And Obama's Death Spiral accelerates....
QuoteAs the White House signals that it is willing to move forward on a health reform plan without a public option, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) sent a strong message Thursday evening: not so fast.
In her strongest statement yet, Pelosi said that any bill "without a strong public option will not pass the House":
"Any real change requires the inclusion of a strong public option to promote competition and bring down costs," Pelosi said. "If a vigorous public option is not included, it would be a major victory for the health insurance industry."
Pelosi's remarks come less than one week before President Barack Obama delivers an address to a joint session of Congress as part of a re-launched campaign effort to sell his health care reform bill to both lawmakers and the public. White House aides have said the president will use the speech to offer more detail than he has so far about what sort of bill he'd like to reach his desk.
"President Obama has said that a public option will keep the insurance companies honest. If someone has a better idea for promoting competition and reducing health care costs, they should put it on the table," Pelosi said. "But for the past month, opponents of health insurance reform have demonstrated that they are afraid of the facts. They have only offered distortions, distractions and misrepresentations to try to kill this historic legislation."
"A bill without a strong public option will not pass the House," Pelosi said. "Eliminating the public option would be a major victory for the insurance companies who have rationed care, increased premiums and denied coverage."
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/26742.html
:yawn:
So who's gonna be elected POTUS in 2012? Romney? Jindal? Pawlenty? :)
Quote from: Caliga on September 04, 2009, 12:29:38 PM
:yawn:
So who's gonna be elected POTUS in 2012? Romney? Jindal? Pawlenty? :)
I can go with Pawlenty, and would probably take Romney over Obama at this point.
The sad thing is that she is probably right - reform without the public option is likely not worth the trouble.
Of course, reform with it is probably not possible.
I'm glad somebody on the Dem side is sticking to the guns. Not that I entirely agree with the particular part of this particular issue, but in general having Obama continue to compromise without getting anything at all in return is getting a bit tiresome. Somebody needs to wear the pants in that party.
Quote from: DGuller on September 04, 2009, 12:49:27 PM
I'm glad somebody on the Dem side is sticking to the guns. Not that I entirely agree with the particular part of this particular issue, but in general having Obama continue to compromise without getting anything at all in return is getting a bit tiresome. Somebody needs to wear the pants in that party.
Well, I'd have to say that I hope it isn't Pelosi and her types who are the ones to call the shots then. That wouldn't bode well for Obama either. Of course, he's in a tough spot, having to please/disappoint the more left wing base, or please/disappoint the larger group of Independents/moderates, etc.
Quote from: KRonn on September 04, 2009, 12:55:33 PM
Well, I'd have to say that I hope it isn't Pelosi and her types who are the ones to call the shots then. That wouldn't bode well for Obama either. Of course, he's in a tough spot, having to please/disappoint the more left wing base, or please/disappoint the larger group of Independents/moderates, etc.
I don't think anybody is going to call the shots, that's what compromises are for. However, to compromise, you need to get something in return, and that's where Obama fails.
Why wait till 2012. Does Obama have any property dealings that could be investigated by some sort of committee?
Quote from: Warspite on September 04, 2009, 01:03:01 PM
Why wait till 2012. Does Obama have any property dealings that could be investigated by some sort of committee?
So you're also getting a strong 1993 vibe from this, huh.
Quote from: Barrister on September 04, 2009, 01:07:50 PM
Quote from: Warspite on September 04, 2009, 01:03:01 PM
Why wait till 2012. Does Obama have any property dealings that could be investigated by some sort of committee?
So you're also getting a strong 1993 vibe from this, huh.
What are you, a lawyer? I just wanted to make a throw-away quip. :weep:
Quote from: DGuller on September 04, 2009, 12:49:27 PM
I'm glad somebody on the Dem side is sticking to the guns. Not that I entirely agree with the particular part of this particular issue, but in general having Obama continue to compromise without getting anything at all in return is getting a bit tiresome. Somebody needs to wear the pants in that party.
Well, duh. Pelosi doesn't have "compromise" in her vocabulary.
