Daley Blames - Who Else? - The Media For Oprah-geddon
Chicago Gets Googled
Friday Flashback - Old School Oprah
Today's Transgender Day of Remembrance Honors the Dead
Review: Paramount Room
Last night, President Obama addressed a joint-session of Congress and the American public to make his case for his health care reform plan, addressed controversies such as the "death panel" accusation, and mixed the usual Obama pragmatism with a bit more of a hard-line stance (the Sun-Times' Lynn Sweet called it "a magnificent balancing act"). You can watch the speech below in its entirety and read the full text here.
Obama initially focused on what he described as his plan's three main goals:
It will provide more security and stability to those who have health insurance. It will provide insurance to those who don’t. And it will slow the growth of health care costs for our families, our businesses, and our government. It’s a plan that asks everyone to take responsibility for meeting this challenge — not just government and insurance companies, but employers and individuals.
Whether he meant it to or not, the President even earned a chuckle of the crowd when he admitted, "some significant details to be ironed out." Obama then addressed accusations made against his plan, including the one made by former Alaska governor (and 2008 GOP VP candidate) Sarah Palin that his plan would be used to form "death panels."
Some of people’s concerns have grown out of bogus claims spread by those whose only agenda is to kill reform at any cost. The best example is the claim, made not just by radio and cable talk show hosts, but prominent politicians, that we plan to set up panels of bureaucrats with the power to kill off senior citizens. Such a charge would be laughable if it weren’t so cynical and irresponsible. It is a lie, plain and simple.
After insisting his plan is not as expensive as some thought, saying it "will cost around $900 billion over ten years — less than we have spent on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars," he then buckled down, saying:
I will not waste time with those who have made the calculation that it’s better politics to kill this plan than improve it. I will not stand by while the special interests use the same old tactics to keep things exactly the way they are. If you misrepresent what’s in the plan, we will call you out. And I will not accept the status quo as a solution. Not this time. Not now.
Of course, Obama's speech will most likely be remembered this morning and into the weekend for the mid-speech, House of Commons-style outburst from U.S. Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC), who offered the initial GOP response when he yelled, "You lie!" (at around the 27:00 mark) after Obama claimed the new health care system would not apply to illegal immigrants. Rep. Wilson later apologized, his actions condemned by fellow Republicans such as U.S. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), and fact checkers figured out pretty quickly who was the liar in this situation. Still, given Obama's reaction, seen below, we're guessing Rep. Wilson won't be getting an invite to the next White House Bar-B-Q.
Obama is not amused by your heckling, Congressman
U.S. Rep. Charles Boustany (R-LA) offered the official GOP response which you can view after the jump.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Why don't republicans care about anyone except themselves? Is it a pre-req that you have to be a selfish jerk to join the republican party?
We have millions in this country living without health insurance. We have a president who is trying to change this broken system, as many before him have.
I hope he's right when he says that many before him have tried to change it, and he'll be the last. I hope he's right.
My own doctor pays $2,000 a month in health insurance premiums for himself and his family (and this excludes a condition he has!) He pays another $2,000 a month in malpractice insurance.
I can't even GET health insurance because of a pre-exisiting condition that doesn't even exist anymore.
And every single republican who sat through that speech last night and refused to applause at Obama's comment that this is a moral cause...every single one of their fat asses is covered by health insurance. Not one of them has to worry about losing everything they own if they or one of their children gets sick and has to pay hospital bills.
It's disgusting. They're all uber-partisan jerks who care for nothing but their own hides.
Right on.
The other thing that kills me is how many of these Republicans claim to be Christians and claim to champion family values. Meanwhile, they refuse to see that there is a health care crisis or they believe that people without insurance have dome something to lose the "privilege" of being insured. They do not care if kids are able to get medical care anywhere other than an ER. They don't care if you or I lose our homes because of medical bills - something which happens to people who are insured. Making health care reform happen is one of the more Christian and family values oriented things a politician could do at this point. But these cowardly and selfish politicians are only willing to make up lies and yell about socialism.
It's not just the politicians that are being selfish and acting this way. They are actually doing a good job representing their constituents. I hail from a Red state in the bible belt. Most people feel this way... and they won't even consider that there actually is an issue.
They pretty much feel like the the people who can't get health insurance have just been irresponsible with their lives somehow and therefore don't deserve help from other people to get it.
We should want better as a people group as a whole. If obama's plan is horrible, I wish these people would at least recognize the issue and come up with better solutions
Wow, I have never seen such over-simplification of a relatively complex issue in my life.
What are your thoughts on world peace?
And was there something in my comment that rang false to you?
Simplify. Simplify. Simplify.
the Democratic oponent to Rep. Joe Wilson brought in over $100k in donations last night alone
Overall, I liked the speech. I thought the end, when he talked out Kennedy, was very effective.
I didn't care for some of the swipes at the Bush administration -- it doesn't help discourse. I hope that Obama lays that boogeyman to rest once and for all. And if he starts another speech with the phrase "greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression," I'm going to fall into a great depression.
