Obama '08?

The House tonight, by a 247-185 margin, voted to repeal the Health Care Bill.

@realjohnboy,

Interesting. Next question is will Harry Reid even schedule Senate debate on the matter ? ; and what will be the result of voting in the Senate ? - if it occurs.

Should the measure get to the Senate floor we might even see a filibuster by those obstructionist Democrats. To paraphrase Cyclo the public elected a strong majority of Republicans in the House and they have every right to pursue their agenda without regard to the wishes of their defeated opponents.

1 Reply

@realjohnboy,

realjohnboy wrote:

The House tonight, by a 247-185 margin, voted to repeal the Health Care Bill.

That margin also included 3 Democrats voting with Republicans, rjb.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

Interesting. Next question is will Harry Reid even schedule Senate debate on the matter ? ; and what will be the result of voting in the Senate ? - if it occurs.

No, he will not. And why should he? The legislation was settled last cycle. And even if it were to pass - which it wouldn't - Obama would simply veto it. You don't have 2/3rds in either house to support overturning the bill.

This whole thing is a waste of everyone's time...

Quote:

Should the measure get to the Senate floor we might even see a filibuster by those obstructionist Democrats. To paraphrase Cyclo the public elected a strong majority of Republicans in the House and they have every right to pursue their agenda without regard to the wishes of their defeated opponents.

The Dems are currently proposing rules reforms that would make their OWN filibuster much more difficult. If you think this is going to be the case, you probably should call your Senator and ask her to support it Laughing

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Life is too short for me to ever call Barbara Boxer. (Diane is another story).

I think it will be easy for Reid to delay debate, but probably impossible for him to stop it entirely. Moreover, a number of Democrat Senators are likely to vote for repeal. To avoid that outcome, I suspect we well may see Democrat fillibuster.

1 Reply

@okie,

I think this is an informative news article.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/01/19/rep-lamar-smith-voting-repeal-new-health-care-law/

"REP. LAMAR SMITH: Why I Am Voting to Repeal the New Health Care Law"

1 Reply

You are correct, Okie. I haven't figured out yet who they were although I think I know who 2 are.
This repeal of the "Job killing health care act" will die in the Senate.
But there will, I think, be some modifications to the law. The most obvious is the requirement that I, a small businessman, file a 1099 reporting expenditures to any vendor from whom I buy $600 or more of stuff from. That might include Office Depot, where I get paper clips, copier toner and envelopes.

1 Reply

@realjohnboy,

I agree the 1099 requirement is a weird one., seemingly totally unrelated to health care. I recently had a request for information so that they could send me one from a very small customer of mine. I've always interpreted the 1099 thing as being for contractors anyway, not for our purchase of merchandise, because if it was, we would have tens of millions of people ten ninety nining Walmart every year, wouldn't we? The mountain of paperwork would increase the costs of Walmart, and the IRS, and would be a paper nightmare.

However, I have had large customer of mine send me 1099s, which I have dutifully recorded with the tax return, but it makes little sense to me, because it was for merchandise, not for contract work.

I've wondered about this, do construction contractors 1099 Home Depot for all that they purchase there? The entire 1099 issue is but one of many issues that convinces me that the IRS does not know what it is doing.

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

Life is too short for me to ever call Barbara Boxer. (Diane is another story).

I think it will be easy for Reid to delay debate, but probably impossible for him to stop it entirely.

Why? He sets the schedule. He's not beholden to bring forward bills the minority wants debated. When the Republicans ran the Senate from 06-08, you certainly didn't see them forced to bring the various bills the Dem House voted through onto the floor.

Quote:

Moreover, a number of Democrat Senators are likely to vote for repeal. To avoid that outcome, I suspect we well may see Democrat fillibuster.

Which Senators do you believe are likely to vote for repeal, on the Dem side? Specifically. You sure ought to be able to name at least two, if you were confident enough to write 'a number of them.' Unless that number is zero.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Which Senators do you believe are likely to vote for repeal, on the Dem side? Specifically. You sure ought to be able to name at least two, if you were confident enough to write 'a number of them.' Unless that number is zero.

Cycloptichorn

What's the point of it? Neither of us knows the future. I believe some of those due for reelection in 2012 are likely to vote for repeal.

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

This takes more than half an hour to listen to but everyone in America should find the 31 minutes and 21 seconds that the piece requires.

http://www.npr.org/2011/01/19/132931975/lowering-medical-costs-by-providing-better-care

okie and ican will hate it: the speaker is a medical doctor who is a Harvard professor and a journalist. People with knowledge and authority are anathema to them and to the rest of the right.

1 Reply

@okie,

A CONTRADICTION!

okie typed:

Quote:

I think this is an informative news article.

Then cited Fox News!

Oh, wait! My apologies. I misread his statement. He did not write, "This is an informative. . ." but "I think . . ."

We all know that okie can not think!

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

Quote:

Three Democrats voted with all House Republicans on Wednesday to repeal the health care reform bill signed into law by Barack Obama last year.

Democratic Reps. Dan Boren of Oklahoma, Mike Ross of Arkansas, and Mike McIntyre of North Carolina joined GOP lawmakers in supporting the symbolic vote to repeal the law.

The three Democrats were among the 39 who voted against the legislation in November of 2009. Just 12 of those lawmakers are still serving in the House in the new Congress (six retired or left their seats to seek higher office; the remainder lost their re-election bids.)

Boren, Ross, and McIntyre were joined by Democratic Rep. Larry Kissell of North Carolina earlier this month in supporting a procedural measure that teed up the repeal vote. Kissell voted no on repeal today.

The final vote was 245-189.

source

2 Replies

@revelette,

Quote:

What's the point of it? Neither of us knows the future. I believe some of those due for reelection in 2012 are likely to vote for repeal.

