Conservative Comment on Passage of...
 

On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 21:54:20 -0700 (PDT), Mike
wrote:

On Mar 22, 12:08*pm, jps wrote:
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 06:33:46 -0400, hk
wrote:



...health care insurance reform, from David Frum:

* *Conservatives and Republicans today suffered their most crushing
legislative defeat since the 1960s.

* * It’s hard to exaggerate the magnitude of the disaster.
Conservatives may cheer themselves that they’ll compensate for today’s
expected vote with a big win in the November 2010 elections. But:

* * (1) It’s a good bet that conservatives are over-optimistic about
November – by then the economy will have improved and the immediate
goodies in the healthcare bill will be reaching key voting blocs.

* * (2) So what? Legislative majorities come and go. This healthcare
bill is forever. A win in November is very poor compensation for this
debacle now.

* * So far, I think a lot of conservatives will agree with me. Now
comes the hard lesson:

* * A huge part of the blame for today’s disaster attaches to
conservatives and Republicans ourselves.

* * I’ve been on a soapbox for months now about the harm that our
overheated talk is doing to us. Yes it mobilizes supporters – but by
mobilizing them with hysterical accusations and pseudo-information,
overheated talk has made it impossible for representatives to represent
and elected leaders to lead. The real leaders are on TV and radio, and
they have very different imperatives from people in government. Talk
radio thrives on confrontation and recrimination. When Rush Limbaugh
said that he wanted President Obama to fail, he was intelligently
explaining his own interests. What he omitted to say – but what is
equally true – is that he also wants Republicans to fail. If Republicans
succeed – if they govern successfully in office and negotiate attractive
compromises out of office – Rush’s listeners get less angry. And if they
are less angry, they listen to the radio less, and hear fewer ads for
Sleepnumber beds.

* * No illusions please: This bill will not be repealed. Even if
Republicans scored a 1994 style landslide in November, how many votes
could we muster to re-open the "doughnut hole" and charge seniors more
for prescription drugs? How many votes to re-allow insurers to rescind
policies when they discover a pre-existing condition? How many votes to
banish 25 year olds from their parents’ insurance coverage? And even if
the votes were there – would President Obama sign such a repeal?

* * We followed the most radical voices in the party and the movement,
and they led us to abject and irreversible defeat.
...

And the frosting on the cake? The incredibly horrid behavior of the
teabagging Republicans the last couple of weeks.

Welcome to the modern Republian Party. *It's a big, stupid tent.

You know, the more I read of your BS liberal posts, the more I get a
mental image of a Keith Olbermann wannabe. Makes me want to puke.

You're a blowhard, yuppie, liberal snob, idiot. Plain and simple. Do
us all a favor and try to be a real, down-to-earth person for a
change. Believe it or not, you'll actually feel better about
yourself.

The majority of Americans *did or do not* support the recent health
care reform legislation. They passed it anyway through back-room
deals. Are you so "enlightened" that you know better than than the
majority of Americans?

Mike

Sore loser.

Obama and the rest of the country are rolling right over your pasty
white ass. Read it and weep, little man.

Conservative Comment on Passage of...
 

On Mar 22, 1:17*pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
wrote in message

...



On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 10:22:00 -0400, hk
wrote:

On 3/22/10 10:12 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 06:33:46 -0400,
wrote:

* * *We followed the most radical voices in the party and the movement,
and they led us to abject and irreversible defeat.
...

Even if it were true that the "we" followed the most radical voices,
would a few Republican votes for the health-care legislation have
reversed the defeat?

Had the Republicans actually been engaged in a process to improve health
care insurance and health care reform, there might have been a truly
bipartisan bill and a lot less rancor. The GOP paid lip service to
reform, but the reality is, the GOP leadership is doing everything it
can to obstruct and to make sure it does what it can to stymie Obama.

Is that a problem if the GOP and its respective constituency consider
the bill to be an Über-Leviathon? *I personally consider an aspect of
it to be an infringement of my personal liberty. *Too, I've read of
several GOP submissions for health-care reform.

But, I bet you have no problem with the Republicans trying to bad abortions,
because it isn't your "personal liberty."

--
Nom=de=Plume

Excellent structure, D'Plume. Maybe you should stop eating your own
cookies.

Conservative Comment on Passage of...
 

On Mar 22, 1:18*pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 06:33:46 -0400, hk
wrote:

...health care insurance reform, from David Frum:

My big problem with this legislation is it doesn't limit insurance
premiums at all and I bet your "october surprise" will be what the
2011 rates are going to be for those 300 million that do have
insurance.
That will be what drives the election.

