Reconciliation...

[CrusaderFrank]

I hope Dems can reconcile themselves to the massive changes we're going to implement when we win it all back in 2012

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The collective "Oh Fuck! I hadn't thought about that" from the "Progressives" is palpable

 

[Vanquish]

So Bush could have partially privatized Social Security and reformed Medicare and Fannie and Freddie using reconciliation.

Thanks for the heads up, Dems, that's going to come in handy in 2012 when we've won it all back

Yeah...that would have been a great fucking idea Frank. With the Wall Street collapse and the stock market debacle suffered under the last year of Bush, privatizing Social Security would have been just peachy....

Two words: Warren Buffett

LOL. Might not want to use him as your go-to guy considering that he's supporting BO on most major issues.

 

[Murf76]

The collective "Oh Fuck! I hadn't thought about that" from the "Progressives" is palpable

I think they're counting on people just falling in love with their big pile of legislative crap. They think they'll be forgiven and all will be well. But... that's not going to happen. The bill has REAL constitutional problems that are going to be challenged. The idea that they're going to change the minds of average Americans who have already rejected this bill... is ludicrous. But it's also the least of their problems.

They're going to end up destroying the filibuster... for nothing. And having changed the parameters of the way the Senate does business, they're going to eat dirt when they're in the minority.... which will be sooner rather than later.

 

[Vanquish]

Destroy the filibuster? Are you kidding me? The filibuster is a joke at the moment. It needs to go back to the Mr. Smith Goes to Washington style method so that people have to back up their words with action! And let's talk about what reconciliation really is... it's doing what ought to be done through caucusing anyway...getting the 2 bills to align with each other.

You dont want to talk about the fact that the Senate actually already passed something. You know what that means? It means your boys voted for a healthcare bill they liked or could put up with. So why dig in your heels and try to stymie the process...instead of getting passed bill #1 to look like passed bill #2?

And as for your "told ya so" about Obama not being bi-partisan, your psychiatrist must have you on some mix of Adderall, Oxcontin, and Thorazine. He bent over backwards to be gracious and even-handed. What did he get in return? Comments that he was arrogant and condescending when he wasn't.

I really wish there was a 3rd part of common-sensed people out there...somewhere.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Yeah...that would have been a great fucking idea Frank. With the Wall Street collapse and the stock market debacle suffered under the last year of Bush, privatizing Social Security would have been just peachy....

Two words: Warren Buffett

LOL. Might not want to use him as your go-to guy considering that he's supporting BO on most major issues.

So what? He's allowed to be a fucking moron on some things.

BTW, How do you feel about how he avoiding the estate tax?

 

[saveliberty]

Summary:

1. The President doesn't really compromise.
2. The Democrats no longer care about minority rights.
3. This plan will INCREASE existing policy costs.
4. There will still be a large number of people without coverage.
5. We will penalize the unemployed for not having coverage.
6. The elderly will have a harder time finding a doctor with Medicare reimbursements declining.
7. The expanded use of the reconciliation will further divide Congress.

This what you want libs?

 

[Dr.House]

Estimates place the number of people without health insurance in 2010 at 52 million.

More than eight in 10 Americans questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey released Thursday said they're satisfied with the quality of health care they receive.

And nearly three out of four said they're happy with their overall health care coverage.

Poll: Health care costs too expensive, Americans say - CNN.com

It should be noted that many people choose NOT to carry coverage by personal choice. Those that would like coverage have a substantial number who can't pay for it due to unemployment. Even with this legislation, approxiamtely 20 million will still be without insurance plus those that choose to pay the fine and not have it.

It should be noted that you cherry pick what you want to focus on from your link and only present what suits your needs.

"But satisfaction drops to 52 percent when it comes to the amount people pay for their health care, and more than three out of four are dissatisfied with the total cost of health care in the United States."

That is the very next paragraph from your own link. I wonder why you excluded it?? Hmm?

Because they don't want to acknowledge that polls showing disapproval don't necessarily reflect just what the nature of that disapproval is. The reconciliation process is being discussed as a way to improve the legislation already passed, which, when done, will likely cause approval to go up when those who've voiced dissatisfaction because they feel it doesn't go far enough are happier with it.

You obvviously know little about statistical analysis...

You can not claim that overall approval will go up when more is added to it, making those who felt it diidn't go far enough happier... This is because you fail to take into account those who feel that it DOES go far enough now and would NOT approve of a bill that went "too far"...

 

[masquerade]

Summary:

1. The President doesn't really compromise. He's a Harvard man. You can always tell a Harvard man, you just can't tell him much.
2. The Democrats no longer care about minority rights. They care about POWER!
3. This plan will INCREASE existing policy costs. You got THAT right!
4. There will still be a large number of people without coverage. Yup.
5. We will penalize the unemployed for not having coverage. First time in the history of the country that we will be forced by the government to purchase a product.
6. The elderly will have a harder time finding a doctor with Medicare reimbursements declining. We are already experiencing a shortage of MD's. This plan WILL make that shortage worse.
7. The expanded use of the reconciliation will further divide Congress. Indeed, and most likely turn both houses over in the fall.

This what you want libs?

73% of Americans ( per CNN poll ) oppose the Democrats approach to healthcare reform.

 

[Murf76]

Destroy the filibuster? Are you kidding me? The filibuster is a joke at the moment. It needs to go back to the Mr. Smith Goes to Washington style method so that people have to back up their words with action! And let's talk about what reconciliation really is... it's doing what ought to be done through caucusing anyway...getting the 2 bills to align with each other.

You dont want to talk about the fact that the Senate actually already passed something. You know what that means? It means your boys voted for a healthcare bill they liked or could put up with. So why dig in your heels and try to stymie the process...instead of getting passed bill #1 to look like passed bill #2?

And as for your "told ya so" about Obama not being bi-partisan, your psychiatrist must have you on some mix of Adderall, Oxcontin, and Thorazine. He bent over backwards to be gracious and even-handed. What did he get in return? Comments that he was arrogant and condescending when he wasn't.

I really wish there was a 3rd part of common-sensed people out there...somewhere.

Oh.... bullshit. Obama has been nothing but an arrogant and condescending asshole. And he'll pay the political price for it.

The filibuster is there for a purpose. It's meant to require a genuine consensus. And while it's true that the House has passed a bill, and the Senate has passed a bill... they're two separate bills and can't be reconciled through the Byrd process on points which do not deal specifically with budget items.

Oh... and don't think I haven't noticed that your chicken-shit ass has bailed whenever you didn't have answers for my questions. It's been twice now.

 

[Vanquish]

I haven't bailed. Since you're putting the mirror back on me, personally, let's take that and run with it for a second.

My day goes a little like this...

I get up in the morning and get on the internet for a bit before starting to get ready for work, feed the pets and make my wife breakfast. I go to work. When I get here, after checking messages and dealing with my boss...I sneak a bit of time on the internet.

Now because of how fast the board moves...and because I've really gotten fed up with the fact that people are partisan hacks and insult each other and fail to make reasoned arguments...I dont always get back to the original tete-a-tete I contributed to. I type one or two offs with the time in between doing my work that I can manage.

I've answered most of what you've typed...I think the first one you're referring to was about how insurance costs increase medical costs...but you're being chicken shit and failing to credit the entire rest of that thread where I answered you and beat you handily. I even made note of the avoidance for you AT THE END OF THE POST. yeah, that's chicken shit alright?

You're a partisan hack who can't admit that Obama tried to work with people during that farce. I don't line up with BO on every issue...not in the least...but on a few issues he's right. He tried so many times during that thing to be even-handed, not to play favorites, and to move things forward. Seriously...I dont think you really watched with your biases to the side...you just had your mind made up beforehand.

Oh well nothing I can do about that. 'Cept call you on your bullshit when you type it.

 

[California Girl]

There are a lot of things that they don't want to acknowledge. Their spin about reconciliation and the excuses that they gave concerning it's past uses by republicans have been countered and shot down but how many of those posters who tried to spin that have come back and admitted that they were wrong? LOL

Where and when?

When has reconciliation been used as a cram down for any legislation unrelated to current budgetary items?

I haven't seen anyone come even close to answering that one.

I'd like to see those answers too!

 

[saveliberty]

Interesting you failed to recognize that Obama only used the hand of compromise when he was losing. As quickly as he could, he reverted back to the hammer.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Can the GOP go to the Supreme Court with a petition to preempt this reconciliation before it gets started?

 

[Murf76]

I haven't bailed. Since you're putting the mirror back on me, personally, let's take that and run with it for a second.

My day goes a little like this...

I get up in the morning and get on the internet for a bit before starting to get ready for work, feed the pets and make my wife breakfast. I go to work. When I get here, after checking messages and dealing with my boss...I sneak a bit of time on the internet.

Now because of how fast the board moves...and because I've really gotten fed up with the fact that people are partisan hacks and insult each other and fail to make reasoned arguments...I dont always get back to the original tete-a-tete I contributed to. I type one or two offs with the time in between doing my work that I can manage.

I've answered most of what you've typed...I think the first one you're referring to was about how insurance costs increase medical costs...but you're being chicken shit and failing to credit the entire rest of that thread where I answered you and beat you handily. I even made note of the avoidance for you AT THE END OF THE POST. yeah, that's chicken shit alright?