Quote from: KRonn on September 04, 2009, 12:55:33 PM
Quote from: DGuller on September 04, 2009, 12:49:27 PM
I'm glad somebody on the Dem side is sticking to the guns. Not that I entirely agree with the particular part of this particular issue, but in general having Obama continue to compromise without getting anything at all in return is getting a bit tiresome. Somebody needs to wear the pants in that party.
Well, I'd have to say that I hope it isn't Pelosi and her types who are the ones to call the shots then. That wouldn't bode well for Obama either. Of course, he's in a tough spot, having to please/disappoint the more left wing base, or please/disappoint the larger group of Independents/moderates, etc.
The independent/moderate faction is the more important of the two. The American left has marginalized itself as though their collective lives have depended on it. He should be more concerned about keeping the Blue Dogs and winning the general elections.
Quote from: Berkut on September 04, 2009, 12:44:13 PM
The sad thing is that she is probably right - reform without the public option is likely not worth the trouble.
Of course, reform with it is probably not possible.
Totally disagree--many of the most important aspects of reform (near universal coverage and access to primary care, keeping health care coverage possible and affordable for people with preexisting conditions/bad medical histories) can all be done without a public option.
Could Obama and Pelosi be playing a good cop, bad cop game? That would be too clever by Democrats, but stanger things have happened.
I'm not sure. Obama's clever enough to engineer the scenario, but I'm not sure Pelosi's clever enough to realize the value of going along with it.
Quote from: DGuller on September 04, 2009, 12:49:27 PM
I'm glad somebody on the Dem side is sticking to the guns. Not that I entirely agree with the particular part of this particular issue, but in general having Obama continue to compromise without getting anything at all in return is getting a bit tiresome. Somebody needs to wear the pants in that party.
He hasn't had to do much compromising so far. He's mostly gotten what he wanted--or at least what Nancy Pelosi has told him he wanted.
Quote from: DGuller on September 04, 2009, 01:23:09 PM
Could Obama and Pelosi be playing a good cop, bad cop game? That would be too clever by Democrats, but stanger things have happened.
Pelosi saying she won't pass a health care bill without a public option, and 40+ senators (senate republicans plus some senate democrats) indicating they won't support a bill that has a public option doesn't seem like a good cop/bad cop routine--it seems like a log jam.
Quote from: Berkut on September 04, 2009, 12:44:13 PM
The sad thing is that she is probably right - reform without the public option is likely not worth the trouble.
Really? My understanding is that without the public option the system would basically be the same as the Swiss.
Quote from: Berkut on September 04, 2009, 12:44:13 PM
The sad thing is that she is probably right - reform without the public option is likely not worth the trouble.
Of course, reform with it is probably not possible.
I am going to have to disagree with you. Reform is necessary, particularly efforts to negotiate down costs with the big drug and medical providers.
There are surely some things the government can do without the public option.
Obama '08..
Obama '12...
Obama FOREVER!
Quote from: Sheilbh on September 04, 2009, 03:26:48 PM
Quote from: Berkut on September 04, 2009, 12:44:13 PM
The sad thing is that she is probably right - reform without the public option is likely not worth the trouble.
Really? My understanding is that without the public option the system would basically be the same as the Swiss.
That's what I am thinking. The "public option" strikes me as wording as much as anything else, a good reform of incentives and tort, maybe with some monitoring of the health care industry as well, would be good enough.
Quote from: Faeelin on September 04, 2009, 12:33:54 PM
Quote from: Caliga on September 04, 2009, 12:29:38 PM
:yawn:
So who's gonna be elected POTUS in 2012? Romney? Jindal? Pawlenty? :)
I can go with Pawlenty, and would probably take Romney over Obama at this point.
I'm not totally sure what your problem is with him. Gay rights? He's flopped a bit, but there are other priorities. Thusfar I don't think he's really made a huge mistake on the stimulus of foreign affairs, which makes him a thousand times better than George W. Bush and better than any likely Republican nominee, including Mitt "Double Guantanamo" Romney.
Quote from: Jaron on September 04, 2009, 03:44:57 PM
Obama '08..
Obama '12...
Obama FOREVER!
Jaron Wallace has spoken.
