchy. “It’s a free country, but they can’t make stuff up.”
What goes around comes around, Liberace.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:05 amIt’s looking like we’re inching towards the robust public option with an opt-out. Medicare for those want it…and live in progressive states. To hell with the rest, apparently.
Sunday’s bombings in Baghdad won’t change our course there. We made a commitment to get all troops out by January 1, 2011; it’s unlikely we’ll leave sooner.
Afghanistan is ungovernable. A leader needs to be respected and feared by his citizens in that country; Karzai is neither. There’s no telling if Abdullah would be better or worse, and we’ll likely never know. Expect the second round to be just as crooked.
And..
THE YANKEES WIN THE PENNANT! WOOHOO!
October 26th, 2009 at 9:06 amA Picture is Worth a Thousand Words: GOP = Faux News
October 26th, 2009 at 9:07 amI never thought I’d agree with a Republican, but this sums up everything we should be saying about Fox News. You have the right to free speech, but you don’t have the right to make that free speech out of pure fabrication.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:10 amIn what way?
October 26th, 2009 at 9:10 amThis “state opt-out clause” has me furious.
I emailed Harry Reid last week my complaint. I WANT a Public Option, but I live in Texas, a state with an insane Republican governor that has threatened to “secede” if they pass a Public Option. And if given the “choice” (irony), he’d opt our state out.
“Don’t ROB me of MY CHOICE by giving it to my brain-dead Republican governor!”
October 26th, 2009 at 9:10 amMugsy, if Perry opts Texas out, you’ll find a whole passel of conservatives with no insurance who will help you vote Perry out of office. Ya’ll.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:15 amIf your TV is producing an annoying whining sound, turn off Fox.
Perino appears to be suffering from ’selective memory’ psychosis.
Chris Wallace was born to whine, & will never be a real journalist like his Father.
Get over it, Fox, you’re out of touch, out of date, and out of time.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:16 amAnd to think, just 8 years ago, to not give the Commander in Chief everything he wanted was treason.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:28 amI’m totally digusted with our MSM! These rumors and so-called,’In-fighting’ is driving me nuts! Where was MSM when the Repugs ran everything? You know, before the Iraq War and Dick Cheney’s meetings with the Energy Companies? Back then, the NEWS was Britney, Lindsay and Paris. Now it’s polls and constant Dem and Obama bashing. WTF?
October 26th, 2009 at 9:29 amBriseadh na Faire says:
October 26th, 2009 at 9:32 am@10.
So the message here I guess is that when the government bullies you, give in, when allowed freedom to choose, make the choice that pays the best.
Ok, so the shareholders get nothing. The important question is, how much do the CEO’s get to walk away with?
October 26th, 2009 at 9:32 amBriseadh na Faire says:
“And to think, just 8 years ago, to not give the Commander in Chief everything he wanted was treason.”
Total flip.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:34 amNow even the suggestion of giving the President what he wants is treasonous.
For eight long years, dissent was called treason… now it’s called ‘healthy debate’ or ’signs of a weakened President” or ‘resurgence of the Republican Party’
Funny how times change under a President who believes in the Constitution…
October 26th, 2009 at 9:34 am‘A Tribute to the Pentagon Memorial’ was on CBS yesterday.
Curious, I tuned in to watch some of it.
The first thing I saw was Rumsfeld wearing an ornate ribbon across his chest & spewing lies at a podium.
Soon, W stood up & began making sounds. He described the memorial in detail, while furrowing his brow and looking super serious.
I couldn’t take anymore. I don’t know if Big Dick was there, but he most likely was.
WTF?
These a-holes allowed an attack on America after being warned 2 weeks earlier of such a plan.
Why is anyone pretending they kept us safe? They did NOT. They allowed 3,000 people to die that day, & then the killing really began.