And for all those who think Joe Wilson will be hurt politically by his rude outburst, ask Michele Bachmann if her "is he pro-America or anti-America?" idiocy cost her a spot in Congress.
it hasn't yet, but that doesn't mean it won't in the future. she publicly started showing some her crazier thoughts toward the end of the election cycle last year. since she was re-elected she has upped the crazy exponentially. we'll see how well she fares in the next election.
i am not so worried about swipes at the bush administration damaging the discourse when a republican congressman is heckling during a presidential address of a joint session of the legislature. there are some people who are not open to civil reasoned discourse.
Well, Obama has to keep bringing up Bush because it falls in line with his strategy of demonization. He hopes that people favor his bill based on hatred of a particular group/person rather than for the specifics of the bill. The insurance industry is another example. Of course, he is sparing Big Pharma from being demonized because they bought him off. Funny how Dems object to that kind of thing when Republicans do it.
He thinks that as long as he can frame the bill as good (him) vs. evil (Bush, Big Insurance, Republicans) he has a chance to get support from his mindless followers who do whatever he says.
Well, Obama has to keep bringing up Bush because it falls in line with his strategy of demonization.
HIS strategy of demonization??? He's been called a racist, been called and portrayed as Hitler, been called a liar during a national address to the nation (not a debate, not a congressional give-and-take session) but HE'S the one doing the demonizationing.
Yeah,um, OK.
He thinks that as long as he can frame the bill as good (him) vs. evil (Bush, Big Insurance, Republicans) he has a chance to get support from his mindless followers who do whatever he says.
To be fair, you frame all of your arguments as good (Republicans) vs. evil (Democrats).
Actually, I don't. I am a conservative/libertarian and usually vote Republican, but I don't have much use for this crop of Republicans and for Bush. They were not fiscally conservative at all, they presided over the largest expansion of government since LBJ. And with Bush's bailouts and emergency "loan" to the auto companies, he couldn't have crafted a better handoff for OBama to continue his agenda of big government and centralized decision making.
Actually, I don't.
Yes, you do.
Ok, a little test. Say something Obama's done that you approve of. Say something good about ANY Democrat.
Geez, stop blaming Obama's failure to get his health care reform passed on Republicans. Obama's biggest problem is (relatively) conservative Democrats that don't want the "public option" and left wingers that won't vote for a bill without it. He does not need Republican support, and in light of last night's speech, I don't think he is going to get any.
Mostly agree.
The GOP, while their numbers are smaller than a few years ago, still have pretty significant parliamentary power, especially in the Senate, and pretty strong PR/propaganda power. That does not excuse the Dems, of course, from their longstanding talents of shooting themselves in the feet. And I will never understand how the Dems, who have more support among Hollywood and creative types than the GOP, get their butts kicked on propaganda and PR so often. I accept that the USA is, in many respects, a center-right country, but that still does not explain it, especially when this center-right country loves its Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security.
The heckling was boorish, but then again, I am a huge fan of the UK's question time (though this speech was not a question time type event). I think Obama should have heckled back.
I can however blame them for spreading lies and misinformation. I can blame them for using disgusting scare tactics to trick citizens into acting against their best interests.
It isn't just about votes for the bill. People should be called out on their dishonesty. They should also be called out for their blindness to the state of health care in this country.
There are plenty of valid and valuable debates to be had on health care reform, but most republicans are not engaging in those debates. They are focused on spreading lies about death panels, medicare, and insurance for illegal aliens. That doesn't just hurt Obama's agenda - it denies all of us a decent helpful debate and perhaps a decent bill.
Healthy opposition is good for democracy, but this opposition is not healthy. They are fanning flames of anger and ignorance. They should be trying to persuade people with facts and reason.
So, so true!
If I hear one more person going off about Death Panels or health insurance for illegal immigrants I'm going to explode.
And why won't the more reasonable of the Republican party (if there are any) come out and start dispelling some of this batshit crazy talk from the likes of Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin and Michele Bachman?
Why won't they do this?
Why hasn't John McCain come out and decry this foolishness? Let the oldies know that there re no death panels. Palin was just out the other day STILL proclaiming that there will be death panels under Obama's plan.
Who will stop this nonsense?
How about Obama's lies and misinformation?
1) If you like your insurance you can keep it - Not true if your employer drops coverage
2) Illegal immigrants are not covered - They are not specifically mentioned in the bill, but Dems have repeatedly blocked amendments that would require proof of citizenship
3) This will not increase the deficit - Not true, according to the CBO, a group whose figures Dems usually cite with regularity
There are many, many more instances where Obama either lies or uses Clintonesque language that can be interpreted in multiple ways.
Wow - talk about oversimplifying.
If your employer drops coverage, there will be a substantial financial penalty to your employer. Presumably, this penalty will be substantial enough to dissuade your employer from dropping coverage. If your employer still decides to drop coverage, you at least have the public option to turn to.
Currently, there is nothing stopping any employer from dropping coverage or drastically reducing how much they pay into the coverage - something which is happening more and more because of the cost of health care and the general economy. Because of this many hardworking citizens are losing their coverage. There is no safety net for these people. Purchasing individual insurance is quite different from employer provided insurance. It is generally more costly, and there are more loopholes that work against the customer. Even Michelle Malkin has written about how difficult it was for herself and her husband to purchase private insurance. Freelancers and small business owners are regularly screwed over because the can't afford or(because of a pre-existing condition)can't qualify for a private plan.
