In The Blogs
- ‹ previous
- 79 of 2794
- next ›
Healthcare Wins in the House
I decided to watch football today instead of following the healthcare debate in the House, and I think I stand by that decision. It turned out to be a close call, though: USC almost gave me a heart attack against lowly Arizona State, but the Democrats would have nearly given me a heart attack against the lowly Republicans if I'd been watching them.
In the end, though, both eked out a win. For some good background on the horrible last-minute abortion amendment, see Amy Sullivan here. Sounds like some bad play calling there. Still, congratulations to Nancy Pelosi. She only won by a couple of votes, but a win is a win. Now, on to the Senate.
I am a bit embarassed that
I am a bit embarassed that you are taking Amy Sullivan at face value. Her "if only we appease social conservatives even more, then maybe they will support liberal reforms" schtick was old 5 years agao when she did it for washington monthly.
Yeah, the idiot extremists
Yeah, the idiot extremists run roughshod over the party. From Stupak who can't even abide allowing *private* insurance to make the decision to cover or not, to idiots at the other extreme who thought it was wise to demand that health care reform pay for every and any abortion.
But I can't believe we're stuck with Stupak's amendment.
I was in the hospital for a week and am still recovering -- what did happen to the public option?
Congratulations Speaker Pelosi
Kevin describes today's Democratic passage of health care reform in "nail biter" terms. I beg to differ.
The bill passed 220 to 215. A minimum of 218 votes are needed to pass a bill in the House when everyone votes. Democrats actually had two more votes than they needed to pass this legislation.
So, is a two vote margin impressive? I would argue that a 218 vote passage would have been even more impressive. Why? Because in reality, the Democrats had the votes to pass this bill. But at least twenty Blue Dog Democrats had been petitioning the Speaker for permission to vote "no" in order to keep the constituents in their right-leaning districts happy. A cold, hard calculus had to be applied to all these requests. "Representative A, your re-election stands in greater peril than Representative B's. Therefore, Representative A, you may vote 'no' but you, Representative B, must vote 'yes'." Representative B, of course, would receive some log-rolling compensation. Perhaps extra votes for a contract renewal at a military base in B's district.
A close vote-- i.e. 218-217-- is indicative of a really disciplined political operation. No votes are wasted. The maximum number of Blue Dogs who need cover get it.
While today's vote wasn't as tight as 218-217, it's interesting to note that one of the 220 votes came from a Republican, which I'm sure was not expected. Which means Nancy Pelosi had worked the Democrats to 219. That's about as efficient a vote as you can expect.
Congratulation Speaker Pelosi.
Votes 218 and 219
Garamendi, aye; Owens, aye.
I am sorry Kevin but the
I am sorry Kevin but the fall of Troy is on the horizon. The end of an era is at hand and Pete will exit Heritage Hall sooner than later.
The Stupak amendment was vital.
We need it to protect the souls of the unborn. When the soul enters the fetus is still a matter of debate: upon conception or at the first quickening. But that's for the theologians to decide, not us (or our representatives).
theologians ???
No, you're completely wrong. This isn't a god-damned theocracy. It's a republic, and we're responsible for exactly these decisions. Christ !
So where are you on the
So where are you on the question of when the soul leaves the body in times of war?
How do you handle abortions by laser-guided missile courtesy the US military?
So where are you on the
So where are you on the question of when the soul leaves the body in times of war?
How do you handle abortions by laser-guided missile courtesy the US military?
Pelosi
Well, we have what to me is an undisputed fact: Nancy Pelosi can deliver when the chips are down. Now we'll see what Reid is really made of. While the democrats were in the minority, he and the other dems had lot's of leeway and excuses re leadership. Now there are no excuses. Reid's leadership is on the line. I'm about 30-70 confident he can keep the dog pound in line.
Pelosi's victory is quite a bit more significant when you consider she had to accept no votes from democrats who needed election coverage.
Freedom!
It's funny, I did watch some of the coverage and saw all these white males talking about how the bill was going to let government interfere in your health care choices and let the government set rules about what kind of medicine is practiced by your doctor. But then all those white men voted to restrict what kind of medicine can be practiced by your doctor. It's almost like their arguments were insincere or something.
