Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ahh yes, the death panels... control cost = rationing = limiting of services = limiting of payments
controlling cost =
1. set standard prices for services
2. bulk buying of pharmaceuticals
3. reduce billing paperwork (by doing #1)
4. use death panels only on whiny conservatives.
So...shutting the GOP and the American people out of the negotiations is bipartisan. They were completely shut out in the house - the ONLY little bit of bipartisanship was in the Senate Finance Committee. Other than that, it has been ONLY democrats who have been included in the creation and negotiations.
The democrats own it, lock, stock and barrel.
Btw - bipartisanship is between parties. Bipartisanship doesn't apply to members of the same party.
The only Republicans doing anything in Congress, are those within the Democratic Party sitting in Democratic Party called seats. I think if you really wanted to have no constraints on Ins Cos, they could have used some help from the GOP.
Very partisan? The only bipartisan work being shown in Congress is within the Democratic Party. It it were not, a Health Care Bill would have been signed several months ago. I think your anger should be directed at the GOP, as they refused to represent your opinions.
Angry? Who's angry? Not one bit. Did my post sound angry?
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan
I think the word you are looking for is "collusion"
Yes, as pointed out bipartisanship can only take place between two parties cooperating. When it's within the party, as has been with the Democrats, it can be accurately called "collusion". You got that right!
The only Republicans doing anything in Congress, are those within the Democratic Party sitting in Democratic Party called seats. I think if you really wanted to have no constraints on Ins Cos, they could have used some help from the GOP.
The GOP tried, but not ONE of their ideas was incorporated into the bills.
Buying coverage across state lines, tort reform. The democrats would have none of it.
The Dems are definitely worried. Talk of bypassing a House vote, just pass the Senate version unchallenged and have Obama sign ASAP.
Dems look at bypassing Senate health care vote - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100118/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_massachusetts_senate - broken link)
snippet:
"The newly discussed fallback would require House Democrats to swallow hard and approve the Senate-passed bill without changes. President Barack Obama could sign it into law without another Senate vote needed."
The Dems are definitely worried. Talk of bypassing a House vote, just pass the Senate version unchallenged and have Obama sign ASAP.
Dems look at bypassing Senate health care vote - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100118/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_massachusetts_senate - broken link)
snippet:
"The newly discussed fallback would require House Democrats to swallow hard and approve the Senate-passed bill without changes. President Barack Obama could sign it into law without another Senate vote needed."
They are truly tone-deaf. The give not one whit what America is telling them...all obama cares about is a perceived victory for himself...that's really ALL that matters...his neck, his prestige, his presidency.
He did tell us that if congress didn't pass his HC bill, it would destroy his presidency.
I submit that the reason his presidency is suffering is because they are TRYING to pass a most unpopular bill and if they do pass it on a party line vote, IT WILL destroy his presidency.
Isn't it just like this arrogant, narcissistic man-child to expect others to sacrifice their careers for him?
"I can't believe I haven't figured this out yet. The closeness of the race in Massachusetts is not just a function of the dreadful Martha Coakley and right-wing hostility to health insurance reform. It's also about the Kennedys.
This Senate seat was held warm for Ted decades ago, when he was parachuted in and stayed there for ever. Part of the revolt is based on the fact that Coakley seems to be the ultimate Kennedy clan crony, and was also plopped in by a tiny number of primary voters, and seems to imbue the arrogance of the Democratic party elite. Most voters know that she could lord it over them for decades. But they'll almost certainly be rid of Brown in a few years.
Brown has also played class politics more effectively. Obama's swoop in to save Coakley also makes him look like an upper-class elitist rather than a mobilizer for change for the poor. The optics, as they say, are awful.
So you have resistance to machine politics in a seat controlled by elites for ever; you have an atmosphere of unrest and discontent after two years of recession; you have the Republican base whipped up into an FNC-induced frenzy against the end of America as they know it; and you have the Herald readers sick to death of Kennedy power. For good measure, you have the ugly spectacle of closed door final meetings in Washington over health reform.
I don't see how even Obama can turn back this perfect storm."
If they lose in MA, you're gonna see the Dems start blaming the Repubs for the failure of their healthcare "reform" bill.
Oh i can see the balme games happening already? just like the Snakes they are?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
