keepthefaith Posted March 2, 2010 Share Posted March 2, 2010 In case anyone missed it yesterday, here is Ryan setting the record straight on how the Senate's bill really should be scored. He lays out precisely where the budget submittals to CBO are "smoke and mirrors" to make it look like the Senate bill will reduce the deficit. If you see nothing else from yesterday's summit, you should at least watch this because the plan Obama is putting foward, as Ryan says, is based on the Senate bill. Ryan destroys any concept that this bill makes fiscal sense. Thanks for posting that link. Ryan is a rising star. In his 6 minutes, he hits his points with numbers and delivers the message of fiscal concern as well as anyone I've seen do that. Obama's body language says to me that he knows Ryan is right and that the numbers don't lie. We need more people in Washington to lay out issues the way Ryan has with numbers and objectivity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 2, 2010 Author Share Posted March 2, 2010 Thanks for posting that link. Ryan is a rising star. In his 6 minutes, he hits his points with numbers and delivers the message of fiscal concern as well as anyone I've seen do that. Obama's body language says to me that he knows Ryan is right and that the numbers don't lie. We need more people in Washington to lay out issues the way Ryan has with numbers and objectivity. Absolutely, Ryan is going to be seen as a real political adversary to the liberals for many years to come. I saw him the other day on Campbell Brown, and she tried cornering him into answering questions in a certain way that would portray his S.S and Medicare proposal as being radical, and every time she tried, he just kept nailing the questions with quick, detailed well thought out responses. At the end she pretty much conceded to his point and you could see in her face a look of "Man this guy knows his ****". The guy knows his numbers, better than anyone in the entire congress, bar none. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 Looks like DC is ready to move forward on reconciliation, come hell or high water. This should be interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 3, 2010 Author Share Posted March 3, 2010 Looks like DC is ready to move forward on reconciliation, come hell or high water. This should be interesting. The question is, does the house have the votes? Stupak says he has 10-12 people who won't vote for the bill unless they change the abortion language, plus you have the lone republican from LA. who did vote for the bill last time who says he won't this time, and then you have Abercombrie and Murtha who won't be there to vote for this time around as well. Also Jason Altmire says that there are some people who voted for it last time that may not vote for it this time, which I'm skeptical of the prospects of that happening simply because people don't want to be seen as flip floppers. Then again, there are supposedly 9 people who voted no the first time who may vote for it this time. The abortion to me seems to be the main hurdle that they will have to overcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 The question is, does the house have the votes? Stupak says he has 10-12 people who won't vote for the bill unless they change the abortion language, plus you have the lone republican from LA. who did vote for the bill last time who says he won't this time, and then you have Abercombrie and Murtha who won't be there to vote for this time around as well. Also Jason Altmire says that there are some people who voted for it last time that may not vote for it this time, which I'm skeptical of the prospects of that happening simply because people don't want to be seen as flip floppers. Then again, there are supposedly 9 people who voted no the first time who may vote for it this time. The abortion to me seems to be the main hurdle that they will have to overcome. Political pressure on those sitting on the fence will be enormous, maybe as great as at any time in history. I'd wager that they'll cave to Nancy and some back room deal. A deal outside of this bill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 The question is, does the house have the votes? Stupak says he has 10-12 people who won't vote for the bill unless they change the abortion language, plus you have the lone republican from LA. who did vote for the bill last time who says he won't this time, and then you have Abercombrie and Murtha who won't be there to vote for this time around as well. Also Jason Altmire says that there are some people who voted for it last time that may not vote for it this time, which I'm skeptical of the prospects of that happening simply because people don't want to be seen as flip floppers. Then again, there are supposedly 9 people who voted no the first time who may vote for it this time. The abortion to me seems to be the main hurdle that they will have to overcome. What a fluster cluck. At this point, the only reason to push this mess through is to have something to point to in 2010. There's not much likelihood that any meaningful positive reform is coming out of this. At this point, you could take the $1.2T face value of this plan, give it to all the uninsured people in the country and tell them "Here's ten grand, now shut the !@#$ up for the next ten years," and it would STILL be better health care reform than what we're likely to get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 The question is, does the house have the votes? Stupak says he has 10-12 people who won't vote for the bill unless they change the abortion language, plus you have the lone republican from LA. who did vote for the bill last time who says he won't this time, and then you have Abercombrie and Murtha who won't be there to vote for this time around as well. Also Jason Altmire says that there are some people who voted for it last time that may not vote for it this time, which I'm skeptical of the prospects of that happening simply because people don't want to be seen as flip floppers. Then again, there are supposedly 9 people who voted no the first time who may vote for it this time. The abortion to me seems to be the main hurdle that they will have to overcome. I understand all of that. I just thought it was interesting that they've essentially decided, even prior to Obama's umpteenth proposal today, to say "We're ramming it." You'd think at the very least they'd wait a couple of days after Obama gives his speech...no, wait...statement...today that says he's going to incorporate some GOP ideas into a smaller bill. When the GOP says "pass," THEN say "Well, we tried. Time for reconciliation." I honestly just can't figure out what they're up to. Like the Rangel thing: is this immense genius or immense stupidity? Could an administration REALLY be this stupid? I have my doubts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 3, 2010 Author Share Posted March 3, 2010 I understand all of that. I just thought it was interesting that they've essentially decided, even prior to Obama's umpteenth proposal today, to say "We're ramming it." You'd think at the very least they'd wait a couple of days after Obama gives his speech...no, wait...statement...today that says he's going to incorporate some GOP ideas into a smaller bill. When the GOP says "pass," THEN say "Well, we tried. Time for reconciliation." I honestly just can't figure out what they're up to. Like the Rangel thing: is this immense genius or immense stupidity? Could an administration REALLY be this stupid? I