What more proof do the public need to know that the republicans will not support any bill to change the status quo.

This obviously just means that the Democrats have to try harder. I'm thinking if we include funding for an invasion of Iran, maybe that'll work.

It's now time to pass a better bill than the Baucus "compromise", including a robust public option.

Obama may have to field shrill accusations of partisanship, but he's doing that anyway. The important thing is to pass a bill now that will be able to have some effect before the mid-terms.

If the insurance premiums of Republicans go down, they'll just have to find another campaign issue. Maybe Michelle Bachmann could help them formulate a good one.

Wow!

I'm shocked that the Republicans are so recalcitrant. Isn't there anything we might do that would persuade our good friendsfrom across the aisle to join with us to bring this good thing to the American people?

No? Well, then god damn their eyes and let's just git to it ourselves...

...and then I woke from the dream.

...they have absolutely no incentive to help Democrats succeed.

Well I don't know about that. Aside from doing right by their constituents, a quaint sentiment to be sure, I am not sure it is very good politics to be seen as the obstructionists on this, most especially if the Dems do succeed without them. Even the crappiest Baucus type reform has the potential to make a measurable positive difference in middle class lives. What's the political value of being lockstep against that?

That's our boys -- the modern-day GOP are the Nabobs of No, the Royals of Refusal, the Grand Satraps of Obstruction, the Eparchs of Entitlement . . . Their Taliban-inspired mission is to obstruct Obama's Presidency and they are willing to throw health care reform (and civility and everything else) under the bus to accomplish this.

The GOP is justly worried about their Party's policy vacuum and their growing irrelevancy to what's important for most Americans. Nothing left for them but charges of socialism and racism since because of Bush they have been trounced in one policy debate after another.

Of course the Republicans reject the Baucus bill. They know crappy legislation when they see it. The party that passes the Baucus bill properly dooms itself to the wasteland for a generation.

The day following the release of the Baucus bill health insurance stocks went up. That should tell all of us something.

What more proof do the public need to know that the republicans will not support any bill to change the status quo.

The "proof" the public needs is an honest MSM that tells it like it is instead of pretending something different. Good lord, I was watching Jeffrey Brown "interview" John Boehner on PBS last night and, while the questions were good, Jeffrey did the "media polite thing to do" and never really followed up on any questions.

Asked about his concern over the extremely disturbing rhetoric coming from the right,Boehner just deflected the question and launched into his canned answer about how it's import that Americans get involved in politics.

Asked about what Republicans are doing for bipartisanship on health care reform, Boehner talked about how the President needs to hit the "reset button" and start from scratch, because the democrats never brought the GOP to the table.

Asked about what ideas Republicans have to fix health care, Boehner said visit our GOP.gov site and look at all the great republican plans and ideas, including medical malpractice reform. etc. etc.

And all the while Jeffrey sat there quietly, politely blinking as he gave a Boehner an unfettered chance to spew his bullshit and confuse people who don't know any better.

We have figured this out.

The Rethugs, who are always willing to sacrifice the national interest and public good in order to win/retain power (Democrats are only willing to do this sometimes, except Lieberman, he is in the 'always' camp) have figured out - through delay careful use of their propaganda arm, Faux News, and etc.), manipulative polling, "artificial turf" wars, etc. - all the seams within the Obama coaltion as regards health care reform and have been, and will continue to, exploit what we laughinly refer to the 'legislative process' to attack those seams until the coaliton unravels.

So the last thing we want to do is succumb to this strategy by acting defensive and reactive and try to satisfy their bad faith demands for compromise and bipartisanship. We need to circle our wagons, not allow them to divide us and pick us off one at a time and lay out our coalition's plan that satifies our members and then attack; negotiate for the few votes we may need from strength.

OK, some one notify the Blue Dogs and the White House.

One hopes this makes clear to policymakers a truth that seemed obvious months ago: Republicans won't take "yes" for an answer

Out of academic curiosity, just how stupid do you think these policymakers are?

Stop the pretense that somehow Democrats are somehow naive. They know what they do. The Democrats make "concessions" not because they are "weak" but because these "concessions" represent what the Democrats really want.

Anyone seen this article in commondreams.org?
Study Finds Lack of Insurance Can Be Lethal
by Elizabeth Cooney
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/09/18
It is pretty conclusive evidence that there is a direct link to death and lack of insurance.
Pass it on to your congresspeople and ask if they will accept responsibility for these deaths.

They probably will say yes. The money speaks louder than truth.

