Obama on Social Security reform 2005

The Democrats won control of Congress in 2006 by running against the war in Iraq.

Both wings of the MSM agreed that the election was a referendum on the War.

Bush's approval ratings were in the tank.

Support for the war was in the tank.

A majority of the country wanted to hear an exit strategy and voted for the Democrats towards that end.

Fox New's and rightwing pundits said "Sometimes the right thing to do is not the popular thing to do."

Bush said "Just because my party lost an election doesn't mean I'm not still the commander in chief. I'm still the President and I'm the decider."

And he went forwards with what his policy was before the election and Surged.


Republicans had an opportunity to shape this bill from the beginning, but it was more important to them to try to facilitate "Obama's Waterloo" than to cooperate with the Democrats to represent the interest of Republican voters.

If Republicans supporters are mad about anything right now, it SHOULD be that their Representatives excused themselves from their responsibility of negotiating to shape the bill to go play politics.



This bill is unpopular in polling when they ask people "Do you support Obamacare" or "Do you support the current bill", but when you go point by point and ask them about the constituent parts of the bill, it still has majority support.

This bill also includes every part of the GOP's four (whopping) page counter-proposal from last summer. So it comes to them pre-compromised to make up for the year the Republicans wasted trying to play politics. But the Republicans are now against the exact same things they proposed less than 1 year go.

The bill ALSO already passed both houses of Congress with majorities. Larger majorities than Bush's tax cuts which were so popular.


Those tax cuts were also passed on Reconciliation BTW. A tactic which Republicans have historically used FAR more often than the Democrats to pass bills with little chance of surviving a second vote in the Senate.


It's also laughable to see Mitch McConnell and other Republicans trying to convince the Democrats that passing the bill will be a political loser. Right, because Mitch McConnell is really going to offer sound political advice to Nancy Pelosi, because he'd hate to see her lose an election over this.

Lame.


The Republicans are so desperate to stop this thing, because they know at the end of the day, despite it's flaws and the lies that have been told about it, it will be popular.

If they thought it was unpopular, they'd let it pass, then sweep Congress in November on a promise to repeal.

Which Obama would not sign.

Which would basically hand the Presidency to the Republicans in 2012 so that they could get a Republican in there to sign to repeal the bill.

That's if the bill really were unpopular.

If the bill in unpopular, it will hand the Government to the Republicans for a decade again.

But it's not unpopular. Obamacare is unpopular. "The Democrats Plan to Take Over Healthcare" is unpopular. End of life counciling described as Death Panels is unpopular.

The constituent parts of the bill are not unpopular. Insurance Reform is not unpopular. Universal Coverage is not unpopular.

And that's what this bill really is.

And the Republicans know that when they see it in action it will be popular and they'll never be able to overturn as a favor to their Insurance Company friends.

And that's why they are DESPERATE to stop it.

And the desperation shows.



Just like the Surge. People didn't want it, people lost elections over it, but in hindsight, it was the right thing to do.

 

Of course, I support some concepts in the bill, the problem is the way it's put together is terrible. Why do you support a proposal to give the insurance industry 30 million new customers with very few cost controls? And yes, the Senate bill has very few cost controls.

Just because someone supports a few general concepts in the health care bill, doesn't mean they support passing it.

 

Healthcare reform WILL pass.

Despite the Republicans and the Blue Dogs, it will pass.

It already has passed. Both house. With more than a simple majority.

I couldn't be happier.


And if Republicans won the election on a platform of Soc Sec reform, and they had the majority they should have done it.

I can't imagine how much worse November 2008 could have been for the Republicans anyway. Why not add dumping Soc Sec into the stock market less than 2 years before a crash to the list of reasons they lost in 2008.


And with healthcare, if the Democrats are right about the bill, it will make improvements that people will be able to see and people will see that there are no "death panels" and it doesn't explode the debt, and the world doesn't end, and they'll like it.

And if the Republicans are right about the bill, it will be a disaster, people will hate it, and the Republicans will win on a message of repealing it.


What a concept! Letting Democracy work. Letting the winner do what they won the election promising to do. And then letting the people decide if they want to keep the changes or change them back. I mean, it's not like the day Health Care Reform passes, the skies are going to crack open and swallow America. Maybe tomorrow Glenn Beck will say that's what going to happen, but realistically, it's probably not going to happen.



And Spacedout, I don't like the Senate bill much either. But I'll take what I can get, hopefully it won't be the last reform. The Insurance lobby just has too much money to throw at Congress to pass anything with any real teeth right now.


Honestly, I for one would have settled for letting people with pre-existing conditions buy into Medicare. That would be enough to cover the people that really need it, the people that private insurance won't even serve as a customer.

But I'll take what I can get today, because I can't wait another 16 years to get by next prescription refill and Insurance Companies flat out won't give me coverage.

 

Being an artist sounds fun. ^ Don't quit your day job, I need someone to pay for my healthcare. After this I hope they pass a bill to give cars and houses to artists as well. Imagine how great it would be to not have to earn anything?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=co9wl5hA9LM]YouTube - If your a lazy ass the health care bill has you covered.flv[/ame]

 

Dude. Read my fucking posts instead of just posting the response based on what you think I should be saying based on the fact that you have deemed that I am a liberal.