Yes, good points from you and matilda.
But I wonder if after last night's speech any of these Dems won't change their minds?
And, for sure...why doesn't Obama grow some nalgas and fucking heckle back? Jeez...this guy!
Obama didn't heckle back because he's a better person than that. I've been impressed at how well he keeps his cool in the face of so much negativity and vitriol from his most outspoken detractors.
I've been impressed with that too. SNL didn't do a "cool" parody on any other president...but, I think he should have had something in his back pocket for just such an occasion. Something that would have put that loud mouth in his place.
Seriously...he's got to start standing up for himself. So far, being cool has not gotten him anywhere with the other side of the aisle.
But I did love the look that Pelosi shot in that direction...like the crabby teacher in fifth grade after someone throws a wad of paper.
"Who threw that??? WHO THREW THAT?? Fine, until that person steps forward, you're ALL staying after school for detention."
(Entire Congress): "Aw, maannnnnnnn..."
I think Obama made the right move by not heckling back. If he did, you know it'd only give Repubs more ammo.
I was going to type something against the public option but I keep thinking about that goofy heckler. What a gift to Dems.
It's like when someone on your basketball team shoots the ball into the wrong basket.
I think Obama was largely preaching to the choir last night, mostly his media allies and people who already favor the plan. A poll was taken (I think I saw it on CNN) shortly after the speech and something like 65-70% of the people who watched were already in favor of the plan. He might get a bump in the next few days, but I expect the numbers to fall back down after that.
You libs amaze me with your short-sightedness and simplification of an issue which is complex. To those of you who say this as a moral imperative and continuously cite the number of uninsured, your argument assumes that this is the only way to get these people in the system. Do you not think there might be unintended consequences in this bill? Do you not see the ruinous fiscal path Medicare has set the country on? Do you really think a government known for bloat, inefficiency and waste is going to reduce costs through efficiency? I can barely type that without laughing.
According to Obama, the vaunted 47 million without insurance has been reduced to 30 million. Why? Because Obama removed the illegal immigrants from the number. 47 million was a useful figure to use for a while because it was larger than 30 million, but eventually people looked into the number and realized it was inflated. Many of the 30 million can afford insurance but choose not to purchase it. Many others are eligible for Medicaid but do not sign up for it. Granting you the 30 million, it is still less than 10% of the population in the. Is it not reasonable to question whether we should drastically change the system and set it on a course of full government control when 90% have coverage and most of those people like their coverage?
But go ahead, call me a liar and a racist and continue to simplify the argument while accusing the opposition of doing the same thing.
I'll take oversimplification to outright lies about covering undocumented residents, scare tactics about "death panels," and trotting out for the Republican rebuttal a congressman and surgeon who's been sued eight times for medical malpractice anyday.
Maybe the President should have really dumbed it down and announced to Congress in Hulk-speak, "ME WANT HEALTH CARE FOR ALL!"
And who's called you a racist in all this?
You completely ignore the fact that some people who can "afford" insurance still can't qualify for it.
Insurance companies will deny people coverage or wildly inflate the cost of coverage if a person has a preexisting condition. A preexisting condition can be almost anything from a yeast infection to allergies to cancer.
If you have a preexisting condition, an insurance company may offer you a wildly expensive plan, but that plan still won't cover your preexisting condition. Let's say you are a cancer survivor and you are able to get one of these plans. If you are diagnosed with cancer again, they will not cover it. That leaves a hardworking American dealing with the physical and emotional pain of cancer and with possibly hundreds of thousands of medical bills. Of course, that is assuming they can find a doctor who will take them on as a patient knowing they are not ensured.
And I am sorry, even if it is *only* 30 million americans with out health care, i find this unacceptable and disgusting.
I am still waiting for an actual plan from republicans which addresses the health care needs of this country. All i see is a lot of denial of the problem.
Oh and by the way, for people like me, this isn't about Obama or political parties - it is about basic human decency. If a republican had a good plan, i would love to hear it and support it.
I want every American to have the most basic tools needed to succeed in life - health care, education, a safe community, a roof over their heads, etc. That would be good for the individual as well as for the country as a whole.
"I want every American to have the most basic tools needed to succeed in life - health care, education, a safe community, a roof over their heads, etc. That would be good for the individual as well as for the country as a whole."
Well, who is against that? With such vague, flowery rhetoric, you would fit in well in the Obama admin. I am for all of that stuff and I am also for world peace.
Stop pretending you would listen to Republicans - I laugh when I hear libs say that.
You people are so proud of yourselves for wanting the 30 million to have coverage. It seems that it is more about you patting yourselves on the back and you give no thought to what is actually in the program. Most people, including myself, are in favor of making it easier for them to have coverage. I am only suggesting that setting the system on a course for governent takeover to cover the 5-8% of the population without health care might be a little excessive. There are ways to make it easier to cover them without turning the system on its head, a system where 90-95% of the country is covered and most are happy with their insurance.
