This gives cover to other liberals to hold their noses and vote for a health care bill that has no public option or single payer.... that retains the current for-profit system where stockholders are more important than premium holders.

Half a loaf is better than none in legislation, and this is a good first step, the kind of step that was taken in civil rights legislation in 1957 that was followed by the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Ya gotta start somewhere.

"If I can vote for this Bill, there shouldn't be too many (on the Left) who can't." - DK

Half a loaf is better than none in legislation, and this is a good first step, the kind of step that was taken in civil rights legislation in 1957

what was the legislation in '57?

was it weak like this legislation?

The Civil Rights Act of 1957, primarily a voting rights bill, was the first civil rights legislation enacted by Congress in the United States since Reconstruction.

After it was proposed to Congress by then-President Dwight Eisenhower, Senator James Strom Thurmond sustained the longest one-person filibuster in history in an attempt to keep it from becoming law. His one-man filibuster consisted of 24 hours and 18 minutes of readings from the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, Washington's Farewell Address, and various phone books. His speech set the record for a Senate filibuster.[1]

The bill passed the House with a vote of 270 to 97 and the Senate 60 to 15. President Eisenhower signed it on 9 September 1957.

Thanks Corky.

But I don't think this deserves comparison. The '57 legislation gave blacks the right to vote.

that is not weak.

this health care bill falls short in what it accomplishes. What is hilarious is that there are insurance company, big pharma HATERS here who are championing this as they need to "believe" this will eventually lead to something better.

what happens when the dems don't have their majorities in the future?

This legislation gives dramatic reforms in the way insurers operate and how many people are covered, an additional 30 million.

Unless you are left of Dennis, Bev, I don't think you have a case.

Half a loaf is better than none in legislation, and this is a good first step, the kind of step that was taken in civil rights legislation in 1957 that was followed by the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
#1 | Posted by Corky at 2010-03-17 10:25 AM

So when's the final vote?

DK's views on most issues are diametrically opposed to mine, but at least, until today anyways, I could always respect him for being intellecutally honest and principled. It seems to me he is a fucking sell out. I hope progressive Dems is his districs vote for a Green Party or Socialist candidate in November. This is what happens when people go to Washington, they fucking sell out. Nice job DK.

Rush Limbaugh was right, Dems are Dems first. He was refering to Supak (he doesn't think he'll vote no eventually he'll cave in too) but it applies to DK as well. They are power-hungry sellouts.

This legislation gives dramatic reforms in the way insurers operate and how many people are covered, an additional 30 million.

you hope and wish for that. but that doesn't make it so.

the devil is in the details Cork......they always are.

additional 30 million covered? we'll see. you choose to believe that.....I don't.
Those 30 million have to "want" to be covered. We'll see if they really do.

"dramatic" reforms? good word for "drama" queens who support this POS.

-What a drama queen, lol!

Health care as a right instead of a privilege is what the debate is all about.... or perhaps you missed that part, Lady Gaga.

People have been making the same comparison in legislation that I made above for months now.

I don't think it's fair to say he sold out. He held out for a long time, but it's clear he's not going to get what he wants, so he either votes for the half ass bill or for nothing at all.

Let's take poll..... how many of these expert commentators here actually heard Dennis' statement this AM?

Yep, just as I figured.

Health care as a right instead of a privilege is what the debate is all about....

LOL

"the" debate?

perhaps "your" debate. but not "the" debate.

you know...the one that counts in DC.

Everyone knows the Bill is half-assed.... it's just perspective that determines which half one likes and which one doesn't.

But to vote no when you can get half of what you want now, and maybe the rest later as is the history with this type of legislation, would be self-defeating indeed.

and maybe the rest later as is the history with this type of legislation

#13 | Posted by Corky at 2010-03-17 11:06 AM

I heard Kukucinich this morning and Obama gave him a ride in Air Force 1 and promised him God knows what for his vote.

Here are the names and the numbers--they don't have the votes

If the bill passes then Republican candidates need to make it explicitly and unambigiously clear they will repeal this shit if elected into office. Otherwise there is no reason for anyone to vote GOP.

Let's take poll..... how many of these expert commentators here actually heard Dennis' statement this AM?

come on Corky, I went to your link.

And I'm not picking on Dennis either.

#10 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE

Given Kucinich's long-standing tradition of voting on principle...does his suggested change-in-direction not even raise an eyebrow given his lavish treatment on Air Force-One coupled with his staged town-hall meeting with Obama apparently 'moderating'?

Don't get me wrong. I have no problem with Obama attempting to change Kucinich's vote - this is DC politics, afterall. I just don't feel that Kucinich deserves the degree of slack that you are cutting him given his history.

Here's a link with a vid of the statement this morning, scroll down

#18

Perhaps you should listen to what he said before making a judgemnet on what he decided.

To quote Dennis....

"I do not think this bill is a step towards anything I wanted".

and yet he is voting for it.

LOL

-will repeal this shit

I can see the GOP fall ads now...

"Parents! Your children with pre-existing conditions don't deserve health care! Give it back now!"

"Small businesses! You don't deserve breaks on health care! Vote for us so we can take them away from you!"

Yeah, good luck with that.

-and yet he is voting for it.

You think he should wait another 70 years until it is single payer?

Given Kucinich's long-standing tradition of voting on principle...does his suggested change-in-direction not even raise an eyebrow given his lavish treatment on Air Force-One coupled with his staged town-hall meeting with Obama apparently 'moderating'?

Don't get me wrong. I have no problem with Obama attempting to change Kucinich's vote - this is DC politics, afterall. I just don't feel that Kucinich deserves the degree of slack that you are cutting him given his history.

#18 | Posted by JeffJ at 2010-03-17 11:13 AM

Dennis is selling out and admits it. He is voting on a bill he does not support to foster a President he does.