In a just World, they would have been arrested on the spot.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:35 amLetting states opt-out really feels like another Missouri Compromise to me. It makes me sick to think we might have ‘no heath care states’ and ‘health care states’ like we used to have ‘free states’ and ’slave states’. The injustice of that system did not collapse from democratic pressure; it took a bloody civil war.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:35 amP.D.
But, but, but….the media is “liberal” isn’t it?
Isn’t that what we’ve been told for the last twenty years?
My jaw drops when I see the msm take up the conservative bullsh!t as factual, when they spend hours of time and barrels of ink on criticism of the Obama administration concerning everything from war to gossip, when they take up the Fox version of events instead of checking for themselves,
October 26th, 2009 at 9:37 amwhen I recall they gave Bush a pass on everything from his AWOL status to the trumped up war in Iraq, to the disclosure of a CIA operative, to torture — they gave him the most favorable reporting of even the worst of instances, but where Obama is concerned, he is always wrong according to them.
Just goes to show the state of the nation, the mouths go where the money is. If we’re going to get anything meaningful accomplished, we need to figure out a way to knock lobbyist and special interest groups out of the decision making process.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:37 amI hope no one makes the argument for outsourcing.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:40 amIt’s a flawed plan, to be certain, but it also has the most chance of appeasing the few Democratic senators that might be weighing a filabuster. Ideally, it would also provide an impetus for the people of the “no health care states” to vote in a legislature and governor that won’t turn a blind eye and deaf ear to the suffering of the populace.
We don’t live in an ideal world, though…while I think civil war might be a bit of a stretch…if the rhetoric of the reactionary right is this fervent only 10 months into Obama’s presidency, I shudder to think what the next 7 years will look like. Unhinged ideologues like Bachmann might not survive re-election campaigns…but you’ll get someone like Sanford (pre-scandal), Jindal, or Perry that will claim to be standing up for “tradional values” and “state’s rights”, all the while fomenting the kind of extremist anti-federal government nonsense that could lead to something very bad…
October 26th, 2009 at 9:41 amEnnuiDivine says:
I’m not anywhere near a student of US history having only lived here for about 7 years, but going off what you’re saying here, I have to ask; is there a halfway credible threat of civil insurrection with the way things are going?
October 26th, 2009 at 9:44 amNot according to this:
New World Communs. of Tampa, Inc. v. Akre, 866 So. 2d 1231(2003)
October 26th, 2009 at 9:46 amthe U.S. health care system wastes up to $800 billion ever year. “The average U.S. hospital spends one-quarter of its budget on billing and administration, nearly twice the average in Canada,”
But, But! Socialism, fascists in your closet! Oh My!
October 26th, 2009 at 9:47 amMarie@18, That’s why I loved how Jon Stewart totally ripped into CNN. ‘Most Trusted Name in News’??? Bullsh*t.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:47 amUSNclerk,
Halfway? No. I’d say quarter-way, though. The rhetoric we’re hearing is about on par with the kind we saw under Clinton, when the faaaaar right leached on to the militia movement. A full-blown civil war won’t happen. But when you have people lynching congressmen in effigy, killing census workers, elected representatives calling the President un-American, and the governor of the one of the largest states in the country threatening secession over health-care proposals, it can’t lead anywhere good.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:48 amanyone care enpough to find out? … not me…
Three Tactics Progressives Use to Discredit Their Opponents
FOXNews – Glenn Beck – ?Oct 21, 2009?
The other day, we put up one of our “chalkboard trees” about Fox News and the White House attack on free speech. Just as an aside, I listed the three things they were saying about us to try to discredit the network.
“Just as an aside”?
October 26th, 2009 at 9:48 amThe Denver Post reports that simply by checking the “female” box when buying health insurance “is likely to cost extra — perhaps up to 50 percent more than a man would pay for the same coverage.” Federal health reform legislation would ban gender-rating and require maternity coverage.
Ok, Ok, How may MORE reasons do we need to abolish the health insurance industry as an enemy of the American public?
