Health Summit

[tieguy]

Yeah, worst economy since 1929 as been turned around and he is a failure. What a dumb thing to say. You and morelies just hate the Dems so bad it wouldn't matter if George Washington was president, you would say he is worthless. Have you ever admitted that something Obama is doing was good? I doubt it and it just shows how cynical and full of hate you are.

I would agree he has turned it around as long as he keeps pumping hundreds of billions of dollars of stimulus money into it.

You really sound like a whiney little girl with the hate line. I've commented on the fact that Obama has now put himself into negotiations of some type at least 10 times and each time he has come back empty handed. When the president puts his stature into negotiations he is supposed to be successful.

I hate to burst your overinflated bubble but I did not hate Obama into failure Obama failed on his own.

 

[tieguy]

Not sure how you figure Obama turned the economy around. After a year of this failed presidency we have more people unemployed, more homes in foreclosure, and more national debt. Oh wait I now see what you mean by turned around. This failure has turned things downward.

Now Av8 don't forget the official excuse line. the world would have been much worse if Obama had not screwed our economy up.

 

[tieguy]

It shows how you think he is the 2nd comming of Christ and you worship the ground he walks on. Take off your "Obama blinders"...even the Liberal dominated media is starting to take jabs at the Messiah. The economy is just booming right now... LMAO!!!

I was pleasently surprised the media did not spin this health conference as another danial fighting the lions fairy tale.

 

[Jones]

It is funny now how everyone is claiming somehow that cutting taxes has nothing to do with the budget but mandating everyone buy health insurance does. To each his own. I wish they would just go back to 67 votes to cut debate off on anything.

I didn't read it as saying that one has to with the budget but the other doesn't. From my perspective it all has to with the budget - taxes dictate how much money they have to spend, programs dictate how much they need to spend. The point of the article was that using budget reconciliation would not be some huge monumental step compared to what it's been used for in recent years. Personally I don't care, it's not like any of these "rules" were handed down from on high, they're just rules that congress made up for themselves in the first place. There's nothing sacred about them, they can change them any time they want to.

 

[tieguy]

I think its funny that congress tried to tie the hands of the reconcilliation process by voting in changes to the reconciliation process that require reconcilliation usage result in being deficit neutral. I'm sure the intent was to tie Bushs hands. Instead it may make reconciliation more difficult for Obama to pass health care reform. The proof is still in the pudding. Who overseas the process of reconciliation to ensure the result actually is deficit neutral and not a paper job of assumptions?

 

[Jones]

I think its funny that congress tried to tie the hands of the reconcilliation process by voting in changes to the reconciliation process that require reconcilliation usage result in being deficit neutral. I'm sure the intent was to tie Bushs hands. Instead it may make reconciliation more difficult for Obama to pass health care reform. The proof is still in the pudding. Who overseas the process of reconciliation to ensure the result actually is deficit neutral and not a paper job of assumptions?

I'm guessing the CBO.

 

[bbsam]

Well of course you are missing one thing. They will not have to repeal it all they will have to do is not fund it in the next budget. So the likely thing that will happen is that all they would end up with would be fewer seats in Congress. That my friend is a risk many will not want to take so they may have trouble even getting the 51 votes they need.

Looked to me like they were daring him to use the process as it just opens the door farther for them down the road to get things done they want. In time we shall see if he will take the bait.

Have you ever seen them not fund an entitlement program, especially one that comes along just as more and more people are losing jobs and health insurance? Notice how they keep extending unemployment benefits?

 

[av8torntn]

Have you ever seen them not fund an entitlement program, especially one that comes along just as more and more people are losing jobs and health insurance? Notice how they keep extending unemployment benefits?

Yes. Read the article Jones posted the repubs defunded some welfare programs with this method.

 

[av8torntn]

they're just rules that congress made up for themselves in the first place. There's nothing sacred about them, they can change them any time they want to.

Sure as long as they get two thirds vote they can change the rules but I'm guessing since they cannot get sixty to cut off debate they'll be hard pressed to gain 67 to change rules. I'm just sayin.....

 

[bbsam]

Yes. Read the article Jones posted the repubs defunded some welfare programs with this method.

Timing is everything. The time will not be right for what you suggest.

 

[Jones]

Sure as long as they get two thirds vote they can change the rules but I'm guessing since they cannot get sixty to cut off debate they'll be hard pressed to gain 67 to change rules. I'm just sayin.....

Technically they could even change those rules and do everything (including rule changes) by simple majority, but I don't see them doing that. Too scared of what the other party will do when the wheel inevitably turns.

 

[av8torntn]

Technically they could even change those rules and do everything (including rule changes) by simple majority, but I don't see them doing that. Too scared of what the other party will do when the wheel inevitably turns.

Technically it's been tried before and failed.

 

[tieguy]

pelosi appears to be indicating she will push the bill through without republican backing on the sunday morning news shows.

when asked she indicated that she considers the health bill does have bi-partisan support. her logic being that there are provisions in the bill that the republicans support.

the double talk coming out of the liberal camp is amazing.

 

[av8torntn]

pelosi appears to be indicating she will push the bill through without republican backing on the sunday morning news shows.

when asked she indicated that she considers the health bill does have bi-partisan support. her logic being that there are provisions in the bill that the republicans support.

the double talk coming out of the liberal camp is amazing.

The beginning of the end for speaker Pelosi.

 

[bbsam]

The beginning of the end for speaker Pelosi.

If we have to serve her and other democrats up to get meaningful health insurance reform, then so be it. I'm getting tired of carreer politicians anyway.

 

[bbsam]

pelosi appears to be indicating she will push the bill through without republican backing on the sunday morning news shows.

when asked she indicated that she considers the health bill does have bi-partisan support. her logic being that there are provisions in the bill that the republicans support.

the double talk coming out of the liberal camp is amazing.

Why if Republicans support alot of the bill's ideas do the insist on starting over? They've had ample opportunity to work on this but play politics instead.

 

[moreluck]

Because the Republicans can make a new one in 200 pages and we need to throw away that 2200 page monstrosity of legalese that no one can understand.......but first, jobs need attention!

 

[tieguy]

Why if Republicans support alot of the bill's ideas do the insist on starting over? They've had ample opportunity to work on this but play politics instead.

I don't think they do support many of the bills ideas in the context the democrats have them. They certainly do not support "a lot" of the ideas as the summit showed. Americans don't want a bill with a 1000 new short sighted provisions in them. they want to go slowly , review each provision with full transparency and then make the changes in small easy to understand groupings.
Its a reasonable request that Obama actually promised on the campaign trail.

So when you ask this question ask why Obama is not delivering full transparency as promised.

 

[Babagounj]

I don't think they do support many of the bills ideas in the context the democrats have them. They certainly do not support "a lot" of the ideas as the summit showed. Americans don't want a bill with a 1000 new short sighted provisions in them. they want to go slowly , review each provision with full transparency and then make the changes in small easy to understand groupings.
Its a reasonable request that Obama actually promised on the campaign trail.

So when you ask this question ask why Obama is not delivering full transparency as promised.

another question to ask..........why has this administration failed to reply to every request for information, why must everyone sue them just to make them comply ?
Why have they not released the White House visitor logs ?

 

[bbsam]

another question to ask..........why has this administration failed to reply to every request for information, why must everyone sue them just to make them comply ?
Why have they not released the White House visitor logs ?

Same reason we won't discuss what's at Area 51...keeps peoples' minds occupied asking the question.