And why do all of you have such trust in government?
It's not that I have so much trust in government. It's more about the fact that insurance companies have no incentives to make health care more afford or more available. For-profit insurance companies exist to make a profit, which is all well and good for the company, but making a profit in the insurance industry means denying claims and coverage, which sucks for the consumer.
Insurance is not a normal free market. First, it is very difficult to pick and choose your insurance company. Most of us are saddled with the one our employer chooses. For reasons I have already outlined, the private insurance is very difficult to navigate and to obtain. Also, most states are monopolized by a handful of insurance companies. Choice is limited from the get go.
Then the consumer also lack choice when it comes to their doctor or hospital. Insurance plans often reduce this choice to in-network providers. Cost often prevents people from seeing out of network providers. Also, it is very difficult if not impossible to comparison shop for services as the cost of services is not made public or transparent by most hospitals or doctors. It is also hard to comparison shop for cardiologist or the cost of a bypass when you are in the midst of a heart attack.
The nature of health care services is just fundamentally different than other products and services.
This is a case where free market principles do not work as the should, because it is not a truly free market. Since the insurance companies refuse to reform themselves, I see few other options other than the government getting involved.
I think Obama was largely preaching to the choir last night,
Good, cause the choir was slacking off and out of tune. The heathens on the right are on their blackberries and shouting like babies, so fuck them.
A poll was taken (I think I saw it on CNN) shortly after the speech and something like 65-70% of the people who watched were already in favor of the plan.
If you were watching "Dancing with the stars" and not the President of the United States address a joint session of congress on the most pressing social and economic issue of our times, who cares what you think?
He might get a bump in the next few days, but I expect the numbers to fall back down after that.
Again, even if his poll numbers are halved, he's beating Bush by double.
You libs
It's liberals. The only people who call liberals "libs" are cretins like Mark Levin. A man who shouts into a microphone while frothing at the mouth. Don't emulate that.
Or else I'm going to start calling you Cons.
Wait...
your argument assumes that this is the only way to get these people in the system.
No, there's also single payer, which would be more humane and decent.
Do you not think there might be unintended consequences in this bill?
You mean like how Cash for Clunkers cause a resurgence in the recycling industry? Yes, there will be unintended consequences, it's just that cons have assumes them all to be disasterous. I'm sure that's not because of their political axe to grind. Oh no. They are above such things.
Do you not see the ruinous fiscal path Medicare has set the country on?
Generally, that's due to waste on the state level. And it's worst in republican states where the system has been neglected and under-staffed. But do go on.
Do you really think a government known for bloat, inefficiency and waste is going to reduce costs through efficiency?
The only thing the right seems to think the government should get unlimited money for is killing people. How Christian of you.
47 million was a useful figure to use for a while because it was larger than 30 million,
I enjoy your complex and nuanced arguments.
Many of the 30 million can afford insurance but choose not to purchase it.
Yes, they choose luxuries like heat, food and shelter.
Many others are eligible for Medicaid but do not sign up for it.
Medicaid is a "bloated government program". But I guess it's better than actual health care reform.
Granting you the 30 million,
People. These are PEOPLE.
it is still less than 10% of the population in the.
In 1964, African-Americans were about 10% of the population. Should we have deferred the Civil Rights Act because they were just 10% of the population? Yes, health care is THAT important. It's the leading cause of bankruptcy, which leads to poverty, which leads to crime. The kid jacking you for your wallet, you can trace a line back to someone in his family getting sick, not having health coverage, going bankrupt and destroying a family.
Treat the disease, not the symptoms.
But go ahead, call me a liar and a racist and continue to simplify the argument while accusing the opposition of doing the same thing.
No, you're ill-informed, getting your arguments from fear-peddlers on tv and radio. You're scared because you've been told to be scared. You've been "warned" about terrible things that aren't going to happen.
Honestly, I feel very bad for you MM. Because instead of embracing the facts, looking at the reasonable arguments, you're just a scared little man (?) shouting at history.
Actually, I feel very sorry for you. I get thge impression that you are someone who is impressed with your "intelligence", but looking over your responses, you don't know how to do anything but name-call, invoke race, demonize the motives of others, and ignore facts and history. There is nothing intelligent, analytical or logical in what you have said. I feel bad for you because you think you have such superior intellect, but one day you are going to wake up and realize that you are nothing special. As for where I get my information, I grew up in this city in a sea of liberalism with Democratic parents and friends. I was a mindless liberal all the way through college, but I began paying attention to issues and have come up with my views on my own. I venture to say that you have never done anything but surround yourself with like-minded people and never have to debate a point of view. The only people you debate or stand up to are straw men that you construct. Your responses are all the same - "government should take care of it." Wow! What intellectual depth! Well, I have news for you, government cannot provide you with a satisfying life. Government can take more and more freedom and earnings from people and you can cheer them on, but at the end of the day it won't make you feel any better. Look at the city now. Do you like our government? Do you like our state government? You should, because this is what you advocate. High taxes, high regulation, high unionization, and one party rule.