October 26th, 2009 at 9:48 amLovely, an ‘industry’ that produces nothing but spends a whole lot on paper shuffling.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:49 am@26.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:51 amLovely, well now I know. I think I’ll wait till 2012 and decide whether or not to talk my wife into immigrating.
27. Katy,
I saw that among the headlines on Google News. And it pissed me off. Not Beck’s article, which I figure is asinine and moronic…but that it was listed so far up on the news page.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:52 ami want to repost this on a ‘live’ thread… from last night:
something on my mind… no active health care threads, so this is OT…
but this line prompted me to post here:
So what type of example did the Bush administration set?
i just watched 60 minutes – the report on medicare fraud:
Medicare Fraud: A $60 Billion Crime
A.G. Holder Tells 60 Minutes More Oversight Is Needed; Scammer Explains How Easy It Is To Steal Millions
really good report… no real surprises except the huge numbers…
i’m very sure it will be used as fuel to argue against any government insurance program…
thing is, i never heard steve kroft ask any questions about HOW LONG such crazy abuse and fraud has been going on… and i don’t mean the usual crap – this report supposed that 95% of medicare claims are fraud… 95%…
this is what i think – it’s part of bushco/repug plan to destroy medicare, drain it of funds… they must have just turned a blind eye to what was going on… actually allowed the fraud and abuse to multiply exponentially…
just my thoughts about that…
i wish kroft had dug just a little deeper into the when, because i’d bet that the fraud picked up dramatically during the bush years with no oversight of anything…
maybe someone will… the obama admin does know of the problem because they allotted a huge sum from the stimulus funds to go after the fraud…
so so much to clean up…
October 26th, 2009 at 9:53 amBnF @#13
Eight paces, right turn. Four paces, right turn, eight paces, right turn, four paces, right turn.
That’s how much they should get away with.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:53 amGoldman: Stand AIG up.
DC: Okay.
AIG: Thanks.
Goldman: Now empty its pockets.
JPM: Got it!
JPM Goldman run off.
DC: Hey! What do I do now!!
JPM Goldman: We will be back.
AIG: I feel woozy
DC: Dont worry, I will keep you standing.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:54 amGo back to Australis Rupert and take your court jesters with you.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:56 amThere was a large protest at a meeting of our country’s largest banks in Chicago. If you didn’t see it on the nightly news, it’s because they weren’t attacking the president’s birth certificate.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:58 amhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/25/bank-protests_n_333155.html
My life is over I got voted off the island!! Wehhhh!
October 26th, 2009 at 9:59 amIt occurred to me the other day that, to my knowledge, there have been only 4 commercial jetliner crashes where not so much as a single passenger seat, a single piece of luggage, was recovered, where they haven’t been able to put together the downed jetliner piece by piece, where it was claimed the entire jetlinder disintegrated. And they all happened on the same day, within hours of each other, on dry land.
By all means, let us secede over health care. Let us carry assault rifles to protest President Obama. Let us obstruct in every way how this Commander in Chief fights the two wars he inherited. Let us block his appointments and policies at every turn.
But under no circumstances shall we conduct a criminal investigation into the Bush Administration. Such an investigation would merely impede progress and lead to partisan bickering. And we can’t have any partisan bickering, can we.
October 26th, 2009 at 10:00 amThere was a large protest at a meeting of our country’s largest banks in Chicago. If you didn’t see it on the nightly news, it’s because they weren’t attacking the president’s birth certificate.
If they had been holding some Obama as Hitler signs they would have shown it.
October 26th, 2009 at 10:00 amBriseadh na Faire says:
October 26th, 2009 at 10:04 am@38: Wow, I had actually never thought about that before. YOu have a point there, far as I know the only way to completely disintegrate something like a plane, or anything else for that matter, is nuclear weaponry. Great, now I feel paranoid.