My point with the above article was simply that the three democrats who voted for the repeal in house were against it in 2009 so it had nothing to do with being up for reelection in 2012. I doubt reelection concerns will have any effect on senators either if the repeal ever comes up for a vote, which I highly doubt.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cyclo, The real issue is not that Reid won't bring the repeal to vote, but that the GOP used filibuster to stop most of the legislation brought forward in the whole history of our congress. They seem to cry wolf without any leg to stand on!

They want to talk about bringing the repeal for "discussion." What a farce!

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Which Senators do you believe are likely to vote for repeal, on the Dem side? Specifically. You sure ought to be able to name at least two, if you were confident enough to write 'a number of them.' Unless that number is zero.

Cycloptichorn

What's the point of it? Neither of us knows the future. I believe some of those due for reelection in 2012 are likely to vote for repeal.

The point is that when you made that statement, you didn't have any actual data. It was just conjecture. Never mind the fact that it doesn't make a lick of sense at all, and that they all voted for it the first time around.

They aren't 'likely' to, any more than they are to vote against other stuff that their base will crucify them for. They are unlikely to. You are simply projecting your fantasies.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

The point is that when you made that statement, you didn't have any actual data. It was just conjecture. Never mind the fact that it doesn't make a lick of sense at all, and that they all voted for it the first time around.

They aren't 'likely' to, any more than they are to vote against other stuff that their base will crucify them for. They are unlikely to. You are simply projecting your fantasies.

Cycloptichorn

There is no "actual data" revealing what politicians might do in the future. There may well be a few opinions and forecasts by self-appointed political commentators, but they are neither facts nor data.

However, apparently unlike you, I form my own opinions based on my understanding and experience of life and, in this case, political affairs and the observed behavior of politicians.

The statement I made is that some are likely to vote for repeal. You say that prospect is "unlilely", and accuse me of projecting fantisies. I am able to get through the day knowing that you disagree. However, don't be so foolish as to project your opinion on the matter as fact. Who is projecting fantasies here?

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

The point is that when you made that statement, you didn't have any actual data. It was just conjecture. Never mind the fact that it doesn't make a lick of sense at all, and that they all voted for it the first time around.

They aren't 'likely' to, any more than they are to vote against other stuff that their base will crucify them for. They are unlikely to. You are simply projecting your fantasies.

Cycloptichorn

There is no "actual data" revealing what politicians might do in the future. There may well be a few opinions and forecasts by self-appointed political commentators, but they are neither facts nor data.

However, apparently unlike you, I form my own opinions based on my understanding and experience of life and, in this case, political affairs and the observed behavior of politicians.

The statement I made is that some are likely to vote for repeal. You say that prospect is "unlilely", and accuse me of projecting fantisies. I am able to get through the day knowing that you disagree. However, don't be so foolish as to project your opinion on the matter as fact. Who is projecting fantasies here?

Dude - YOU are! The idea that Democrats are going to defect and vote against their party and against the signature piece of legislation from the last cycle is a farce. There's literally zero evidence to support the idea. Usually when we say something is 'likely' you can point to some reason you believe that this is true.

In this case, when you were pressed for more evidence or reasoning, you provided none - and got defensively huffy about it. Forget about political commentators - I asked YOU why you thought this would happen. And you have no answer. That's the definition of talking out your ass.

I do not believe Reid will ever bring this bill up for a vote. I don't believe the Republicans can force him to do that, no matter what you say. I don't believe that if it was brought up for a vote, that ANY Dem up for re-election in the Senate is going to stab his party and prez in the back and vote against HC reform. I don't believe these things, because there's no evidence to support believing in them and no logic that makes an argument that they will do this. This whole thing is nothing more than a pipe dream on your part.

The Republicans in the House are going to have to pivot to actually attempting to govern, now that they've got their symbolic bullshit out of the way. You'd be better served to forget about repeal, because it simply isn't happening.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Here is the offending statement (it is rather brief compared to the lengthy polemics in your reaction to it.);

georgeob1 wrote:

I think it will be easy for Reid to delay debate, but probably impossible for him to stop it entirely. Moreover, a number of Democrat Senators are likely to vote for repeal. To avoid that outcome, I suspect we well may see (a) Democrat fillibuster.

It is clearly an opinion, and a reasonable one at that. Moreover I recited the likely outcome of the procedure in the Senate.

Your intemperate reaction is both unfounded and probably revealing of your own insecurities on the matter.

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

Here is the offending statement (it is rather brief compared to the lengthy polemics in your reaction to it.)
;
georgeob1 wrote:
I think it will be easy for Reid to delay debate, but probably impossible for him to stop it entirely. Moreover, a number of Democrat Senators are likely to vote for repeal. To avoid that outcome, I suspect we well may see (a) Democrat fillibuster.

It is clearly an opinion, and a reasonable one at that. Moreover I recited the likely outcome of the procedure in the Senate.

Your intemperate reaction is both unfounded and probably revealing of your own insecurities on the matter.

But when I ask you to explain, you can't explain any element of it. And instead got quite huffy.

How is it impossible for Reid to stop debate on this issue? He controls the schedule and can stop any repeal vote from even happening. The most that McConnell could do is try to offer an amendment. Reid would block it and McConnell would be forced to try and amend the rules mid-stream, which takes 67 votes. Farcical to think that anyone would go that route or that any success could be had.

How many Senators are 'a number?' What brings you to believe that number isn't zero?

A little funny that you would call my response intemperate. I would call yours evasive. Instead of actually answering any questions, you attacked me back for daring to even ask them.

You really have a hard time when questioned, don't you? When your authority to make pronunciations is challenged.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know