have my doubts. I believe what it's come down to LA is urgency. They are obviously not all on the same page, and the lack of coordination is painfully obvious. They know that they need to get this done by the time the Easter break comes along. If they don't get it done by then, which to my understanding is their self-imposed deadline, then they know that many of the vulnerable rank and file house democrats will have to go home and face their angry constituents, sort of like the December debacle that occured last year, and they want to avoid that at all costs. The house doesn't trust the Senate, the Senate knows that if they want to get this done, that the House has to first sign their original Senate bill first and the house will only do that if they get assurances from the Senate that they will make all the fixes necessary to suffice their concerns. So, in my view, this "official" announcement from Harkin is a way of showing the House that they care committed to making the changes. The W.H, well they're just straight up desperate to get anything through, and Rahm Emanuel, who is their main point guy for negotiations between them and the House doesn't really have that great of a relationship with the liberals, so the level of distrust between all of them is pretty high. So it doesn't surprise me what so ever that we are hearing mixed uncoordinated messages coming from all camps, because they all have separate agendas with the same common goal of passing "health care" reform. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 3, 2010 Author Share Posted March 3, 2010 An excellent article with tons of insight regarding who may possibly vote for or against the bill in the house. http://www.slate.com/id/2246368 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 Interesting speech today. No talk of scaling anything back. Just another "get this done because it's the right thing to do" and move on with reconciliation. Somebody get the popcorn ready...we could possibly be watching a political party implode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 3, 2010 Author Share Posted March 3, 2010 Interesting speech today. No talk of scaling anything back. Just another "get this done because it's the right thing to do" and move on with reconciliation. Somebody get the popcorn ready...we could possibly be watching a political party implode. Remember, they know what's best for the American people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 Remember, they know what's best for the American people. Here's the thing; in order to go the route of reconciliation, the only vehicle is the Senate Bill, not anything to do with anything Obama discussed today or in "the plan" he introduced during the Blair House Project. The House would have to approve the current Senate plan, which has all the kickbacks in it and union payoffs, etc. With respect to the fact that I'm new to watching this stuff on a daily basis, the last time I saw something this FUBAR'd, a guy was trying to argue his case for boiling noodles for 60 minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted March 4, 2010 Share Posted March 4, 2010 Barry back to buying votes: http://tinyurl.com/yettwrp It's time for America to act. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 4, 2010 Author Share Posted March 4, 2010 So which is it president Obama, 60 or 51 votes? More hypocritical change we can all believe in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 4, 2010 Share Posted March 4, 2010 So which is it president Obama, 60 or 51 votes? More hypocritical change we can all believe in. If this bill wasn't so destructive to our country, I'd be relishing every moment of this amazingly embarrassing administration. What's going to be very interesting to watch is that the onus is now on Congress to pass the unchanged Senate bill with the trust and understanding that it will get amended. Part of me feels like I'm watching a B horror flick, yelling at the chick on the screen, "Do you REALLY want to go in that room? You hear screams. You see blood trickling from the bottom of the door. Do you really want to go in there?" And yet part of me is yelling "Let me get the door for you, B word." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 4, 2010 Author Share Posted March 4, 2010 If this bill wasn't so destructive to our country, I'd be relishing every moment of this amazingly embarrassing administration. What's going to be very interesting to watch is that the onus is now on Congress to pass the unchanged Senate bill with the trust and understanding that it will get amended. Part of me feels like I'm watching a B horror flick, yelling at the chick on the screen, "Do you REALLY want to go in that room? You hear screams. You see blood trickling from the bottom of the door. Do you really want to go in there?" And yet part of me is yelling "Let me get the door for you, B word." thanks, I needed that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted March 4, 2010 Share Posted March 4, 2010 Barry back to buying votes: http://tinyurl.com/yettwrp It's time for America to act. Rahm's handywork I would guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted March 4, 2010 Share Posted March 4, 2010 So which is it president Obama, 60 or 51 votes? More hypocritical change we can all believe in. Belief you can Change in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 4, 2010 Share Posted March 4, 2010 I don't mind admitting I'm a fan of Greta Van Susteren. She does some of the better interviews you see these days, and always manages to get good dialogue with both sides. Last night she interviewed what I found to be a very impressive Democratic congressman from Maryland named Frank Kratovil. While I haven't had time to dig too deeply into a lot of Kratovil's history, you can't help but walk away from this interview thinking that this is precisely the kind of guy you want in Washington trying to get things done. What stood out to me was, unlike most elected officials, after she asked a yes/no question, you could see he would go down the path of "Well, y'know..." but then check himself with a yes or no answer. Check this interview out, and let me know if you get the same sense about this guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 4, 2010 Author Share Posted March 4, 2010 I don't mind admitting I'm a fan of Greta Van Susteren. She does some of the better interviews you see these days, and always manages to get good dialogue with both sides. Last night she interviewed what I found to be a very impressive Democratic congressman from Maryland named Frank Kratovil. While I haven't had time to dig too deeply into a lot of Kratovil's history, you can't help but walk away from this interview thinking that this is precisely the kind of guy you want in Washington trying to get things done. What stood out to me was, unlike most elected officials, after she asked a yes/no question, you could see he would go down the path of "Well, y'know..." but then check himself with a yes or no answer. Check this interview out, and let me know if you get the same sense about this guy. To answer your question I do. I saw the interview last night, and the guy appears to be a fiscally conscience independent minded politician. Btw, I also like watching Greta's show, she's got the best interviews that offer the best insight, along with tingles. Her show is meant to be for political junkies like myself, and usually find alot of substance within her show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts