14
   

No Public Option

 
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2009 09:10 pm
@Green Witch,
The untreated number is going to balloon. All the good that has come from preventative medicine efforts I can see coming to a halt. Then there is dentistry..

0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2009 09:12 pm
@Thomas,
Nods to Thomas.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2009 09:30 pm
@Thomas,
Thomas wrote:

Finn dAbuzz wrote:
With all due respect, this is indicative of your liberal bent.

Doesn't necessarily mean she's wrong.

Of course not, but it's a good rule of thumb that bias misleads.

Finn dAbuzz wrote:
You can't imagine that there is principled opposition to a Public Option without disdain and disregard for the poor.

Have you considered the possibility that she can imagine it, and just doesn't think that's what's going on?


Glib.

I've also considered the possibility that she can imagine it, but doesn't want to believe it.

Then there's the possibility that she can imagine it but refuses to acknowledge it.

Shall we try for some additional possibilities?

Frankly, I would expect more from her (unfortunately she has given you a nod so I guess my expectations were not met) than being able to imagine it and insisting that it isn't at play.

Nevertheless, out of fondness, I still prefer to believe that her bias simply won't allow her to imagine it

0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2009 09:33 pm
@Joe Nation,
Clearly you didn't take the time to read my post before launching into your childish and offensive riff about political activity. Whether Bi Polar Bear , I or anyone elese wrote letters or didn't write such letters does not in any way limit our rights to have opinions on or comment on the outcome so far.

In the famous words of Dick Cheney, Go **** yourself.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2009 09:34 pm
Hello, did you read my post?
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2009 09:36 pm
@ossobuco,
ossobuco wrote:

I do get there is principled opposition, I can see agreeing with it. I think it contains within it distain for the poor.


This is true.
Distain may be too big a word.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  2  
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2009 09:50 pm
@Thomas,
Thomas wrote:

georgeob1 wrote:
Do you believe that the outcome to date would have been better had he acted more forcefully with respect to (say) the health care legislation?

I'm not Bi-Polar Bear by I do believe that, yes. Legislation is a bargaining process; Obama entered the bargaining process over healthcare with a lukewarm compromise position, and signaled from the beginning that he wasn't intending to put up much of a fight over it. So it's little wonder that at the end of the bargaining, healthcare reform will be a diluted mush that isn't worth writing home about.

In my opinion, Obama could have achieved a much better end result by doing two things: i) open the haggling with with a tougher position such as Kennedy's Medicare for All or at least Edward's campaign plan, and ii) signaling an intent to kick some asses over it.

If confronted in such a way, Congress Republicans would have opposed that no more than they currently do -- after all, they're maxing out their capacity for opposition right now. Moreover, Lieberman, Tupac, and other Democrats positioning themselves as centrists, would just as happily "compromise" on a more aggressive reform plan. Their current opposition is not driven by any policy principle I can recognize -- it's all about positioning themselves halfway between what the president suggests and the Republican opposition.

Obama could have definitely gotten a better outcome by showing a little more audacity. Instead, all that healthcare reform leaves us with is timidity of hope.


I believe you are overlooking the (presumably) deliberately vague rhetoric that candidate Obama used so consistently during the campaign concerning this issue. He never unequivocably endorsed a public option as it is termed now. Indeed, on several occasions when asked, he evaded endorsing such an outcome. Instead he repeated his assurances that everyone should have access to health care (whatever that means) and that everyone should have the same quality care he (then) enjoyed as a Senator; and other things like that.

In office he handed the ball to the Democrat Leadership in the Congress (presumably wishing to avoid the Clinton outcome of 1993) , and continued to refer vaguely in his speeches, to the several variants being discussed and negotiated as "my plan". He has also repeatedly assured questioners that he is directly involved in the process, and to a degree that appears to be the fact.

With this evidence in mind I conclude that he wanted significant health care legislation and greater involvement by government, but wasn't particularly wedded to any particular solution. Perhaps this comes from mere ineptitude, or, alternatively, from the belief that the first legislation will merely be the foot in the door and that specific goals can be pursued later.

It also appears likely that from a fairly early point in the process the Administration focused on co opting various organized groups that opposed previous reform legislation. These include big pharma; AARP; the AMA; medical diagnostic equipment makers and others - each of whom got significant financial relief or direct benefits in all versions of the proposed legislation.

In short I strongly suspect that Obama will likely achieve the objectives he sought in this endeavor. It merely happens that in important respects they do not include some of the objectives of his enthusiastic supporters, who read whatever they wished into his calculated rhetorical vagueries.
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2009 10:00 pm
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:
I believe you are overlooking the (presumably) deliberately vague rhetoric that candidate Obama used so consistently during the campaign concerning this issue. He never unequivocably endorsed a public option as it is termed now.

You're damn right I'm overlooking it! Overlooking it was the premise of your question, to which I responded. Notice your conjunctive: "had he acted more forcefully ..." If your point now is that he never intended to act more forcefully, I agree. It's the main reason my approval of Obama had always been lukewarm.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2009 10:11 pm
My approval of Obama included some knowledge of all this, and more. (I posted on my neg take of the drone thing somewhere on a2k before the election.)

What I hadn't figured out is quite what a pillow he is re standing up on much.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  2  
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2009 10:14 pm
@Thomas,
OK so far. Apparently we agree that, probably, he wasn't particularly wedded to some of the particulars such as a publicly administered option (or core plan), and some other of the particulars that have so captivated some of his now disgruntled supporters. However, I don't believe it is evident that he could indeed have gotten much more than he did in this case. We are both here speculating about what might have been, so at best we can just exchange opinions.

The fact is the public is indeed aroused at the prospect of unbounded new entitlements; Democrat senators & representatives are in increasing numbers concerned about their own reelection odds; and all of them are concerned about the likely public reaction to the many new taxes and government-mandated cost increases the reality of which will smack the public in the face over the coming year. I am not persuaded the President could have gotten more from this Congress in any other scenario. However he could well have come out of it with more political bruises and scars than he has got.
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  0  
Reply Wed 16 Dec, 2009 12:49 am
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:
In the famous words of Dick Cheney, Go **** yourself.


You could not have found a better way to punctuate your post or provide an illustration of the limitations of your rhetorical ability. It is amusing, however.

T
K
O
0 Replies
 
Joe Nation
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Dec, 2009 04:57 am
And he never answered the question I asked.
Bear did.
Joe(mebbe jes prefers to be an online gasbag.)Nation
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  5  
Reply Wed 16 Dec, 2009 08:38 am
I'm somewhat confused by all the hand-wringing. The bill in the Senate is not amazing and does not include a public option, but it has a number of solid improvements over our current system including removing pre-existing condition clauses, gender based pricing and life-time caps. It's cost neutral (based on CBO analysis) and will insure more people. Nate Silver at 538.com did an analysis showing that the annual premium for an average family of four would drop by half (Why Progressives Are Batshit Crazy to Oppose the Senate Bill). We would all like to hit a home run every time at plate and this is only a double in my view, but I'd rather get on base than go down swinging.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Dec, 2009 11:50 am
Just emailed this to Kay Hagan Joe.... you'll forgive me for not wasting my time appealing to Burr. Ihope this meets your approval and you won't hurt me by telling me to **** myself again.

My personal opinion that Joe Lieberman is a scumbag of the highest order aside he has the right to his opinion. However, unless I am mistaken you Senators and Congressman are elected to represent the wishes of the people who vote you in. the majority of conneticutt citizens want a public option. He is not doing his job. If he is going to accept the mantle of the face of opposition in your party he should accept the consquences. Please strip him of any and all perks of his job except the most basic. This isn't vengeful... it's fair. I like the amnedments you've proposed and I wish the man I voted for and the rest of the democrats would show some spine and push through a real healtchare reform bill with options that would make healthcare afofrdable to every citizen. I assure you that without it there will be a republican Congress and Senate in 2010 and your party will have lost my vote. I will sit out the next elections.