Quote from: Faeelin on September 04, 2009, 12:33:54 PM
I can go with Pawlenty, and would probably take Romney over Obama at this point.
We are going to have to put up with Faeelin the anti-Obama spambot until then? Oh boy.
I'm for the public option but this is classic cut the nose to spite the face. If you can get 70% percent of what you want, why would you insist on getting zero instead?
Quote from: Valmy on September 04, 2009, 03:54:09 PM
Quote from: Faeelin on September 04, 2009, 12:33:54 PM
I can go with Pawlenty, and would probably take Romney over Obama at this point.
We are going to have to put up with Faeelin the anti-Obama spambot until then? Oh boy.
You shouldn't be so hard of Faeelin; he's going through an important stage. The stage where his once idealistic dreams of youth are brutally crushed by the system leaving him a bitter shell of the man he once was. It's a necessary stage in the development of any true Languideshian.
Quote from: Savonarola on September 04, 2009, 03:58:59 PM
Quote from: Valmy on September 04, 2009, 03:54:09 PM
Quote from: Faeelin on September 04, 2009, 12:33:54 PM
I can go with Pawlenty, and would probably take Romney over Obama at this point.
We are going to have to put up with Faeelin the anti-Obama spambot until then? Oh boy.
You shouldn't be so hard of Faeelin; he's going through an important stage. The stage where his once idealistic dreams of youth are brutally crushed by the system leaving him a bitter shell of the man he once was. It's a necessary stage in the development of any true Languideshian.
Is it? :unsure:
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 04, 2009, 04:08:32 PM
Quote from: Savonarola on September 04, 2009, 03:58:59 PM
You shouldn't be so hard of Faeelin; he's going through an important stage. The stage where his once idealistic dreams of youth are brutally crushed by the system leaving him a bitter shell of the man he once was. It's a necessary stage in the development of any true Languideshian.
Is it? :unsure:
It happens to everyone. IT IS YOUR DESTINY. :ph34r:
I can't think of any Republican I like, except Huckabee.
Palin scares me. I'm not entirely sure Romney's human (and he ties his dog to the top of the car!). Pawlenty seems dull. I use to think Sanford was interesting until he went hiking. I don't think Jindal sounds 'Presidential' (his voice seems too high-pitched to me, hard to take seriously for a President).
So for me at this point it's all about Huckabee :wub:
Quote from: Sheilbh on September 04, 2009, 04:22:38 PM
I can't think of any Republican I like, except Huckabee.
Hrmm. Given how Huckabee is probably the most homophobic of the lot, I'm surprised.
Quote from: Faeelin on September 04, 2009, 04:28:53 PM
Hrmm. Given how Huckabee is probably the most homophobic of the lot, I'm surprised.
I think I'd only care about the gay shit on a state level.* I don't really care about DADT (which I think will be gone within the next few years) and DOMA and I'd hate for the whole gay issue to go Federal.
Edit: * Even then, barely. It's really not an important issue for me when I vote.
Quote from: Faeelin on September 04, 2009, 04:28:53 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on September 04, 2009, 04:22:38 PM
I can't think of any Republican I like, except Huckabee.
Hrmm. Given how Huckabee is probably the most homophobic of the lot, I'm surprised.
Not really. Languish gays (with the exception of you and Marty (sorry to place you in such a group)) tend to vote or root for homophobes for some bizarre reason. Look at Garbon and Palin.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on September 04, 2009, 03:57:12 PM
I'm for the public option but this is classic cut the nose to spite the face. If you can get 70% percent of what you want, why would you insist on getting zero instead?
Sometimes I wonder if the democrats want to achieve anything: from putting all the gay issues on the backburner to seemingly refusing to compromise on cap and trade, card check, and now potentially even health care, all of those are in trouble.
Quote from: Sheilbh on September 04, 2009, 04:22:38 PM
I can't think of any Republican I like, except Huckabee.
Palin scares me. I'm not entirely sure Romney's human (and he ties his dog to the top of the car!). Pawlenty seems dull. I use to think Sanford was interesting until he went hiking. I don't think Jindal sounds 'Presidential' (his voice seems too high-pitched to me, hard to take seriously for a President).
