Tweet
Originally posted by SubGod22
-
I think GWB allowed massive amounts of spending to quench any argument that he wasn't interested in the domestic economy while fighting the war on terror. It seemed to work, John Kerry didn't have much to run against Bush on."Don't measure yourself by what you have accomplished, but by what you should accomplish with your ability."
-John Wooden -
True. Politics trumps all.Originally posted by wu_shizzle
However, if I thought the health-care debate would solely turn on Democratic lawmakers’ instincts for personal political survival I might feel a little better. There are other factors in play: Health-care is the president’s signature first-year initiative. He and the Democratic leadership also signaled it’s a test of their political virility. As I am sure you are aware, our liberal friends have been working tirelessly for a government takeover of the health system since at least 1944. Will the hard Left be unyielding when it comes to realizing this age-old dream even if it means heavy losses on 2010? To date, Congress has turned a deaf ear to the American people and its Democratic members have showed they believe they can pass this legislation through sheer force of will. It is beginning appear that the goal is simply to pass any sort of legislation no matter how ill-conceived and financially reckless just get something on the books.
As an aside, given the large Democratic majorities in both the House and the Senate, it’s actually surprising that the Democrats have not passed something yet. This failure is due to three factors: Democratic overreach, principled and focused Republican opposition, and some very damaging scores by the CBO.
Looking into my crystal ball, I put the odds at 50–50.Comment
-
Random news and commments about members of Congress willing to sacrifice their seat to pass the liberals dream of gov't-run healthcare:
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) said Sunday that he will vote for landmark health care reform legislation even if it means he will be defeated at the polls next November.
"If you get to the final point and you are a critical vote for health care reform, and every piece of evidence tells you, if you support that bill, you will lose your job, would you cast the vote and lose your job? " CNN's John King asked Bennet on the "State of the Union" program.
"Yes," said Bennet, a former Denver public schools chief who was appointed to the Senate by Colorado's governor when President Barack Obama tapped Ken Salazar to be interior secretary.
King warned Bennet that the video of his vow would be sequestered in the event he is voted out next year.
"All right. That tape will be held -- I hate to tell you that, but that tape will be held right now," the CNN host said.
This statement alone should cause his constituents to fire him. He just said that he would ignore his employers in order to back his party.And you will. BYE BYE DEMS in 2010. I helped to vote you in, and now I shall help to vote you out. Majority of Americans DO NOT WANT Obama-Pelosi welfare health care..Yes, we want reform, but not a new entitlement program.In other words "I have no plans to respect the will of the people I serve". At least he didn't flip them the bird as he said this. I'm beggining to think that Obama has promised anyone who votes for this then looses will be offered a job in his cabinet or in a cushy job somewhere. Why else would a senator not respect the will of the people.So basically this chump is saying he will vote for government control vs the freedom of Americans. What a dirtbag.Comment
-
Why should he care what the voters think? They didn't put him in the Senate. Is it then any wonder that he serves his party and not the people?Comment
-
In light of this statement, I would like to read the Senator’s full floor speech. Regardless, it is an interesting comment:
SEN. MAX BAUCUS (D-MT): “Health Care Reform” Will Cost “$2.5 Trillion”SEN. MAX BAUCUS (D-MT): “Just for a second -- health care reform, whether you use a ten-year number or when you start in 2010 or start in 2014, wherever you start at, so it is still either $1 trillion or it's $2.5 Trillion, depending on where you start…” (Sen. Baucus, Floor Remarks, 12/2/09)Comment
-
:good:Originally posted by RoyalShockComment
-
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that up to 10 million people could lose their employer-based insurance coverage under the Senate's health care reform bill.
Comment
-
"For instance, a family of four making more than $88,000 would not qualify for subsidies and could face even higher premiums in the private market."
I think that pretty much says it all.Comment
-
Senate Dems: Deal near to drop public option
WASHINGTON - Democratic senators say they have a tentative deal to drop a government-run insurance option from health care legislation.
No further details were immediately available as talks carried on late into the evening.
But liberals and moderates have been discussing an alternative, including a private insurance arrangement to be supervised by the federal agency that oversees the system through which lawmakers purchase coverage.Comment
-
Looks like the Ezekiel Emanual Death Panel is paying a visit to the public option. That cannot be good for its survival.
What's still alive in the bill is the government funding of murdering defenseless babies. Weren't we told by His Holiness that abortion wouldn't be in the bill? Why is it still there if it never existed?Comment
-
I have suspected from the beginning that they would do whatever they had to do to pass something, anything. That includes dumping a government plan, or as in the case of the House bill, voting to ban abortion despite deeply held beliefs in favor of abortion. Passing a bill has always been more important than the content of the bill -- which is, in part, why this has become so twisted. If it says "health care reform" at the top, it will say "Barack Obama" on the dotted line.
But I am skeptical this “deal” will get the Democrats to 60 votes. It will be interesting.Comment
Comment