My favorite line of yours is when you say I am a "scared little man". Do I sense a little projection there? I have never been happier, I have a great job, a child on the way, a 2 year plan for getting out of the city, things are looking up. My happiness has nothing to do with who is President. Yes I dislike Obama, but I do not let it consume my life. You are the one who seems to be so miserable, ripping on everything and everyone who doesn't agree with you. Every comment you post on every topic is negative. Fuck Oprah. Fuck Trump. Fuck this person and that person. Everybody is stupid. Anybody who dares to succeed without the help of government draws your ire. Then you declare me misinformed, when you are the one who spouts every liberal talking point/lie that has been used for decades. I actually think a few steps ahead and look at what government health care has done in other countries, unlike you. You continue to hold on to the dream that government can provide for you.
Hey, its OK though. Many people are as miserable as you. If you want to talk some time, I am here for you.
but looking over your responses, you don't know how to do anything but name-call, invoke race, demonize the motives of others, and ignore facts and history.
This from a person who keeps blanketly addressing "everybody" in the comments section as 'leftists', 'you libs', 'mindless followers of Obama*'
*especially interesting considering I didn't vote for him.
you don't know how to do anything but name-call, invoke race, demonize the motives of others, and ignore facts and history.
How does one "invoke race"? Is this a form of necromancy? A kind of legerdemain? Chicago is a city divided by race, this is a site about Chicago. I could invoke a map for you.
There is nothing intelligent, analytical or logical in what you have said.
Or anyone else for that matter.
I feel bad for you because you think you have such superior intellect,
No, just facts, reason, compassion (hiss! Boo!) and opinions based on those three.
but one day you are going to wake up and realize that you are nothing special.
Someone wasn't hugged very much as a child. You're so envious at the "intellect" of others all you can hope for is one day we all just get sad and emo? How about a hug?
I was a mindless liberal all the way through college, but I began paying attention to issues and have come up with my views on my own.
So, you sold out. Baby Boomer?
I venture to say that you have never done anything but surround yourself with like-minded people and never have to debate a point of view.
You mean like my friend the randian anarcho-capitalist? Or my Cousin the evangelical minister? Or my best friend the blue-dog democrat?
Assumptions, what do they make you and me?
The only people you debate or stand up to are straw men that you construct. Your responses are all the same - "government should take care of it."
We are the government. You know this, correct?
Wow! What intellectual depth! Well, I have news for you, government cannot provide you with a satisfying life.
No, but communal efforts can ensure that fewer people live in desperate circumstances. I'd cite everything from the Tennessee Valley Authority to water safety to public highways as an example.
And all those government evils also employed MILLIONS and helped create the middle class.
So, you're welcome.
Government can take more and more freedom and earnings from people and you can cheer them on,
Freedom to lose your health care when you lose your job? Freedom to go bankrupt from medical bills? Freedom to see the insurance industry cut off people's care when they are most in need?
Yay...freedom.
High taxes, high regulation, high unionization, and one party rule.
Indeed. Which is why I voted for Tony Periaca in the lase election. And Judy Barr Topinka in 2006
But I'm a lib.
Do I sense a little projection there? I have never been happier, I have a great job, a child on the way, a 2 year plan for getting out of the city,
Good riddance. And I pity that child for having such a fool for a father. Hopefully your better half is, well, better.
Yes I dislike Obama, but I do not let it consume my life.
No, it's pretty clear you HATE him.
Every comment you post on every topic is negative. Fuck Oprah. Fuck Trump. Fuck this person and that person. Everybody is stupid.
As opposed to your sunshine and lollipops contributions? I do like to take the piss.
when you are the one who spouts every liberal talking point/lie that has been used for decades.
Says the man parroting the words of the shouting heads on tv and the radio. Sorry Charlie, my talking points come from all that useless intellectual education.
I actually think a few steps ahead and look at what government health care has done in other countries, unlike you.
Yeah, like increased life expectancy and public health. Monsters.
Hey, its OK though. Many people are as miserable as you. If you want to talk some time, I am here for you.
At least until you and the little Maurader move to your compound and wait out the black man's terrible awful socialist nightmare.
You can bet the far-right lunatics will try to spin Rep. Wilson's juvenile (and racist) outburst as some righteous sign of revolt.
For many angry Americans, Wilson has just become proof that Congress contains at least one member who shares their incredulousness. They still can't believe that this man is president. They can't stand the fact that what they see as nothing more than some-fuckin'-nigger has beat them at their own game.
There will be Say It So, Joe! slogans (or something like that) in no time.
I've made this point before, but it seems like it needs to be made again. Republicans are NOT lying about the illegal immigrants.
Sure, the House bill says that illegal immigrants are not covered. However, the current House bill would not have any verification of citizenship. The effect of that ommission is that the plan WILL be used by illegal immigrants.
That is the conclusion of the Congressional Research Service, the non-partisan office that works for Congress.
Can you guys convince Jen and Jake at Gothamist to dump Movable Type and get a commenting system that allows me to ignore one-issue partisan idiots like Masked Marauder, who spout the same bullshit and early-2000s generalizations over and over?
'Preciate it.
