Move along, nothing to see here. Newsflash! They are all assholes, regardless of party. Be it your party or their party, assholes to the core. Move along. SNAFU and FUBAR, all rolled into one nice neat little package.

For some, the news didn't go over so well...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4aQCiRjvZY&feature=player_embedded

ISO

Grizz, - I don't see any monkeys, but stay tuned! I have never been happy when either party has had a super majority. It makes the majority party undisciplined and dictatorial. Our country is split pretty much down the middle between left and right, the Senate is better when that situation is represented.

the dems have been bending over backwards trying to compromise since the healthcare debate started. that is why the current bill is a steaming pile of @#$^, and the backlash to the backroom deals falls squarely on a party not willing to make a stand for what they were elected on.

honestly, i've always wondered why a party with well over 50 votes to pass a bill with a public option and without all the backroom deals won't just force their opposition to fillibuster the bill. a threat of a fillibuster should not stop a majority from pushing legislation through. make republicans and blue dogs stand on the floor of the senate for months talking - make them fillibuster.

my opinion is that the democrats are losing seats not due to ideas, but not having the balls to enact their campaign promises. people don't like their politicians to be pussies when it comes to governing.

unfortunetely, the outcome of this election will probably result in more meekness from dems and will actually ensure even more losses this fall.

hey dems, you still have a huge majority. you need to work hard to have something to campaign on this fall or you will face huge losses. show some balls and fight. that's why democrats will vote for someone else, lack of fight for the issues they want tackled.

I love that argument. We are now getting hammered because people hate what we are trying to do so let just force it down their throats. We know whats best.

That would be about the dumbest thing ever. Both parties in this country suck and that type of response would likely lead to a R supermajority. That would be just as bad as what we have now.

Why not try the Slick Willy thing. Stop, think, realize people dont like what is happening, change. Real change this time. Quit the Chicago style stuff and actually attempt to govern from where most people in this country are......The center. Send the scare crow back to san fran and well Harry has only got till Nov anyway.

And if the R's want to just stand in the way and do nothing......then screw them. If Pelosi and Reid just want it their way....Screw them too. We need a new party in this country that give a damn about the people of this country and not just scoring pol points.

Last time I will say it BRING BACK THE PARTY OF THE BULL MOOSE!!!

i think the question is why people hate what they are doing. i think it's because they are pussies who won't stand and fight for what got them elected. the majority of people want health care reform. the compromises and bull that comes from attempting to create a fillibuster proof bill is what created a terrible bill. at least that's how i see it. and it's not about forcing it down people's throats, but forcing a vote on what you campaigned on. if it gets fillibustered, fine... but fight for a better bill with a public option. you stand a better chance of getting re-elected in the fall of 2010 if you have passed legislation that you can run on. also, not being a bunch of pussies helps come election time.



the problem is exactly that they think of polling and not of leading. there will be a republican supermajority if the dems keep governing like pussies. plus, the republicans only need a simple majority because the dems just lay down when they are in the minority. again, dems = pussies.

fyi, the idea of a public option in the health care debate is already "the center". the far left idea is single-payer and the far right idea is "let them eat cake".

"if the R's want to stand in the way and do nothing"?!?!?!? that's exactly what they are doing, which would be political suicide if their opponents took advantage and forced them to fillibuster in favor of the status-quo.

we're both unhappy with the dems, just for different reasons.

Topwater

Americans want health care reform they just don't want this reform. 78% of Brown voters are against this government health care bill. Certain dems are doing everything they can to get away from this bill. It says allot when Barney Frank thinks they need to take a step back. You think ramming this through shows strength. I just think it shows arrogance going against the majority of the american people.

That's it in a nut shell.

sorry, maybe i wasn't clear. they should ram this current bill up the "you know what" of lieberman, nelson, snowe, and all the others that helped create this heaping pile of compromise @#$%. they should get back to what they promised on the campaign trail and put it to a f'ing vote.

as for ramming it through. all i'm talking about is forcing the republicans, droopy, and conservative dems to back up their fillibuster talk with a real fillibuster.

put a non-compromised health reform bill up for a vote. sorry if you confused my anger at dems with support of the current bill.

Actually, they like it in Mass., and they already have it...they're not too stoked on paying for what they already have.

Fish on...

Todd

Reminds me of Caddyshack...."You'll get nothing and LIKE IT!!!"

Isn't the health care plan in Mass a giant fiscal disaster? I would love it too if I got everything and someone else paid for it.

From the Boston Globe:

MASSACHUSETTS HAS been lauded for its healthcare reform, but the program is a failure. Created solely to achieve universal insurance coverage, the plan does not even begin to address the other essential components of a successful healthcare system.