38. Briseadh na Faire,
You damn Truthers. There are any number of things that the Bush Administration should be on trial for (invasion of Iraq, operation of Bagram and Guantanamo, use of white phosphorus in Iraq, intentionally targeting civillians in iraq and Afghanistan, undeclared war in Pakistan, warrantless wiretapping, Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, response to Katrina [it's on par with E.Pakistan's response to the 1971 cyclone in Bangladesh], etc…); there’s still no way they were competant enough to pull off the 9/11 attacks. Also, just because they benefited from it an inordinate amount doesn’t mean they caused it. Same charges were leveled against Roosevelt re:Pearl Harbor.
October 26th, 2009 at 10:14 amUSN, the mentioning of the Pentagon Memorial reminded me. At that site, a commerical jet liner completely disappeared, its non-hardened nose breaking through a total of about 9′ of hardened reinforced concrete walls (as I recall), its tail and wings folding into a hole not even the diameter of its fuselage, leaving but trace wreckage on the outside of the hole.
No seats. No luggage. Not even a complete engine was found. Not even enough pieces to make a complete engine. Not outside the Pentagon. Not inside the Pentagon. And of all the surveillance cameras around the Pentagon, the only tape released to the public has an obstructed view.
Paranoid? No. But I figure I’m only alive now because I have not become inconvenient enough to the powers that be. If it were my choice, I’d be a special prosecutor tasked to investigate the occurances of that day.
October 26th, 2009 at 10:16 amkaty,
October 26th, 2009 at 10:26 amI share your thoughts about the 60 Minutes piece last night. I feel it will be used by the rightwing to advance their case against health care legislation – OTOH, while there was no mention of how long this has been going on, it was apparent that fraud is a long-standing problem — and that Eric Holder and his team are on top of it and apprehending the criminals.
Obama has said that part of his stimulus was to put money into cleaning up frauds like this, and it has begun – so I hope that the right message will be discerned by the viewer – not that Steve Kroft helped that process along.
EnnuiDivine says:
27. Katy, I saw that among the headlines on Google News. And it pissed me off. Not Beck’s article, which I figure is asinine and moronic…but that it was listed so far up on the news page.
right… i scrolled down to the bottom to find what i posted…
…
43. Marie – good that you saw that too… i’m hoping there will be more follow-up to that story…
October 26th, 2009 at 10:36 amEnnuiDivine says:
October 26th, 2009 at 10:38 am@41. I am in no way saying the administration caused 9/11, however the simple truth is that even aviation kerosene does not burn hot enough to completely destroy an aircraft frame.
45. USNclerk,
That’s just it, though…when flight 77 hit the Pentagon, it didn’t completely disintegrate. Debris from the plane was scattered and became a twisted wreck with the pieces of the building, but it was there. The planes didn’t turn to dust, but the impact of a loaded 747 crashing into a heavily reinforced concrete-and-steel building will cause some incredibly extensive damage.
October 26th, 2009 at 10:43 amThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Where’s doom and gloom “another joe” or “freeman” to call him a liar?
October 26th, 2009 at 10:45 amEnnuiDivine says:
October 26th, 2009 at 10:50 am@46. Fair enough. You know more about this than I do, this whole event taking place while I was in high school. It was just that when it was mentioned earlier, I realized that they never made much mention of wreckage that I could remember. Of course, I had a hard time remembering which classes I had, so it may just be me.
So, they were just too busy being as$holes to vote? That poll definately tells a different story. Sucks to be you.
October 26th, 2009 at 10:50 am47 – Poor delusional baby…
Just because lots of Americans believe in Santa Claus doesn’t mean he exists.
And if that’s 40% figure is true, please explain why we Democrats own the White House, the House and the Senate.
I’ll be waiting….
October 26th, 2009 at 10:50 amSTORMfront
Meaningless. What does conservative mean? A much MORE relevant stat is that MORE than fifty percent of people consider themselves Democratic or LEAN democratic and less than forty percent consider themselves GOP or leaning GOP. You can WISH all you want. Bush was such a catastrophe he ruined you morons
October 26th, 2009 at 10:51 amstorms poll has this disclaimer:
Why not take a deep breath and realize that conservatives are now indies not republicans.