Typical leftist. Love to control speech, don't you? God forbid you be subjected to views other than the views that you hold.
I don't mind being exposed to views other than my own. I just prefer not to waste my time on people like you. Please ... continue with your trollish, dishonest, generalization-filled "commentary." Those who died defending free speech are looking to you from heaven, beaming proudly.
Ticking of a box to ignore the babbling moron ≠ 'controlling speech' especially on somebody's privately owned blog. When I avoid the guy standing on the street up on a box screaming about doomsday, I'm not controlling his speech.
BTW, there's not a single 'leftist' who posts here with any regularity.
Reform is bad for business. And thats what this is all about. Underneath that simple fact lies the "debate" over the details. The industry is running scared and desperate to squash any hints of significant reform. Any real reform--even half-assed-moderate-right regulation proposals--will cramp their style. From this stew of fear and resentment bubbles up all kinds of bullshit diversions: insured illegal immigrants, death panels, socialism (big laugh).
The jackass cracker from SC couldn't control himself. I can only imagine the level of seething hatred suppressed by these assholes in that room at that time. You can see it on their faces. Where was the opposition proposal? What kind of a lame rebuttal was that? Give us a break and secede already. No plan, no information. Pitiful.
Any battle worth fighting will be hard, opposition should be acknowleged, then crushed. If you have enough support, use it and shove the bill down their throats. Enough already.
Well said handlord.
Obama is just as much in bed with big business as any other administration. He let Big Pharma off the hook for a price. Goldman Sachs and GE are all over this administration.
I understand though. Demonization of big business is part of the Democrat playbook. That way, you don't have to actually look at the bill. However, its OK when Obama wheels and deal with other big businesses.
Hypocrite.
Obama is just as much in bed with big business as any other administration. He let Big Pharma off the hook for a price. Goldman Sachs and GE are all over this administration.
And yet he's trying to institute "Socialism" right Masked Marauder? Whoops! You're logic just contradicted itself!
BTW, I agree he's in bed with big business, which was why I couldn't vote for him. However all of D.C. on both sides of the aisle are in bed with (bought by) big business. Look at the campaign donations of "big business", they give well to both parties with one party or the other receiving *just a bit more* if they look like they're going to take an election. Has always been.
I agree with the phrama part (though I think you need a huge profit motive in phrama to spark significant R&D--see, we don't hate capitalism outright, even though we all pray to our posters of Che).
But, as Navin pointed out: How can one be both a commie and/or socialist, and in bed with those evil capitalists?
I think your assumptions are nearing the event horizon, after which all logic, such as exists now, breaks down completely.
Please clarify.
No my logic is not breaking down. It is consistent. You are the ones who seem to be getting lost. Nobody said corporations don't exist in a socialist society.
GE is positioning itself for billions in government handouts for green jobs. Goldman is positioning itself to have a substantial stake in the Chicago Climate Exchange, trading carbon permits. Do you really think this is capitalism? Government working hand-in-hand with select businesses and subsidizing government-preferred ventures with billions in taxpayer dollars is about the furthest thing from free market capitalism you can get.
I would even suggest that GE has an independence/ethics issue since it is covering Obama on NBC while at the same time setting itself up to reap billions.
"GE is positioning itself for billions in government handouts for green jobs. Goldman is positioning itself to have a substantial stake in the Chicago Climate Exchange, trading carbon permits. Do you really think this is capitalism? "
Yes and no.
We've never had a free market, despite your fantasies. Thank god we've never had one, either, or else we would have had a much less extensive railway network (which would have meant our steel industry would have been far behind Germany's for a long, long time); nor interstates (which still rely on govt handouts); nor a moon program with its various offshoots for private industry.
I agree with wise subsidies and tax breaks, especially in the so-called green economy, where such countries as Denmark, Germany, France and, yes, China are kicking our butts.
I don't approve of insider deals, and cynical capitalism, such as exhibited by Goldman Sachs.
But, unfortunately, the GOP since about 1980 has been the biggest (though not only) cheerleader of what I call crony capitalism. Why is that?
Perhaps you can offer your own thinking, not assumptions and slogans this time.
So Obama is in bed with big business and doing their bidding, while at the same time trying to implement a historical revolution that sees the U.S. government seizing control of all private business. Nope, nothing bananas in that assumption. Should be an interesting feat for Obama to pull off: a revolution, while also fighting two wars on the other side of the World with a country in massive debt.
Government working hand-in-hand with select businesses and subsidizing government-preferred ventures with billions in taxpayer dollars is about the furthest thing from free market capitalism you can get.
We have never had a 'free market' thank Christ. The closest we did was during the Gilded Age and running up to The Great Depression. The government has always worked (somewhat) to enrich the few, whether through corporate welfare or fighting wars (iraq) to benefit oil men and war profiteers. We've been slowly moving toward a full blown plutocracy since the '70s after a peak in prosperity that went back to the end of the depression. Please get your big words straight Masked Marauder, what you see now is anything but socialism. What's really interesting, is how all you so called 'fiscal conservatives', have only recently crawled out from behind the toilet and into the light to complain about 'spending'. Amazing how feelings change after inaugeration day.