Thanks you for the work you do for North Carolina and our nation. Best reagards and Happy Holidays to you and your family
Green Witch
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Dec, 2009 12:01 pm
@Bi-Polar Bear,
I emailed all my representatives with a similar message. In my version I referred to Lieberman as a "corporate weasel" instead of a "scumbag", but it's the same idea.

0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -4  
Reply Wed 16 Dec, 2009 12:04 pm
This so-called health care bill will not make it to PrezBO's desk this year and it will certainly be on the minds of voters in the 2010 elections.
This will result in liberals across the nation getting their dumb asses voted out of office and that is a good thing for the country.

It would be best for all Americans that all versions of this so-called health care bill be scrapped and never brought up again.
0 Replies
 
rabel22
 
  2  
Reply Wed 16 Dec, 2009 09:26 pm
As far as i am concerned the democrates are a bunch of lieing bastards. They promised us a public option. I would vote republican next time even if they ran Bin Laden. I am sick to death of politicians who break all thier promises. From now on I vote against incumbents no matter how good they look.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Dec, 2009 09:42 pm
@rabel22,
rabel22 wrote:

As far as i am concerned the democrates are a bunch of lieing bastards. They promised us a public option. I would vote republican next time even if they ran Bin Laden. I am sick to death of politicians who break all thier promises. From now on I vote against incumbents no matter how good they look.


The Democratic leadership may have promised you a public option, but certainly not all Democrats signed on to that promise.

Perhaps your local congressman or senator promised you a Public Option and then reneged.

In any case, they really are all a bunch of lying bastards and you should vote Republican, or at least anti-incumbent next time.



georgeob1
 
  3  
Reply Wed 16 Dec, 2009 10:01 pm
@rabel22,
Who promised you the public option? I don't think it was the current President. During the campaign he mouthed only vague and reassuring generalities, artfully crafted to seem agreeable to most listeners. He did promise "health care reform" whatever that means. He also made many references to "my plan" and its rather abstract features. However he offered few specifics and made no definite or concrete committments beyond that.

I believe the credulous and now indignant left wing folks, who enthusiastically supported him, merely filled in the blanks Obama artfully left in his lofty rhetoric with whatever they wished to hear. It is hardly a novel or new way to con large numbers of people, particularly those who imagine they are smarter than most.

Finally, we still do have a democratic system and a (partly at least) functioning democratic legislature. The votes just aren't there for the proposals the Democrats and their supporters have put together. Something may well pass, enabling the president to declare victory, but I suspect when the public begins to experience the new taxes; the government-imposed cost increases and the typical brueaucratic muddle that will surely follow -- they may well come to regret the whole damn thing.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Dec, 2009 09:00 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

rabel22 wrote:

As far as i am concerned the democrates are a bunch of lieing bastards. They promised us a public option. I would vote republican next time even if they ran Bin Laden. I am sick to death of politicians who break all thier promises. From now on I vote against incumbents no matter how good they look.


The Democratic leadership may have promised you a public option, but certainly not all Democrats signed on to that promise.

Perhaps your local congressman or senator promised you a Public Option and then reneged.

In any case, they really are all a bunch of lying bastards and you should vote Republican, or at least anti-incumbent next time.






and republicans aren't a bunch of lying bastards? Are you kidding me?

What the dems promised, and Obama campaigned on was AFFORDABLE AND FAIR TO THE PUBLIC healthcare. Contrary to what's been shoved down people's throats by Insurance, Pharma, Republicans and a handful of Democrats most people withinsurance problems aren't asking for free... just for fair.

the dems and Obama have lost my vote unless that criteria is met. The repubs hasven't had my vote since the first term of Reagan.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » No Public Option
  3. » Page 2
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/10/2021 at 03:08:30