Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

[pirate]

Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

Oh cry me a river already. If some poster wants to trot out stupid, 8th grade right wing talking points and idiocy on a regular basis, they can expect to take some heat. I have no idea of MinnFan's employment status but seeing that he's out here constantly he's obviously idle for some reason or another.

Its always the same with people. They don't mind dishing it out but they can't take it. Its an internet message board with random posters. If you take it seriously you're a grade "A" nimrod.

Your comments weren't random, they were directed at one person...I was unable to ascertain his employment status from a review of other posts and pointed out that it wasn't clear what was fact and what wasn't.

That I couldn't tell if you would stoop that low, after reading hundreds of your posts over a length of time, should tell you something.

As for not taking it seriously...that comment, coming from you, is ***** hillarious.

Name calling? Really? That is how you distinguish yourself from the people spouting 8th grade idiocy?

 

[MinnFan]

Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

If the end is to avoid a filibuster, that's true. But the means matters. Reconciliation is a procedure that's already in place. Furthermore, the indication is that the Democratic plan is to 1. pass the current Senate bill in the house (the one that already received 60 votes), and then proceed to modify that bill's financial and budgetary components using reconciliation, with only 50+ votes needed in the Senate and a majority in the House.

I agree that this is different than the "nuclear option", but to say that this is the same as previous budget reconciliation is quite a stretch. For one thing there are an average of 67 yea votes in the 22 previous times reconciliaion was used. It has been used for the 20 hour time limit instead of the 51 votes.

 

[Rover]

Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

Your comments weren't random, they were directed at one person...I was unable to ascertain his employment status from a review of other posts and pointed out that it wasn't clear what was fact and what wasn't.

That I couldn't tell if you would stoop that low, after reading hundreds of your posts over a length of time, should tell you something.

As for not taking it seriously...that comment, coming from you, is ***** hillarious.

Name calling? Really? That is how you distinguish yourself from the people spouting 8th grade idiocy?

pirate, here's a newsflash. I don't give a rat's @rse what you think of my commentary in particular or board etiquette in general. If you don't like it, get lost. If there's any part of that you're having trouble understanding, let me know and I'll be happy to explain it in more detail for you.

Regarding not taking it seriously, my most pointed comments are always directed at BC fans (and visa versa) yet we are all always ready to have some beers and some laughs whenever we meet up, be it after BU games, before the Beanpot or HE tourney, in DC, etc. You might want to consider how seriously you take this board yourself before ascribing motivations to others that just aren't there.

 

[SPIN CONTROL]

Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

Since when do pirates wear skirts and cry like little girls?

 

[Foxton]

Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

Since when do pirates wear skirts and cry like little girls?

It's because of global warming, the skirts must offer some kind of cooling advantage with the unrestricted air flow.

 

[pirate]

Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

pirate, here's a newsflash. I don't give a rat's @rse what you think of my commentary in particular or board etiquette in general. If you don't like it, get lost. If there's any part of that you're having trouble understanding, let me know and I'll be happy to explain it in more detail for you.

Regarding not taking it seriously, my most pointed comments are always directed at BC fans (and visa versa) yet we are all always ready to have some beers and some laughs whenever we meet up, be it after BU games, before the Beanpot or HE tourney, in DC, etc. You might want to consider how seriously you take this board yourself before ascribing motivations to others that just aren't there.

Well, that couldn't be true or you would have simply ignored them.

Good to know I hit a nerve though...always helpful to know the weak spots.

 

[Rover]

Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

Well, that couldn't be true or you would have simply ignored them.

Good to know I hit a nerve though...always helpful to know the weak spots.

You just go on believing that skirt boy (copyright Spin Control).

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

This was said by the most frequent visitor to the White House and new member of the Deficit Reduction Panel, Andy Stern, yesterday...



This is some scary stuff

link

Enough to absolutely terrify some out of touch conservatives. But what matters to the rest of us is the deficit...and we have yet to see if the moves will get us out of the recession.

 

[Patman]

Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

Enough to absolutely terrify some out of touch conservatives. But what matters to the rest of us is the deficit...and we have yet to see if the moves will get us out of the recession.

We'll be yet to be seeing it for quite a long while.

---

Tundra,

This congress is beautiful. Hey, we got a problem with the financial system that's gunking up jobs... LETS FIX HEALTH CARE!!!!

So, in the end, the ideological goal comes before the pragmatic system problem. That fits right in line with the ideologue-in-chief. So much for smart power... or is only smart power if he holds the same ideas that other smart people hold to make themselves feel noble.

 

[pirate]

Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

They have put effort into getting the banks to increase lending to small business. Just as things were too far one way, the pull back has gone too far the other way...if we can get to a middle ground perhaps we'll see some jobs as a result.