It's the same game the right has been playing with Obama for ages. During the campaign it it was "Who is Barack Obama?" nonsense about him being a secret muslim/marxist/socialist/nazi/fascist who was in a radical church for 20 years and hates america with all his community organizing.
Now it's that he's Hitler and a socialist who wants big government run by corporations who kill grandma while illegal immigrants perform abortions on your daughter and Atheist green fanatics steal your SUV
In short, they are nuts.
Honestly, I am, on a daily basis. shocked that Barry Goldwater has not risen from his grave to stalk and devour the modern Republican party. A party that used to embrace reason and rational thought is now ruled by moody fanatics yelling at everything and everyone.
I'd like to rename all interstates in the U.S. to "Socialist Interstates." If Masked Marauder is going to Indiana or Wisconsisn this weekend, he'll be taking U.S. Socialist Interstate 94 to get there. I'd like to start getting some of the idiots who keep throwing that word around to understand that there are many "socialist" things in our society that they benefit handsomely from while using the same term to demonize things like green industry, public transportation.
The topic here is health care. By "business" i specifically mean the business of health care--the Health Insurance Business. You go off on this and other administrations and their ties to big business all you want. Go nuts. Other big businesses don't profit off of our health and welfare. The insurance industry itself is anathema to the ideals of this country. Obama is tied to whoever/whatever, i don't give a fuck. He's a successful politician in the United States of America, of course he has ties to business interests. I'm concerned right now with the issue at hand--health insurance. You should be too.
Masked Marauder, while a bit blunt, is making excellent points.
You liberals should open your minds just a little bit. And stop painting conservatives as mean. We are not mean. We want what is best for our society. We may disagree with you, but we do want what we believe is best for everyone.
"You liberals should open your minds just a little bit. "
You seem to have the same affliction as MM: That all of us are libs.
Interesting.
I bet I am much more of a national security hawk--think Otto von Bismarck, or even some aspects of classic British imperialism, or a long-standing willingness to use at least tactical nukes on certain of our enemies (hint: one country used to be called Persia)--than you are, even though I consider Iraq to be a strategic mistake.
Lose the assumptions, Ward. Your life will be better and you will be taken more seriously. Since you comment here often (and often leave comments that make me think), I suspect you do care at least a bit about how your ideas are taken by others. If not, what's the point?
If conservatives don't want to be thought of as mean, maybe they shouldn't choose such mean spirited people to represent them in the public eye. Why is there so much reliance on the Limbaughs, Palins, Bachmanns, and Becks? Conservatives have allowed the harshest and looniest voices to hijack their side of the discourse. Liberals don't need to paint conservatives as mean - conservatives do a fine enough job portraying you as mean.
Also, a health care plan from the right would be appreciated. Without a plan, I am unsure exactly what conservatives believe is best for everyone. Rush Limbaugh suggests the we shouldn't have insurance and pay everything out of pocket. Is that what is best for everyone? It certainly wouldn't be best for me, and my guess is it wouldn't be best for you either.
If what you say is true, you obviously don't speak for all conservatives, likewise I and whoever here don't automatically speak for or represent all liberals, so stop with the "you.." business. You sound like masked magruber. thats not a good thing.
Yes, republicans...the party of compassion.
And what, do you believe, is best for everyone? Lets hear it.
No, you're not mean. You're greedy and short-sighted, not mean.
Greedy, in that you think that rich people getting tax cuts is helping the economy. By arguing that progressive tax structures "punish success" and that money will "trickle down". The trickle feels an awful lot like piss these days. Especially when the GOP gutted the regulatory system and allowed financial system to almost collapse entirely due to fraud. Simple greed.
Short-sighted, in that rather than see the long-term benefits of health care reform (preventative care reducing costly ER visits, cheaper GP visits preventing long-term illnesses) you cry loudly about how awful things will be.
Things are awful for MILLIONS of Americans right now. And they don't have to be and we can change that with minimal disruption.
You want to talk about tort reform? Digitizing records? Group buy rates? FDA approval restructuring? Boosting med school subsidies for GPs? Subsidizing nurses education? Keeping costs down across the board? Awesome, I'm right there with you, lets do it.
Call the President a liar, scream at elected representatives, bring guns to protests and generally act like fools? No, not interested.
Cindy Sheehan, who is bonkers, and Michael Moore, who is annoying, don't even go as far as the fringe on the right is going these days. I want a vigorous debate. The GOP seems to want a soap opera cat fight.
"We want what is best for our society. We may disagree with you, but we do want what we believe is best for everyone."
Fair enough. But in terms of the health care system, what is the conservative view of that? Is it the way the current health care system is set up? If not, how should it be changed?
Matilda, you deny being a liberal. Yet, of your comments that might be classified as "liberal," "conservative," or "moderate," your comments are nearly always in the "liberal" category.
Why, then do you deny it? If that is what you believe, be proud of it. I am a conservative on fiscal matters. A pro-choice, pro-same-sex marriage fiscal conservative.