October 26th, 2009 at 10:54 amGallup: Conservatives Maintain Edge as Top Ideological Group
Too bad the ultra-radical Republican party isn’t remotely conservative, then.
October 26th, 2009 at 10:56 amThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
storm, explain the election results in respect to your poll.
You can live in denial if you choose but don’t try to shit us.
October 26th, 2009 at 11:02 amstorm 55. You’re an idiot. I said no such thing. You want to play semantics, go out in the street and lay down.
You just lie.
October 26th, 2009 at 11:04 amThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Two confused trolls without a single clue.
As useless as a pair of empty testicles.
October 26th, 2009 at 11:17 amThe state opt out option is BOGUS. We need to give the public option its best chance to WORK not set it up to fail. Big money corporations find state govs even easier to buy than Congress. Write a federal law and the states can get on board. There isnt any requirement anyone buy the public option ANYWAY thats already option enough.
October 26th, 2009 at 11:19 amcaptain, you want to act like this is not a crisis? You want to pretend that something big doesn’t need to be done immediately?
Remember the gop screaming because Obama’s health care reform would cost 900 Billion over ten years?
October 26th, 2009 at 11:20 am
Mrs. Obama said with a laugh. “But you know what, when he beats me in tennis that gets to be pretty annoying, and he beats me quite often.”
How long before Glenn Beck pulls this out of context to claim that the President “beats his wife”?
October 26th, 2009 at 11:28 amSure. FOR THE STATE.
Explain how it increases choice for THE CONSUMER.
On second thought, don’t bother.
October 26th, 2009 at 11:29 amIt seems it’s not just our trolls who have sexual fantasies about Keith Olbermann, Salon reports that Sarah Palin has had them too.
“And to think,” SP says, “I once dreamed of blowing Keith Olbermann.”
October 26th, 2009 at 11:34 amSTORMfront fails to recognize that while more people may call themselves “conservative” than call themselves liberal, when questioned on their positions on the actual issues, most Americans favor liberal positions.
Calling oneself a “conservative” today seems a little like calling oneself a “screenwriter” in Hollywood. If it doesn’t produce anything, it doesn’t matter, you can call yourself anything you want.
October 26th, 2009 at 11:34 amThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
b-cup, you have a really weird concept of “choice”.
October 26th, 2009 at 11:45 amAnd I thought I said you didn’t have to bother, b-cup. Looks like I was correct.
October 26th, 2009 at 11:46 amThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
You keep saying “there would be more choice”.
MORE CHOICE FOR WHOM, b-cup?
What does “choice” even mean in this context? You’re gonna spin off and form your own planet if you’re not careful.
How does a state government determining that individuals in that state DON’T have the public option mean “more choice”?
You shouldn’t have bothered.
October 26th, 2009 at 12:10 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
This comment has been voted down. Click to read.
ralph the wonder llama:
Since b-cup has come out of the closet and is now in full troll mode, it may be prudent to just ignore the little bugger. You know what happens once he gets all wound up, he’ll spin, spin, spin and make this thread all about b-cup.
October 26th, 2009 at 12:23 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Democrats are discussing ways to speed up key benefits in the health reform bill to 2010, “eager to give the party something to show taxpayers for their $900 billion investment in an election year.” “We want to be able, within the cost framework and the implementation framework, to have as much start as early as possible, even though we know all of it can’t,” said Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI).
October 26th, 2009 at 12:49 pm…………………
Provided this includes a strong public option this is welcome news and will do good for the democrats in their re election bids in the upcoming mid terms .
The opt out legislation may well be a boon as well as people in red states will get to see whether or not their Representatives support compassion or corporations over the constituency which elected them . If this is what it takes to pass a stong “robust” public option give it to them .
Not passing “real” reform will do the democrats “real” harm !
According to the CBO the stronger the public option the larger the savings to the American people .