You're a partisan hack who can't admit that Obama tried to work with people during that farce. I don't line up with BO on every issue...not in the least...but on a few issues he's right. He tried so many times during that thing to be even-handed, not to play favorites, and to move things forward. Seriously...I dont think you really watched with your biases to the side...you just had your mind made up beforehand.

Oh well nothing I can do about that. 'Cept call you on your bullshit when you type it.

Well... since you're having such a difficult time keeping up... here are the posts I'm referring to:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2047769-post108.html
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2057481-post243.html


You do understand, don't you, that accusing other people of partisan hackery is rather comical when the point you're attempting to defend is Obama's "bipartisanship".
In his most recent "negotiation" with Republicans, his own pile-of-shit proposal, which had ALREADY been rejected, was the starting point from which he refused to budge.

 

[Vanquish]

Take the cotton balls out of your ears, remove the blinders from your temples...now..go back and watch the event.

You'll find that Obama said something every common sensical...and then tried to execute it. He said he wanted to identify commonalities, identify areas of difference, then keep the commonalities, and work on the differences. That's pretty fair, wouldn't you say?

And then he tried to follow that as a procedure on each of the major categories of topics.
And tried to give the mike to republicans in good order.
And then responded with a tone and clarity that wasn't condescending.

You've got the easier side of this opinion to prove...surely there's a quote or two or three that you think is condescending? Quote it. On my end, to prove my opinion, I have to "show" or analyze his moderating skills as well as his comments AND his opposition's comments. You've got the easier case...make it.

And great job on the threads...I already referenced one of those for you. Glad I could help.
If you're resorting to ad hominems that means you obviously can't talk about the issue at hand.

 

[Murf76]

Interesting you failed to recognize that Obama only used the hand of compromise when he was losing. As quickly as he could, he reverted back to the hammer.

Obama never had any intention of compromise. From the beginning, with Porkulus, he's behaved in a partisan faction. Not surprising, since he had next to nothing to recommend him in the way of "reaching across the aisle". Nuclear proliferation? How much opposition is there to THAT?

The healthcare summit was an obvious attempt to mislead the public. If his intent had been anything other than Reconciliation all along, logic tells us that he'd have made an honest effort and started from scratch. He didn't. He already knew that the current bills are stuffed up with poison pills that can't be negotiated. Yet he started with the Senate bill and some sleight proposed changes.

It was all kabuki.

 

[Vanquish]

Yeah, starting all the way over and re-hashing out ALL of the already agreed upon parts is MUCH more efficient than just working on the disputed parts.

I'm sorry ...can you show me which party is immune to adding pork? That's right. You can't. Both sides do it.

 

[Murf76]

Take the cotton balls out of your ears, remove the blinders from your temples...now..go back and watch the event.

You'll find that Obama said something every common sensical...and then tried to execute it. He said he wanted to identify commonalities, identify areas of difference, then keep the commonalities, and work on the differences. That's pretty fair, wouldn't you say?

And then he tried to follow that as a procedure on each of the major categories of topics.
And tried to give the mike to republicans in good order.
And then responded with a tone and clarity that wasn't condescending.

You've got the easier side of this opinion to prove...surely there's a quote or two or three that you think is condescending? Quote it. On my end, to prove my opinion, I have to "show" or analyze his moderating skills as well as his comments AND his opposition's comments. You've got the easier case...make it.

And great job on the threads...I already referenced one of those for you. Glad I could help.
If you're resorting to ad hominems that means you obviously can't talk about the issue at hand.

I already discussed all that... on the "Talkfest" thread, referenced above. Obama monopolized the time. He attempted to force "agreement" that was not there. And he was a condescending asshole pretty much the whole time, specifically in his response to John McCain and his refusal to engage Republican points of discussion. Not to mention his constant, rude, interruptions.

I can only assume that it is YOU who are impeded by cotton balls and blinders. Either that, or the DNC is paying your ass to carry their water. Even a child can understand that using your own, already unacceptable, starting-point won't get you an agreeable result. Obama KNEW that. But he wasn't there for honest negotiations. He was there to perpetuate yet another deceit upon the public.

 

[Meister]

Yeah, starting all the way over and re-hashing out ALL of the already agreed upon parts is MUCH more efficient than just working on the disputed parts.

I'm sorry ...can you show me which party is immune to adding pork? That's right. You can't. Both sides do it.

It wouldn't be starting "All the way over", if you already have some "already agreed upon parts". What it would do is create an actual bipartisan bill that "both parties" would agree to.
Having said that.....it isn't so much about what's in the bill, it's that it IS a bill that the DEMOCRATS have manufactured. Both sides say it's not a good bill....but like I said, it is a bill. This IS the bill that barry will hang his hat on, and his legacy. This is the bill that nan' will be able to say that she was a good Speaker of the House. It's not what's in the bill, they could care less, if they did care, they would do it right. This is about power, and it's about bragging rights....make no mistake about that.