Fuck you and your simplistic
Fuck you and your simplistic white male rants. This bill wouldn't have passed without white males. Obama would not be President without white males.
So take your divisive, simplistic, illogical hate speech and ram it.
Fine, take out the "white male" part
and the rest makes sense. Well said, SP.
I object
An add made in heaven to repeat over an over next year:
"When it was time to extend health care"
"I object"
"When it was time to help the unemployed"
"I object"
"When it was time to invest in infrastructure"
"I object"
"When it was time to wean ourselves from Middle East oil"
"I object"
"Republicans: the party of No."
Catholic bishops
Is this true that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops was opposing the bill?
Please explain to me why the Catholic Church is tax-exempt in the U.S.
"Yeah, the idiot extremists
"Yeah, the idiot extremists run roughshod over the party. From Stupak who can't even abide allowing *private* insurance to make the decision to cover or not, to idiots at the other extreme who thought it was wise to demand that health care reform pay for every and any abortion."
You liberals have said abortion is all about choice. Great, I choose not to have my tax payer dollars to pay for it. That's my choice. You get knocked up? You and your man can deal with it - like adults.
And you guys have all but begged for private insurance to die. Great. Pelosi's bill is the first step towards this. So now you can reap what you sow; with government taking control of the health industry, many voters will fight to keep abortion from being funded. And many will fight to keep seeing their tax dollars to cover crap like sex change operations.
"Please explain to me why the Catholic Church is tax-exempt in the U.S."
Why shouldn't they be, asshole? They simply pointed out to Catholics that Obama lied - once again: yes, the Pelosi bill did, in fact, allow taxpayer money to fund abortions (until the Stupak Amendment). They simply advised Catholics of this lie and asked them not to support this lie.
I'm sure ACORN has done much worse, but you'd support their status to the grave.
"You get knocked up? You and
"You get knocked up? You and your man can deal with it - like adults."
So how do you handle Iraqi women who got "knocked up" only to have strangers in the form of the US military subsequently "deal with it" via laser-guided bomb?
definitely -- let's play this game
You want to go to war in Iraq -- or anywhere, for that matter? Bully for you. Pay for it with your own tax dollars. Mine are staying in my pocket.
You want to set up a separate judicial system outside of the one that's already funded here in the United States? Pay for Guantánamo yourself. My tax dollars stay with me.
All hot & bothered to give big Pharma a sloppy, wet tongue bath? Cough up the money yourself, because I'm not giving you one thin dime.
Wanna set up a tax code & economic policy that benefits the richest of the rich, while ignoring the middle class? Fine, but none of my descendents are picking up the tab when it comes due. Your kids & grandkids can take second & third jobs to pay for that mess.
I like the way this works.
Where to Start with You...
Name calling is unnecessary, you just made it to the level of a 3rd grader. You probably don't care.
Once any religion starts getting in politics they should lose their tax exempt status.
Last I checked Acorn isn't a religion.
I could go on, but I think I've hit the high points of your moronic rant.
k.b.
Accountability
All those who voted for this repressive, coercive legislation with long term secondary and tertiary affects (your kids and mine will still be paying for this f-up) should, "resign, or be prosecuted."
Denial based on pre-existing condition
21 (I saw reported 25 somewhere else) Dems voted for the Stupak amendment and against the health care reform bill. At least they are being logical, opposing the bill that reputes not to deny health care coverage based on pre-existing conditions.
The rest of the Dems (and one Republican--thank you, Cao) voted inconsistently for a bill that now contains an amendment denying health care coverage to 50% of the population based on a pre-existing condition--pregnancy.
Think about it.
Have we gone mad?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Stupak amendment doesn't deny coverage to women that are pregnant. It denies abortion for those that are pregnant.
This from Michelle Kraus of the Huffington Post: "Federal funding for clinics is essential to the future of women’s reproductive rights and health."
I'm sorry, but does your reproductive right make me culpable for the cost of your abortion?
Moreover, "Making it unaffordable for poorer women to have abortions just means that they will suffer the consequences of illegal and life threatening procedures."
Then you have the right to not get pregnant.