So for me at this point it's all about Huckabee :wub:
Huckabee, really? The guy that wants to abolish the income tax? The Baptist minister? Isn't the guy a creationist?
Quote from: alfred russel on September 04, 2009, 04:40:27 PM
Huckabee, really? The guy that wants to abolish the income tax? The Baptist minister? Isn't the guy a creationist?
We don't entirely agree, that's fair but I think he's one of the more compelling candidates :wub:
Quote from: alfred russel on September 04, 2009, 01:28:36 PM
Pelosi saying she won't pass a health care bill without a public option, and 40+ senators (senate republicans plus some senate democrats) indicating they won't support a bill that has a public option doesn't seem like a good cop/bad cop routine--it seems like a log jam.
Do we know that for a fact? Have 40+ put themselves on record as voting against a bill with a public option?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 04, 2009, 04:59:18 PM
Quote from: alfred russel on September 04, 2009, 01:28:36 PM
Pelosi saying she won't pass a health care bill without a public option, and 40+ senators (senate republicans plus some senate democrats) indicating they won't support a bill that has a public option doesn't seem like a good cop/bad cop routine--it seems like a log jam.
Do we know that for a fact? Have 40+ put themselves on record as voting against a bill with a public option?
I don't, but I've assumed it since a I believe a few democrats have (I know Lincoln from Arkansas, and I think a few others from Louisiana and Montana, but I don't follow this close enough to say for sure).
Quote from: alfred russel on September 04, 2009, 04:40:27 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on September 04, 2009, 04:22:38 PM
I can't think of any Republican I like, except Huckabee.
Palin scares me. I'm not entirely sure Romney's human (and he ties his dog to the top of the car!). Pawlenty seems dull. I use to think Sanford was interesting until he went hiking. I don't think Jindal sounds 'Presidential' (his voice seems too high-pitched to me, hard to take seriously for a President).
So for me at this point it's all about Huckabee :wub:
As you can see from his reply, while Shelbh follows the issues very closely, in the end it's all about symbols and storylines for him. Witness his love for Blair, HUckabee, Ignatieff, and the Catholic Church. :lol:
Huckabee, really? The guy that wants to abolish the income tax? The Baptist minister? Isn't the guy a creationist?
Quote from: Barrister on September 04, 2009, 05:08:11 PM
As you can see from his reply, while Shelbh follows the issues very closely, in the end it's all about symbols and storylines for him. Witness his love for Blair, HUckabee, Ignatieff, and the Catholic Church. :lol:
I think you're sort of right. The sad thing is the only one I genuinely believe in and support strongly is Blair :(
Quote from: Sheilbh on September 04, 2009, 04:22:38 PM
I use to think Sanford was interesting until he went hiking.
:lol:
I think he became more interesting because of that. Just not in the context of Presidential candidates.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on September 04, 2009, 03:57:12 PM
I'm for the public option but this is classic cut the nose to spite the face. If you can get 70% percent of what you want, why would you insist on getting zero instead?
What will be in Obama's new bill? Does anybody know? Most of what I've read make it clear Obama's still tyring to figure that out.
Quote from: QueeqegI'm not totally sure what your problem is with him. Gay rights? He's flopped a bit, but there are other priorities. Thusfar I don't think he's really made a huge mistake on the stimulus of foreign affairs, which makes him a thousand times better than George W. Bush and better than any likely Republican nominee, including Mitt "Double Guantanamo" Romney.
Eh. I care about health care reform, climate change, a government that isn't holding people indefinitely without trial, and gay rights; indeed, I am something of a single issues voter when it comes to whether or not a politician views me as the equal of everybody else.
Obama hasn't "flopped a bit" on gay rights, he's completely abandoned them. But he's completely abandoned every other issue I care about too. So why bother voting for the guy again?
Quote from: Faeelin on September 04, 2009, 07:22:54 PM
indeed, I am something of a single issues voter when it comes to whether or not a politician views me as the equal of everybody else.
Then why don't you start acting like the equal of everyone else?