October 26th, 2009 at 12:57 pmThe American People when polled for decades have supported medicare for all at ates of near or above 70 % in those polls .
Anyone who supports less than a robust public option ,Obama included , is legislating on behalf of corporations over the wishes of the the citizenry ,period !
Congress and the Obama administration are getting ready to address the issue of banking institutions that are “too big to fail.” A measure that could be introduced this week “would make it easier for the government to seize control of troubled financial institutions, throw out management, wipe out the shareholders and change the terms of existing loans held by the institution.”
October 26th, 2009 at 12:58 pmABOUT TIME !!!!
Has b-kkkup starting posting links to freeperville to “prove” her point?
October 26th, 2009 at 1:00 pmBackup @ 58
October 26th, 2009 at 1:10 pmThere are definitely downsides to the opt out for the uninsured ,it’s like turning your backs on them . I am fairly sure that there are other downsides which have yet to be seen .
However if that is the price needed for reform to get a foothold than I cautiously might support it but advocate a strong fight not to include it in the new legislation .
If the actual goal is provide health care to the American people than anything else than universal heath care and a single payer system is garbage .
October 26th, 2009 at 1:18 pmIf the goal is about keeping the system in place which allows the middle man ( insurers ) to drive the price up while providing nothing of actual benefit to the consumer than the window dressing legislation we have been largely hearing about then why bother except to provide political cover for our legislators , nearly all of them , who are bought and paid for by the corporations .
As evidence as I present the fact that the stronger the public option the greater the savings to the American people !
backup says:
What are the downsides to that option?
October 26th, 2009 at 11:14 am
Um, the entire population of a state is held hostage to the political whims of the Governor and legislature, no matter how much the people might need or want a public option.
Yeah, that’s more choice alright.
Get bent, backup.
October 26th, 2009 at 1:21 pmLove or money …… at some point we must make a choice . This applies across the board , not only to health care , but to our obscene war machine , our foreign policy agenda ,etc…
October 26th, 2009 at 1:30 pmRight there’s the crux of b-cup’s comprehension problem.
The public option is MANDATING a choice.
What a frickin’ idiot you are sometimes, b-cup.
October 26th, 2009 at 1:59 pmralph. If everyone believed as you did, there wouldn’t be a debate.
Is it possible that you just don’t see or understand how the public option could actually end up limiting choice?
October 26th, 2009 at 2:08 pmAnd those people can’t elect different leadership?
October 26th, 2009 at 2:09 pmfreeman. you’re practical in that you see that it may be the best way to get a public option at all.
October 26th, 2009 at 2:11 pmralph. Think about it this way:
Wal-mart wants to open a store a few blocks from where you are.
You resist that because you don’t want Wal-Mart forcing the other local businesses to close.
You understand that Wal-mart has the capacity to undercut the local business until they are forced to close. Once the competition is eliminated, then Wal-mart can operate with impunity. It can and will do whatever it wants.
You will then not have a choice to shop somewhere else. Those options will be gone.
October 26th, 2009 at 2:17 pmOh STFU b-cup. You can spin all you want but MORE OPTIONS do not LIMIT CHOICE.
You truly are an idiot sometimes.
October 26th, 2009 at 2:26 pmAh b-crap, I can see you are as clueless and stupid as usual.
You forgot to finish your scenario. What if Walmart was one of only a small handful of retailers left and they had made food so expensive over the last 2 decades we had 10s of thousands die each year because they couldn’t afford to eat. Then the government said it would set up “affordable” retail outlets that would sell basic food necessities at their real price. Then Walmart sent out d***chbag republicans like you to say this would put them out of business.
I’d say we have proof you are a d**chebag…
October 26th, 2009 at 2:36 pmSo, having Wal-mart as an additional choice in the neighborhood, can only result in more choices in the long run?
October 26th, 2009 at 3:02 pmIdiot.
October 26th, 2009 at 3:08 pmBackup
So continuing to IGNORE the point is how you are going to play this? Why are you so dishonest?