There are several parts that need to be fixed. That's how things are done in
Congress.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Brilliant thought, D'Plume. Again you prove yourself not to be
average.

Conservative Comment on Passage of...
 

On 22/03/2010 9:33 PM, wrote:

The problem is "the law" can easily change and make the projection
wildly wrong. That is what happened to Medicare. Once they got the
framework in place it became a Christmas tree that everyone could hang
ornaments on. That is the fear with this bill. The congress is already
saying they are going to "fix all the problems" that were created to
get it passed in the first place. I am sure all of the cost saving
devices will be the first things to go, like the Medicare cuts, the
tax increases and the limits on what they grant the states.

Good annology. And he reason they don't want it in a seperate fund is
so they can hide the skiming as they ask for more, and more taxes. Foot
is now in the door, going to be hard now to stop.

As I said earlier, based on what congress said about the cost of
Medicare and what actually happened.

In 1964 the estimate was Medicare would cost $12 billion by 1990. It
was really $107 billion. When you are off by almost an order of
magnitude that is not really an estimate, it is a fantasy or being
less generous a lie.

Yet, times change. No entity could possibly know the future in that much
detail. It's been nearly 50 years since 1964.

... and the plan is broke.

Let's see how this actually works out. To start with there are already
at least 6 states suing over constitutional issues so this bill as
passed. Then you still have the reconciliation vote coming. Who knows
what deals have to be made to pass that.
I am as much worried about the back room deals and the pork that will
show up on other bills to get these votes as I am the bill itself.
Those are the ones you really have to be a "thomas junkie" to even
find.

This is true for just about any contentious legislation. Nothing new. That
requires a different effort to clean up.

There will be a bill to rename a post office in Fumbuck Mississippi
with a $300,000,000 bridge to nowhere in it so that congressman would
vote for this. Multiply that by the three dozen votes they had to
wring out and you are talking about some money. That is just how the
process works.

I agree. Better still, it looks like some in the press are actually looking.
It'll get easier as time passes.


Wanna bet? Entitlements are already bankrupting the country and they
just added a huge new one.

They will. When the tax bill arrives people will be ****ed to no end.
It will not be just income tax, sin taxes, utilities, gas and like EVERY
other nation with a statism government VAT, a national sales tax. At
some point government will go for a national sales tax.

--
--------------
Politicians don't provide anything, the tax payers do.

Conservative Comment on Passage of...
 

"TopBassDog" wrote in message
...
On Mar 22, 1:17 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
wrote in message

...



On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 10:22:00 -0400, hk
wrote:

On 3/22/10 10:12 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 06:33:46 -0400,
wrote:

We followed the most radical voices in the party and the movement,
and they led us to abject and irreversible defeat.
...

Even if it were true that the "we" followed the most radical voices,
would a few Republican votes for the health-care legislation have
reversed the defeat?

Had the Republicans actually been engaged in a process to improve health
care insurance and health care reform, there might have been a truly
bipartisan bill and a lot less rancor. The GOP paid lip service to
reform, but the reality is, the GOP leadership is doing everything it
can to obstruct and to make sure it does what it can to stymie Obama.

Is that a problem if the GOP and its respective constituency consider
the bill to be an Über-Leviathon? I personally consider an aspect of
it to be an infringement of my personal liberty. Too, I've read of
several GOP submissions for health-care reform.

But, I bet you have no problem with the Republicans trying to bad
abortions,
because it isn't your "personal liberty."

--
Nom=de=Plume

Excellent structure, D'Plume. Maybe you should stop eating your own
cookies.


Structure? You mean the typo? Wow. I'm not perfect. Thanks for the reminder!
--
Nom=de=Plume

Conservative Comment on Passage of...
 

"Mike" wrote in message
...
On Mar 22, 12:08 pm, jps wrote:
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 06:33:46 -0400, hk
wrote:



...health care insurance reform, from David Frum:

Conservatives and Republicans today suffered their most crushing
legislative defeat since the 1960s.

It’s hard to exaggerate the magnitude of the disaster.
Conservatives may cheer themselves that they’ll compensate for today’s
expected vote with a big win in the November 2010 elections. But:

(1) It’s a good bet that conservatives are over-optimistic about
November – by then the economy will have improved and the immediate
goodies in the healthcare bill will be reaching key voting blocs.

(2) So what? Legislative majorities come and go. This healthcare
bill is forever. A win in November is very poor compensation for this
debacle now.

So far, I think a lot of conservatives will agree with me. Now
comes the hard lesson:

A huge part of the blame for today’s disaster attaches to
conservatives and Republicans ourselves.