Provided they understand that means there will be good people who lose everything because their business just didn't work just as there will be people who thrive because they got the funding they needed.

People tend to seize on the anecdote (Joe the plumber, old medicare lady etc) and then advocate a system in which nothing bad ever happens to anybody...that just isn't reality.

When defaults increase we'll see if they jump on the banks for predatory lending or if they recognize there is going to be ebb and flow.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

So, in the end, the ideological goal comes before the pragmatic system problem. That fits right in line with the ideologue-in-chief. So much for smart power... or is only smart power if he holds the same ideas that other smart people hold to make themselves feel noble.

See this is precisely the problem with many conservatives and a large part of the problem that this country ran into last decade. Conservatives are about ideology...socialism, that anti-moralistic hollywood point of view, anti-Americanism. And when you aim at an ideal, frankly this country and its citizens become a lower priority. The worst the left is guilty on healthcare is a general concern that many are not being cared for by the current system...right or wrong...not the desire for more govt control.

That's why all the bs about socialism is a red flag...it shows that even after the Bush era, lessons have not been learned on the right.

Ohh...and big shocker here:

GOP Uses Fear to Raise Money
Thursday, March 04, 2010
By Chris Wallace

A Republican Party internal fundraising document outlines an aggressive campaign focusing on fear of President Obama and comparisons to socialism.

Politico obtained the 72-page document from a Democrat. It explains GOP fundraising logic as: "What can you sell when you do not have the White House — the House — or the Senate?" The answer: — "Save the country from trending toward socialism!"

There is also a slide titled "The Evil Empire," that has a caricature of President Obama as The Joker, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as Cruella de Vil, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid as Scooby Doo.

Republican Chairman Michael Steele calls the GOP document "inappropriate" and says he is dealing with it administratively.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,588072,00.html

 

[Rover]

Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

The problem with conservatives is that they're not a problem solving people. If your basic ideology is that govt is bad, when you are in control of the govt your inclination is to do nothing except for special interest legislation for whoever is bankrolling your campaign (see the DeLay era). Put Obama aside for a minute and look at the last two Presidencies, one Dem and one GOP. Which admin tackled the deficit? Which tried to tackle health care? Frankly the GOP hasn't had a solutions to current problems driven Presidency since Reagan's first term (military build up, tax cuts, social security revamp).

That's why the idea that the GOP wants to take on health care, just that they want to start from scratch is laughable. Raise your hand if you really think they'll actually make significant progress in both reducing the cost of health care or expanding coverage to the uninsured if they're in the majority? These problems have been well known for years. Where was the effort to address them during their time controlling Congress? Answer: nowhere to be found, but we did get a lot of effort to make the tax burden on big GOP campaign donors lighter, even though the country had to borrow the money to do so.

 

[unofan]

Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

Which admin tackled the deficit?

That had more to do with 1) Gingrich and the "Contract With America" platform that got the GOP into power on the hill, and 2)the tech bubble than it did Clinton. And you know it.

Congress has always controlled the purse strings. That the GOP lost their fiscal sense since then is also not in doubt, but that likewise had more to do with the idiots on the hill than Dubya or Obama.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

That had more to do with 1) Gingrich and the "Contract With America" platform that got the GOP into power on the hill, and 2)the tech bubble than it did Clinton. And you know it.

Congress has always controlled the purse strings.

I agree.

Can you tell me why the Congress with Bush in office didn't finish the job?

 

[unofan]

Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

I agree.

Can you tell me why the Congress with Bush in office didn't finish the job?

Cause they got corrupt and greedy like every other Congress since the begining of time?

 

[Rover]

Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

That had more to do with 1) Gingrich and the "Contract With America" platform that got the GOP into power on the hill, and 2)the tech bubble than it did Clinton. And you know it.

Congress has always controlled the purse strings. That the GOP lost their fiscal sense since then is also not in doubt, but that likewise had more to do with the idiots on the hill than Dubya or Obama.

I respectfully disgaree unofan.

1) Gingrich does deserve credit, don't get me wrong on that. However, he and the leadership after he left wanted to blow the money on top level tax cuts - the very thing that happened after they got a friend in the White House in GWB. Clinton deserves the lion's share of the credit for rejection both large tax cuts on the right and large spending on the left and focusing on deficit reduction as the goal of the administration.

2) "it was mostly tech bubble related" is a myth, and a dangerous one at that. By trying to poo-poo away the actual accomplishments of that era as all a mirage, you give politicians free reign to deficit spend up to their eyeballs as you've taken away a recent standard to hold them to. That makes no sense IMHO. IF a dot com bubble was truly driving the economy, than all of the 22M jobs created in the Clinton era would have been lost after it crashed. In fact, the country kept those 22M jobs even through the tepid growth era of the 2000's. What the country did better then was a balanced budget inspired confidence globally in investing in America, hence how capital inflows outstripped outflows and the dollar was much stronger than the euro for example (Euro was under $1 for a time). Targeted tax cuts for jobs and investment, coupled with free trade, also helped. All these things vanished under the fiscal recklessness of the next admin, and we're still paying the price for that.