Hey, you need to correct a typo in your post:

Senate Finance Committee Max Baucus (D-Mont.)

Should be:

Senate Finance Committee Max Baucus (C*-Health Care Insurance Nutsack)

*C - Rhymes with Clockplucker

I'd really like a journalist to ask a Republican lawmaker what exactly in the Baucas bill they don't like and why. Just an honest question.

The Baucus version illustrates the basic mistake in Obama's approach, which was to give the Republicans a good-faith assumption. Their action on the stimulus bill, where they got their tax cuts and then voted against it anyway, should have put Obama on notice that the Republicans have no interest in seeking solutions.

The problem, oddly enough, isn't really the Republicans. Not when Democrats have 258 House seats and 60 Senate seats. The ongoing health care legislation disaster is a Democratic failure. The Republicans have a free hand to commit political mayhem, and Obama's fawning, pleading approach plays straight into their hands.

Obama is looking more and more like a one-termer in the Jimmy Carter mold: able to win an intriguing one-shot campaign, but not able to govern once having gotten the job. As for the Democratic Party, well, it is nothing more or less than its usual pathetic self.

One more thing: It is laughable to blame the media for the Democratic Party's failure. I'm tired of that whine. This sad situation was made within the Democratic Party and nowhere else. If health care reform collapses as appears to be imminent, the Democrats will deserve the beating they'll take in 2010, and Obama will deserve his defeat in 2012.

Bad republicans, evil republicans, given everything they wanted and still won't go along with Baucus. Tort reform will be experimented with (and judged by whom?). A specific plan for interstate insurance policy marketing is not there. There's no mention of tax reform to allow HSAs in the so-called high deductible offering. There's no discussion of mandates, the biggest cost driver of all, after the practice of defensive medicine issue (tort reform). Truth is Rocky, O, and all the other socialists want single payer and they can't find a way to design a plan to get them there and fool the republicans in the process. Head fakes aren't enough.

And by the way, someone please point out to all us boobs out here where any, and I mean any, government run enterprise delivered on it promises for outcomes and cost. Also tell us how effective the Canadian and British models are working in terms of outcomes and costs. Be sure to have the facts, please.

Canada spends 10% of GDP vs. the U.S. at 17%, and has longer life expectancy than we do. Not that facts ever counted. Both the Democrats and the Republicans are owned lock, stock, and barrel by Big Health. Nothing's going to change, that much is clear.

I was just in Canada last weekend, and they are shaking their heads and laughing at what passes for a health care debate in the United States. I'll tell you, as someone who has usually been in the mood to patronize the Canadians and not quite measuring up, it's a come-down.

The U.S. political and economic system has been breaking down for the past 25 years. The pace is decline is accelerating, and we are now at the point where big problems cannot be solved by anyone. We're turning into Latin America, with one party representing oligarchy and the other scattered and directionless.

This is not going to turn out well. People ought to start looking at the history of Argentina, which in 1900 was one of the richest countries in the world.

I scrambled some articles in my prior posting. Meant to write:

" ... patronize the Canadians for not quite measuring up ..."

"The pace of decline is accelerating ..."

Ok, can someone please explain again the LOGIC behind requiring me to pay for someone elses health insurance? Food, housing, education......

The logic? Okey-doke.

1. Good health enables productivity and consumption, both of which are necessary elements for the functioning of a modern industrial economy. The other guy's good health is in your economic interest.

2. If you don't pay for his insurance, what will you do when he shows up at the emergency room? Throw him out onto the street and let him die? Of so, see #1 above. If not, then you've just chosen the most expensive method of health care, and someone's going to have to pay.

3. If you deprive people of health care for lack of ability to pay, what happens when there are public health emergencies? How do you prevent, say, tuberculosis, if people can't afford to see a doctor? What do you do if there's a new epidemic? See #1 above.

4. The moral code that our society is based on requires us to help the poor.

5. When poor families are deprived of necessities for lack of ability to pay, the next generation suffers. Their children grow up with lost productivity and potential. See #1 above.

So, there's your logic. Not that it would ever matter to you.

Ok, can someone please explain again the LOGIC behind requiring me to pay for someone elses health insurance? Food, housing, education......

Do you ever wonder why Americans pay more than double what the rest of the civilized world is paying? Who do you think gets the bill when one of the 50 MILLION uninsured people shows up at the ER?

You'll ALREADY paying - we're trying to make it affordable.

Man, what a dumb f&*k...

This is the welcome page for the dentaldoctor.us Association web site.