I’ve been on a soapbox for months now about the harm that our
overheated talk is doing to us. Yes it mobilizes supporters – but by
mobilizing them with hysterical accusations and pseudo-information,
overheated talk has made it impossible for representatives to represent
and elected leaders to lead. The real leaders are on TV and radio, and
they have very different imperatives from people in government. Talk
radio thrives on confrontation and recrimination. When Rush Limbaugh
said that he wanted President Obama to fail, he was intelligently
explaining his own interests. What he omitted to say – but what is
equally true – is that he also wants Republicans to fail. If Republicans
succeed – if they govern successfully in office and negotiate attractive
compromises out of office – Rush’s listeners get less angry. And if they
are less angry, they listen to the radio less, and hear fewer ads for
Sleepnumber beds.

No illusions please: This bill will not be repealed. Even if
Republicans scored a 1994 style landslide in November, how many votes
could we muster to re-open the "doughnut hole" and charge seniors more
for prescription drugs? How many votes to re-allow insurers to rescind
policies when they discover a pre-existing condition? How many votes to
banish 25 year olds from their parents’ insurance coverage? And even if
the votes were there – would President Obama sign such a repeal?

We followed the most radical voices in the party and the movement,
and they led us to abject and irreversible defeat.
...

And the frosting on the cake? The incredibly horrid behavior of the
teabagging Republicans the last couple of weeks.

Welcome to the modern Republian Party. It's a big, stupid tent.

You know, the more I read of your BS liberal posts, the more I get a
mental image of a Keith Olbermann wannabe. Makes me want to puke.

You're a blowhard, yuppie, liberal snob, idiot. Plain and simple. Do
us all a favor and try to be a real, down-to-earth person for a
change. Believe it or not, you'll actually feel better about
yourself.

The majority of Americans *did or do not* support the recent health
care reform legislation. They passed it anyway through back-room
deals. Are you so "enlightened" that you know better than than the
majority of Americans?

Mike


Reply: The poll you're referring to said that the a percentage didn't like
the bill because it went too far... something like 45%. The rest either
liked it or thought it didn't go far enough. So much for your enlightenment.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Conservative Comment on Passage of...
 

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 19:43:54 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 17:48:17 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

The CBO is non-partisan and both sides of the isle refer to it.

Medicare is fixable, and it's been amended several times. Republicans
called
that program communism also, but I don't see too many of the
Teabaggers
willing to give up the benefits.

--
The problem is they can only project the effect on the budget based on
the fantasy numbers the congress sends them. Things like saying they
will actually cut Medicare by a half trillion. That will be "fixed" by
eliminating the cuts.


Umm... I don't think Congress sends them numbers. They send them
policy/law
statements. The CBO interprets the statements and makes a judgement
about
numbers.

True but Congress knows what number will come out of CBO when they
frame the question and CBO is not allowed to question the scenario
congress sends them.

?? They "frame" the question by using the language of the law. The CBO
can't
question the scenario because it's not within their purview to do so.

The problem is "the law" can easily change and make the projection
wildly wrong. That is what happened to Medicare. Once they got the
framework in place it became a Christmas tree that everyone could hang
ornaments on. That is the fear with this bill. The congress is already
saying they are going to "fix all the problems" that were created to
get it passed in the first place. I am sure all of the cost saving
devices will be the first things to go, like the Medicare cuts, the
tax increases and the limits on what they grant the states.

Well, true, but by that logic, the costs could be a whole lot better too.
There's always fear. That's what the right plays on. Read what the bill (and
reconcilliation) will do. It's pretty good. Not perfect, things need to be
speeded up, but it's not bad.


As I said earlier, based on what congress said about the cost of
Medicare and what actually happened.

In 1964 the estimate was Medicare would cost $12 billion by 1990. It
was really $107 billion. When you are off by almost an order of
magnitude that is not really an estimate, it is a fantasy or being
less generous a lie.

Yet, times change. No entity could possibly know the future in that much
detail. It's been nearly 50 years since 1964.

... and the plan is broke.

It's not unfixable. I think that's the point. It's not broken in the sense
that people want to give it up. It's broken in the sense that it needs to be
financed properly.


Let's see how this actually works out. To start with there are already
at least 6 states suing over constitutional issues so this bill as
passed. Then you still have the reconciliation vote coming. Who knows
what deals have to be made to pass that.
I am as much worried about the back room deals and the pork that will
show up on other bills to get these votes as I am the bill itself.
Those are the ones you really have to be a "thomas junkie" to even
find.

This is true for just about any contentious legislation. Nothing new. That
requires a different effort to clean up.

There will be a bill to rename a post office in Fumbuck Mississippi
with a $300,000,000 bridge to nowhere in it so that congressman would
vote for this. Multiply that by the three dozen votes they had to
wring out and you are talking about some money. That is just how the
process works.

I agree. Better still, it looks like some in the press are actually
looking.
It'll get easier as time passes.


Wanna bet? Entitlements are already bankrupting the country and they
just added a huge new one.

There's nothing wrong with most entitlements other than financial issues,
and those can be resolved. I was talking about the press actually doing its
job. I wish they would.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Conservative Comment on Passage of...
 

"Canuck57" wrote in message
...
On 22/03/2010 9:33 PM, wrote:

The problem is "the law" can easily change and make the projection
wildly wrong. That is what happened to Medicare. Once they got the
framework in place it became a Christmas tree that everyone could hang
ornaments on. That is the fear with this bill. The congress is already
saying they are going to "fix all the problems" that were created to
get it passed in the first place. I am sure all of the cost saving
devices will be the first things to go, like the Medicare cuts, the
tax increases and the limits on what they grant the states.

Good annology. And he reason they don't want it in a seperate fund is so
they can hide the skiming as they ask for more, and more taxes. Foot is
now in the door, going to be hard now to stop.

As I said earlier, based on what congress said about the cost of
Medicare and what actually happened.

In 1964 the estimate was Medicare would cost $12 billion by 1990. It
was really $107 billion. When you are off by almost an order of
magnitude that is not really an estimate, it is a fantasy or being
less generous a lie.

Yet, times change. No entity could possibly know the future in that much
detail. It's been nearly 50 years since 1964.

... and the plan is broke.

Let's see how this actually works out. To start with there are already
at least 6 states suing over constitutional issues so this bill as
passed. Then you still have the reconciliation vote coming. Who knows
what deals have to be made to pass that.
I am as much worried about the back room deals and the pork that will
show up on other bills to get these votes as I am the bill itself.
Those are the ones you really have to be a "thomas junkie" to even
find.

This is true for just about any contentious legislation. Nothing new.
That
requires a different effort to clean up.

There will be a bill to rename a post office in Fumbuck Mississippi
with a $300,000,000 bridge to nowhere in it so that congressman would
vote for this. Multiply that by the three dozen votes they had to
wring out and you are talking about some money. That is just how the
process works.

I agree. Better still, it looks like some in the press are actually
looking.
It'll get easier as time passes.


Wanna bet? Entitlements are already bankrupting the country and they
just added a huge new one.

They will. When the tax bill arrives people will be ****ed to no end. It
will not be just income tax, sin taxes, utilities, gas and like EVERY
other nation with a statism government VAT, a national sales tax. At some
point government will go for a national sales tax.

--
--------------
Politicians don't provide anything, the tax payers do.


Oh go away. The adults are talking. You need to go to your room and play
with your dolly some more.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Conservative Comment on Passage of...
 

"TopBassDog" wrote in message
...
On Mar 22, 1:18 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 06:33:46 -0400, hk
wrote:

...health care insurance reform, from David Frum:

My big problem with this legislation is it doesn't limit insurance
premiums at all and I bet your "october surprise" will be what the
2011 rates are going to be for those 300 million that do have
insurance.
That will be what drives the election.

There are several parts that need to be fixed. That's how things are done
in
Congress.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Brilliant thought, D'Plume. Again you prove yourself not to be
average.


So you deny that this is how it works? If so, please point to a major bill
that came out of Congress that didn't require changes...

--
Nom=de=Plume

Conservative Comment on Passage of...
 

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 11:21:05 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

I don't think anyone actually trusts congress to do all the things
they promise. After all the process is actually driven by billion
dollar lobbyists.
That is why thinking people dismiss all of those CBO projections. They
are based on fantasy scenarios that are unlikely to happen, like
cutting a half trillion out of Medicare.
Bear in mind, Medicare ended up costing almost 10 times what the
original CBO estimate had it at, out at the 10 year mark. Government
programs always get bigger, not smaller.


Yet, the corporations are legally allowed to pump as much money into the
system as they want.

The CBO is non-partisan and both sides of the isle refer to it.

Medicare is fixable, and it's been amended several times. Republicans
called
that program communism also, but I don't see too many of the Teabaggers
willing to give up the benefits.

--
The problem is they can only project the effect on the budget based on
the fantasy numbers the congress sends them. Things like saying they
will actually cut Medicare by a half trillion. That will be "fixed" by
eliminating the cuts.

How are they going to cut Medicare? Medicare people vote at a higher
percentage than others. And they already said they are going to fix the
drug donut hole. How is that going to reduce costs?