 

[Plante26]

Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

The problem with conservatives is that they're not a problem solving people. If your basic ideology is that govt is bad, when you are in control of the govt your inclination is to do nothing except for special interest legislation for whoever is bankrolling your campaign (see the DeLay era). Put Obama aside for a minute and look at the last two Presidencies, one Dem and one GOP. Which admin tackled the deficit? Which tried to tackle health care? Frankly the GOP hasn't had a solutions to current problems driven Presidency since Reagan's first term (military build up, tax cuts, social security revamp).

That's why the idea that the GOP wants to take on health care, just that they want to start from scratch is laughable. Raise your hand if you really think they'll actually make significant progress in both reducing the cost of health care or expanding coverage to the uninsured if they're in the majority? These problems have been well known for years. Where was the effort to address them during their time controlling Congress? Answer: nowhere to be found, but we did get a lot of effort to make the tax burden on big GOP campaign donors lighter, even though the country had to borrow the money to do so.

The Obama plan doesn't do a ****ed thing to reduce the cost of health care. All it does it provide coverage for everyone that can't/won't purchase insurance. It also does away with the pre-existing conditions clause, which is going to drive the cost of health insurance even higher than it is now. Basically, it'd be like your auto insurance premiums being calculated in with the same risk group as drivers with multiple accidents, habitual drunk drivers and chronic speeders. Think your auto insurance premiums will go down? Snowball's chance in hell. Same thing applies to health care......loosen the criteria for coverage and risk goes up. Risk goes up, and insurance claims go up. Claims go up, and premiums go up. It's not that difficult to understand.

See, there's no addressing the actual COSTS that drive health care ever higher: labor union infiltration of the medical industry, skyrocketing malpractice insurance costs due to the steady increase in lawsuits and the government only paying a fraction of the costs for Medicare/Medicaid-covered procedures--thus shifting the difference to non-government subsidized health care.

Now this is where you'd predictably point the finger at pharmaceutical companies for their consistently-increasing profits over the years being a cause; you'd also predictably be wrong. If you were to do a cost analysis of how much money is saved in medical care by taking any given medication, the difference would be STAGGERING. $100 a month for blood pressure meds? Drop in the bucket as compared to a stroke and years of follow-up care. Cholesterol blocking statins at $50/month? Peanuts vs. a triple bypass and a couple of weeks in the cardiac ICU. Health insurance companies are making too much money, you say? Their profit margins are razor thin. Try again.

The problem can be summed up as such: Nurses making $120,000/year, patient's families being encouraged to file lawsuits any time a family member passes away at a hospital and Uncle Sam paying health care providers sixty cents on the dollar for their Medicare/Medicaid patients. Coupled with the fact that the average uninsured person could have ample health insurance for a third the cost of the average auto loan payment (or the monthly cost of cable and cell phone service), and I see little reason to make health insurance more costly to 90% of Americans to cover a very small percentage of people that need--and would benefit from--this plan.

 

[SPIN CONTROL]

Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

I think the biggest factor regarding health care costs is that your average American is a fat lazy slob that stuffs their faces with twinkies and doritos all their lives and then wonder why they end up in the hospital when they get older.

Not to mention the fact that we overmediacte ourselves with prescription drugs more than Rover guzzles booze on a daily basis. Which believe me is quite a bit.

 

[LynahFan]

Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

2) "it was mostly tech bubble related" is a myth, and a dangerous one at that. By trying to poo-poo away the actual accomplishments of that era as all a mirage, you give politicians free reign to deficit spend up to their eyeballs as you've taken away a recent standard to hold them to. That makes no sense IMHO. IF a dot com bubble was truly driving the economy, than all of the 22M jobs created in the Clinton era would have been lost after it crashed. In fact, the country kept those 22M jobs even through the tepid growth era of the 2000's. What the country did better then was a balanced budget inspired confidence globally in investing in America, hence how capital inflows outstripped outflows and the dollar was much stronger than the euro for example (Euro was under $1 for a time). Targeted tax cuts for jobs and investment, coupled with free trade, also helped. All these things vanished under the fiscal recklessness of the next admin, and we're still paying the price for that.

We kept those 22M jobs by transferring the dot-com bubble to the housing bubble which then became the CDO bubble. We've just been pushing the same bubble around and just in the last 2 years have we shed all those jobs that were mythical to begin with.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

The Obama plan doesn't do a ****ed thing to reduce the cost of health care.

The Congressional Budget Office begs to differ.