October 26th, 2009 at 3:21 pmEugeneDebs.
Democrats can insist on all or nothing on the public option.
They’ll either get it or fail, due to reluctance on the part of Blue Dogs (and opposition of Republicans).
The opt out is a compromise that could help win approval and create a circumstance where areas of the country that now oppose the public option can see how it works and adopt it later.
October 26th, 2009 at 3:28 pmSTOP being so dishonest. Without LOCKSTEP opposition by the GOP of ANY real healthcare reform the bluedogs would be irrelevant. It is the GOP that is the stumbling block here. Your really dumb Rush inspired talking point about the GOP having no responsibility for trying to kill healthcare reform will only fool the most gullible brainwashed people imaginable. I say make it a REAL reform. If it doesnt pass take it to the people and make the argument that the REAL impediment to reform is the GOP with collaboration of bluedogs and let the chips fall where they may. Putting out an option that just sets the table for the reform to fail is worse than a halfmeaure it is sabotage
October 26th, 2009 at 3:32 pmWTF does this even mean?
b-cup, it would behoove you to at least monitor the Reality-Based Community, even if you don’t intend to join it.
That way, at least you might sound like you know a little bit of what you’re talking about.
Right now you’re trying to make the argument that, essentially, adding the option of an apple to desert choices of peach cobbler, butterscotch pudding, and chocolate cake will result in fewer choices because eventually, everybody would choose the apple.
I think your work is done here.
October 26th, 2009 at 3:37 pmEugeneDebs. Even if Republicans are nothing but obstructionists, Democrats still have to make a decision.
Push for the public option with no compromises and risk failure or compromise with an opt out and have a better chance of passing.
October 26th, 2009 at 3:38 pmralph. You’ll agree that the government can subsidize the public option. The government isn’t required to be profitable to operate.
Because of that, the public option could undercut private options that are required to be profitable.
When those private options fail due to their inability to compete with the government subsidized option – there will be less choice.
Initially, that may seem like a good thing. But, if quality or wait times cause suffering under a government monopoly, what other option will people have? The private options will be gone.
October 26th, 2009 at 3:50 pm“would make it easier for the government to seize control of troubled financial institutions, throw out management, wipe out the shareholders and change the terms of existing loans held by the institution.”
what good is it having a capability that none of the politicians would ever be willing to use on there sugar daddies? No doubt they could have done a lot of that this round of plutocratic stealing, but for obamadmin dithering to save the bankster honey pot for more plundering. This is mo’ same ole, same ole.
Another eye-candy policy initiative from obamadmin.
October 26th, 2009 at 3:50 pmI say GO FOR IT. Put GOP obstruction front and center. Fight for MEANINGFUL reform and if the GOP is mad for denying America both the reform AND the public option that polls show is OVERWHELMINGLY popular showcase them doing it. They can go the way of the WHIG party
October 26th, 2009 at 4:33 pmSure Backup. THAT is the way it worked with universities isnt it. WAIT no it isnt. That is just the talking point you have been programmed with. Sure its dumb as dirt but then I guess a propaganda parrots gotta do what a propaganda parrots gotta do
October 26th, 2009 at 4:35 pmb-cup, when I described your argument (fairly, I believe) to my wife, she laughed out loud.
I thought that an appropriate response.
October 26th, 2009 at 4:47 pmralph.
It’s good to know I can still make her laugh.
Kidding.
Here’s my prediction. This opt out provision will become the Democratic position that enables a successful passage of a healthcare bill with a public option.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:25 pmSen. Russ Feingold said Sunday during an appearance on CBS’s “Face the Nation” that he is working with his colleagues to block any increase in U.S. troops levels in Afghanistan. “There will be resistance to [a troop increase] if necessary…We will do what we can to prevent this mistake,” the senator told host Bob Schieffer.
That’s great Sen. Feingold. Now follow that up by pushing to remove the targets we have there already!
October 27th, 2009 at 12:34 am