Perhaps, Ward, some of us don't really think in ideological terms, but in pragmatic terms of what is best to increase the strength of our country. I think having a larger safety net will increase the strength. I also don't think the conservative view of this moment--that is, putting our heads in the ground and hoping things come out OK in the long run--is really the best way to go.
I don't even know what it means to be a "conservative on fiscal matters" any more. Medicare part D? Failing to invest in infrastructure? Making it harder for poor and lower-middle class people to afford post high-school training and education?
See, you have differing views, too, views that veer from the orthodoxy. Why you can't acknowledge that quality in others is beyond me.
You can trust me when I say my views on war and its uses don't make me popular among most liberals I know. Nor my willingness to let pharma make big bucks in exchange for healthy, sustained R&D.
I’m not sure why I even read these comments anymore under the heath care articles. It’s just the same information (I use that word loosely) by the same people over and over again.
It would be nice however to not see all the “liberal” or “conservative” generalizations because it seems pretty clear that no one falls squarely into those labels. I like this debate that’s beginning much better.
Ho-hum… back to work I go.
Matilda, let's call a truce. I will keep an open mind about you if you keep an open mind about me.
By the way, someone above asked me what my solutions would be for health care. I believe in Health Savings Accounts. That puts market forces into better play while making individuals responsible for any overutilization of services. I also believe in Medicare vouchers so that seniors can go into the marketplace and companies will compete for the Medicare business.
What I am against is doing something that can make things worse than they are right now. And the Democrat's plan will certainly make things worse.
HSAs sound great if you're healthy and make decent steady money.
Thats not reform. Not enough for me anyway. The industry is the problem, not the buyer.
thanks
My problem with HSAs are the high deductibles and that you run the risk of discouraging people from getting necessary care. The high deductibles can mean that you are paying out of pocket for any care you receive unless you experience a more severe illness or injury. HSAs tend to benefit people who never get sick or people who have serious medical issues. The in-between people can get screwed.
We want to catch medical conditions early, and I fear HSAs may contribute to late detection, which has a human and a financial price.
HSAs are the opposite of spreading risk, where young healthy people contribute to the pool thereby subsidizing sick and elderly people. HSAs are not "health care" as most of us know it ... and they're the polar opposite of universal health care. They're the 401Ks of health care.
I'm a military brat so I grew up on socialized medicine in the evil socialist environment of the U.S. Navy. My parents are still covered and once a year they get full-day physical exams and checkups by multiple doctors. I couldn't imagine setting that up through Blue Cross. More likely I'd have to schedule numerous appointments at different places on different days, all with separate co-pays, and it would result in dozens of statements in the mail. My poor parents, with their weird socialized medicine. My girlfriend's from Spain, an evil socialist country. They have communist high speed rail and wind power and solar panels and pristine highway infrastructure and all that other goofy socialist shit like excellent public schools and stuff. They also have single payer health care. Her mom is retired and has diabetes but she'll never worry about being dropped for coverage ... she'll never fear being unable to afford her prescriptions ... or fear losing her home due to medical bills. It's just Godawful I tell you.
I have the distinct feeling that the right's vision of Socialism of any sort is say, 1980s East Germany via Reaganvision. Mysteries behind the wall, that kind of thing. Evil, wool suited, pasty-faced bureaucrats leering at your 12 year old daughter while she digs between cobblestones for stray beans and string, shrouded in a twilight haze of diesel and ash.
Its easy for them to demonize that of which they know absolutely nothing, nothing. Modern European Socialism has nothing at all to do with Cold War Communism. Its just bad for business and thats the bottom line. Whats bad for business is not always bad for society. Sometimes whats good for business is bad for people.
As we keep this up, the important issues now are not the complex details of this plan or that bill anymore, as they had been in the past, but the basic fundamentals of how we treat each other, what expectations we have concerning decency and dignity. Do we watch over and care for each other or do we step on the corpses until we reach the top victorious?
During the 2005 State of the Union adress the Demss booed and heckled Bush it was childish and unacceptable then just as Rep Wilsons actions were unacceptable last night.
I think Obama would have much more success if he would quit worring about the GOP and try and explain to moderate and Conservitive Dems how this plan of his does not add hundreds of Billions to the deficit. He claims it wont but factcheck even says the president isnt being truthful here. Obama needs to show we can afford this and show how. The cost is the real issue not death panels or abortions, illeagal immigrants be straight with us about the cost convince the country we can afford this.
Both sides have engaged in booing over the years. Disturbing the speech by yelling that the POTUS is a liar is uncharted waters, at least in modern times.
I agree that calling the president a liar during a speech to congress is uncalled for. What is interesting is that both sides of this issue are right depending on the view you already have. The bill does say illeagal immigrants will not be given health care so Obama is correct. The bill makes no attempt to have anyone show they are eligible for healthcare so just liKe the laws that you need to be a U. S. citizen to live or work here it will be ignored and not enforced. I applaud Obama on trying to tackle health care reform it does show how interelated so many of these issues are. Still my one big concern is the huge cost and the lack of details/honesty about how we will pay for this
My thoughts are I thought it was a fantastic speech. It's been a long time coming for health care. I agree, we need to figure out how we are going to pay for this, but in the end, it needs to be done!