IF THE REPUBLICANS HAVE AS PART OF THEIR PLATFORM SOC SEC REFORM AND THEY WIN AN ELECTION THEY SHOULD DO IT.

If it turns out to be political suicide is another matter.

AND SINCE THE DEMOCRATS WON TWO ELECTIONS IN A ROW WITH HEALTHCARE REFORM AS PART OF THEIR PLATFORM, THEY SHOULD DO IT.

If it turns out to be political suicide is another matter.

YOU ARE THE ONE LIVING IN THE FANTASY WORLD WHERE REPUBLICANS ARE STILL IN POWER. YOU WANT THE MAJORITY PARTY TO CEDE TO THE MINORITY PARTY, DESPITE THE BILL ALREADY PASSING BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS JUST BECAUSE THE REPUBLICANS FEELINGS ARE HURT BECAUSE WHEN DEMOCRATS STARTED WORKING ON HELATHCARE THE REPUBLICANS CHOSE TO JUST SAY NO TO EVERYTHING.

You are the one that wants to change the rules now. Bush's tax cuts passed on Reconciliation. It had passed the Senate with only 50 votes. Cheney had to cast the tie breaker on that one.

You want to change the rules now because you perceive healthcare to be bigger that Bush's tax cuts.

Additionally, the Surge happened just after a HUGE swing in control of Congress. Bush's approval ratings and the War's approval rating were lower than Obama's or Healthcare is now.

But Bush went ahead and surged anyway.

Is health care bigger than war? Maybe to you and the chuckleheads at Fox News.


And do you know why we have 4 year terms for President, 2 years terms for House, and 6 year terms for the Senate?

It's to isolate the actions of Government from the passionate whims of the moment.

If we had a system like the UK where there could be an election at any moment, then politicians would have to do everything based on the whims of the people at that moment.

But we don't have that system. OUr founding father saw fit to isolate the President and the Senate from the whim of the moment by giving them long terms. Otherwise nothing will ever get done, because as soon as they start working on one problem, the masses will turn against it on a whim and demand they work on something else.

Are you saying that we should dump our system in favor of a system more like Parliament? The American system is broken perhaps?


Obama is just doing what he campaigned on.



And do you really believe that Health Care reform - especially in it's current watered down form - is a Government Conspiracy to run the lives of people?

If so, you seriously need to go talk to a counselor. Your are suffering from paranoid delusions. Obama doesn't want to kill your grandmother. There are no "death panels".



And anything you can say about reform - like that it will give the power to make decisions about your health care to the Government - is already true about insurance companies. Currently they dictate what treatments your doctor can prescribe. And they have a profit margin to protect whereas the Government doesn't. So they are more prone to forego important treatments to save money.


And anyway, you and Green18 already pay for other people's health care.

You pay for it in the form of higher insurance costs, you pay for it in the form of higher costs at the doctor and at hospitals.

The only differnce is that it's cheaper to treat people proactively than reactively. It cheaper to pay for someone to go see a doctor at the first signs of a heart problem than it is to pay to treat them after a heart attack.

So would you rather make sure that everyone can see a doctor when they need to, or would you rather pay more to treat them when their condition gets to the point where they end up in an emergency room with no insurance?

The Conservative in me would rather pay for the $150 annual doctor visit and some cheap medications, than pay $10,000 or more for the emergency room visit when they have a heart attack.




And finally, the whole Keith Olbermann/MSNBC/MSM screed.... It's pointless.

If I'm an MSNBC tool, then you are a Fox News tool.

Both parties are hypocrites.

Cable news in predominantly leftwing biased, talk radio is predominantly rightwing biased.

So anything you say about me being brainwashed or being a tool is equally true of you.

Democrats want big Government to enslave the masses, Republicans want big business to enslave the masses.

Blah, blah, blah...


That kind of name calling, hyper-partisan demagoguery is just pointless and stupid and not conducive to rational debate.

I can debate things rationally forever. I've refrained from name calling up to this point because so far, it's been a relatively civil debate.

But I'm not going to get into a flamewar on a fucking pot smoker forum.

 

With your logic I'd think you'd like my idea for free houses and cars.

If we dont just give poor people a house then we have to subsidize their rent and pay for homeless shelters.

If we dont give people a car how can they get to work to pay taxes? We have to subsidize public transportation.

Realistically health plans (note; not insurance) need to be changed in the following manner;

1. Tax health benefits as regular income and lower income taxes to offset the increase in taxable income. This solves the portability issue as more individuals would shop for their own plan rather then going through their employer.

2. Tear down barriers preventing individuals from purchasing healthcare plans from another state. The Feds are notorious for overstepping their constitutional bounds and ignoring state rights yet they are derelict in their duty (ie interstate commerce clause) when it comes to healthcare.

3. Ideally people would abandon health plans altogether and pay out of pocket for routine medical care. This would bring market forces to bear that aren't currently present. As long as a hmo is paying people don't shop around for routine care at the best price. Health insurance (note; not plan) should be purchased for unforeseen catastrophic injuries/illness.

 

Healthcare is a hell of a lot bigger than tax cuts, it's 20% of our nation's economy.