What would such a system provide? The prestigious Institute of Medicine, part of the National Academy of Sciences, has defined five criteria for healthcare reform. Coverage should be: universal, not tied to a job, affordable for individuals and families, affordable for society, and it should provide access to high-quality care for everyone.

The state's plan flunks on all counts.

First, it has not achieved universal healthcare, although the reform has been a boon to the private insurance industry. The state has more than 200,000 without coverage, and the count can only go up with rising unemployment.

Second, the reform does not address the problem of insurance being connected to jobs. For individuals, this means their insurance is not continuous if they change or lose jobs. For employers, especially small businesses, health insurance is an expense they can ill afford.

Third, the program is not affordable for many individuals and families. For middle-income people not qualifying for state-subsidized health insurance, costs are too high for even skimpy coverage. For an individual earning $31,213, the cheapest plan can cost $9,872 in premiums and out-of-pocket payments. Low-income residents, previously eligible for free care, have insurance policies requiring unaffordable copayments for office visits and medications.

Fourth, the costs of the reform for the state have been formidable. Spending for the Commonwealth Care subsidized program has doubled, from $630 million in 2007 to an estimated $1.3 billion for 2009, which is not sustainable.

Fifth, reform does not assure access to care. High-deductible plans that have additional out-of-pocket expenses can result in many people not using their insurance when they are sick. In my practice of child and adolescent psychiatry, a parent told me last week that she had a decrease in her job hours, could not afford the $30 copayment for treatment sessions for her adolescent, and decided to meet much less frequently.

In another case, a divorced mother stopped treatment for her son because the father had changed insurance, leaving them with an unaffordable deductible. And at Cambridge Health Alliance, doctors and nurses have cared for patients who, unable to afford the new copayments, were forced to interrupt care for HIV and even cancers that could be treated with chemotherapy.

Access to care is also affected by the uneven distribution of healthcare dollars between primary and specialty care, and between community hospitals and tertiary care hospitals. Partners HealthCare, which includes two major tertiary care hospitals in Boston, was able to negotiate a secret agreement with Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts to be paid 30 percent more for their services than other providers in the state, contributing to an increase in healthcare costs for Massachusetts, which are already the highest per person in the world. Agreements that tilt spending toward tertiary care threaten the viability of community hospitals and health centers that provide a safety net for the uninsured and underinsured.

There is, though, one US model of healthcare that meets the Institute of Medicine criteria: Medicare. Insuring everyone over 65, Medicare achieves universal coverage and access to care, is not tied to a job, and is affordable for individuals and the country. Medicare simplifies the administration of healthcare dollars, thereby saving money. We need to improve Medicare, and expand this program to include everyone.

A bill before Congress, the United States National Health Insurance Act, would provide more comprehensive coverage for all. The bill includes doctor, hospital, long-term, mental health, dental, and vision care, prescription drugs, and medical supplies, with no premiums, copayments, or deductibles.

People would be free to choose doctors and hospitals, and insurance would not be tied to a job. Costs would be controlled because health planning in a national health program can reestablish needed balance between primary/preventive care and high-tech tertiary care. A modest, progressive tax would replace what people currently pay out of pocket. This program would pay for itself by eliminating the wasteful administrative costs and profits of private insurance companies, and save $8 billion to $10 billion in Massachusetts alone.

We must let Congress know we want improved access to affordable healthcare for all, not more expensive private health insurance we can't afford to use when we are sick. Massachusetts healthcare reform fails on all five Institute of Medicine criteria. Congress should not make it a model for the nation.

Susanne L. King, M.D., practices in Berkshire County.

What Todd fails to realize is polls on Massachusetts are not all in favor of there health care reform. Some polls show numbers down into the 30's that are in favor. The reform failed in it's attempt to cut health care costs.

That assumes that Obama's camapign promises were not just BS to get elected. He has really proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that he is a phony....promise all day then get elected and forget about most of the promises....change your teleprompter based on how the wind is blowing and not on the principles that alot of people based their vote for him on. I think people are seeing that the emperor has not clothes.

Topwater,

I posted the same video on page 2 of this thread..LOL! (great video, although that same video has been used for a number of "issues")

ISO

In other circumstances I might have said it wasn't so much a vote for Brown as a vote against Chokeley. However, if Mass. can't find a Dem who is well qualified to replace Ted Kennedy in the Senate, who and where else could? I'm thinking the Dems fielded a lousy candidate, an embarassment to Kennedy's liberal legacy, especially pertaining to the health care issue, Mass. independents were having none of it, and Brown, the better candidate won.

I've always liked 538...non-partisan and usually pretty straightforward, right to the heart of the matters at hand.

Fish on...

Todd

Hey KK you don't happen to remember what thread that was on do ya? I wouldn't mind seeing that again.

KK...write this down...YOU ARE RIGHT...the Big Stick video is way better than the one about Brown.

ISO