"I have doubts about the bill. This is not the bill I wanted to support," Kucinich said..."We have to be very careful that the potential of President Obama's presidency not be destroyed by this debate."

He is knowingly passing a bad bill to suck up to party. He has clearly placed party above not only country, but principle. I so used to respect Dennis.

In other words, DK cares more abot Obama and his legacy and power than he does about the country. The bill is bad, who cares if by voting it down Obama suffers? Isn't your country more important the the legacy of a president , any president? These peole in Congress forgot what they were elected for, to be an independent branch of the government, not to be slaves of the executive, what a disgrace these people make me sick.

You think he should wait another 70 years until it is single payer?

Jesus Christ you are a hysterical drama queen and you are revealing it right now.

calm down Corky. you are getting what you want.....a democrat victory.

we all know that you don't give a shit about what is actually in the bill. just that the dems (led by Obama) win. period.

be a good winner.

-"I have doubts about the bill. This is not the bill I wanted to support," Kucinich said..."We have to be very careful that the potential of President Obama's presidency not be destroyed by this debate."

Nice "..." there, as those two statements are not conjoined in his statement.

"Kucinich explained his decision in the following terms:

He fought to make the bill better as long as he could. The bill is now written and the decision is not whether it's the bill he'd want but whether it is better to support it as it is or oppose it. If this health care reform effort failed, just as Clinton's effort failed a decade and a half ago, it would make future attempts at reforming the system that much more difficult. "This is a defining moment for whether or not we'll have any opportunity to move off square one on the issue of health care. And so even though I don't like the bill, I've made a decision to support it in the hopes that we can move towards a more comprehensive approach once this legislation is done," he said."

from above link

-be a good winner

Frak off, Beverly.

You are the one who seems unable to grok his position and reasoning, which is obvious to most.

Nice "..." there, as those two statements are not conjoined in his statement.

That is what "..." is for Corky. Had I left it out, then I would have been dishonest. I included it because he did say both those things, but there were words in between it, thus the "..."

You REALLY need help Corky. You have passed self-mockery and moved into entirely unexplored areas of self-parody.

He contradicted himself in his speech.

read my #21. He said that. He said it wouldn't even lead to anything he wanted.

then he says it is "square one".

square one to what? first he said that it wouldn't lead to anything he wanted.

again, I think he misspoke one way or the other.

More from Dennis: "That's not what my support is all about here. I come at it from a different level, taking a more historic, long-term view, [with the aim to] empower our president and the Congress to start to move the country forward, notwithstanding the differences we have."

He is voting to "empower our president and the Congress," not to support a bill he thinks is good.

and another dem who becomes just another lying sack of dogshit when the ole arm is twisted...and folds like a cheap suit..
look for blue dogs to now begin "EL FOLDO"....

CHECK FOR DEALS FOR OHIO and in particularly his district.

Frak off, Beverly.

sure cork. nice retort.

I nailed it on the head and you know it. you don't care about the bill...only a victory for dems.

anybody with an open mind who saw his speech can conclude that he hates the bill more than you do and that he is ONLY voting for it to keep the dems from losing more seats if the bill fails.

and it is quite probable that he was threatened if he didn't vote for it.

Jesus, I'm not sure YOU watched it Cork.

-there were words in between

There were paragraphs in between. Your attempt was to make the second statement the rationale for the first, when it is obvious from the entire statement that it was not the main consideration.

-self-parody.

Have yet another hissy fit, turn purple, then come back an apologize yet again.

It's no more than we expect now.

Have yet another hissy fit, turn purple, then come back an apologize yet again.

It's no more than we expect now.

No hissy fit. No purple. No apology to you.

It is way more than we expect from you. All we get is "rah rah rah" out of you.

All we get is "na, naw, naw," out of you.

You've become famous for your thin-skinned hissy fits and late apologies. I'm sorry I can't agree with you all the time, and that you lash out when that happens.

Perhaps it is you that needs to seek the help. Not everyone is going to validate and confirm your emotions, dear boy, 'cause you know what?

It ain't about you.

anybody with an open mind who saw his speech can conclude that he hates the bill more than you do and that he is ONLY voting for it to keep the dems from losing more seats if the bill fails.

Of course, this only occurred after a prestigious ride on AirForce1 and some personal time spent with Obama discussing God-only-knows what.

He is voting to "empower our president and the Congress," not to support a bill he thinks is good.

#32 | Posted by kanrei

Exactly.

Now, if he were the typical politician this would be 'ho-hum'. However, he has established himself as being principled. He seems willing to marginalize himself for the good of the party. Again, nothing new for a Schumer or a Durbin, but we are talking about Kucinich. So, is he now nothing more than a party hack who votes party above personal belief AND the will of his constituency?

-AND the will of his constituency?

I understand he has a very liberal district, right?

His rationale is logical and honest. Why not take half a loaf now and work towards improving the legislation, when the other choice is to doom it entirely?

Perhaps Dennis deserves a little more credit for this.

he made it clear that he thinks the bill is a POS and that he is voting for it only because he feels he has to in order for dems to save face.

I believe him. which means I think he is telling the truth....refreshing isn't it?

He shook hands with Obama at the door of AF1 and said "okay boss, but I hate this fucking thing and I'm going to say that in my press conference".

-Obama dick sucker,

I see the hysteric ad hominem has started.

Please don't hold your breath this time. You know how I worry....

I see the hysteric ad hominem has started.

Yeah, you did start it.

Did I?

Mind pointing out to me where?

A day can't go by where Corky jumps on a post I made, then pretends he is being attacked out of the blue for no reason. Poor Corky.

Concentrate, K. The ad hominem remarks you said I started. Point out to me where that happened.

No one jumped on your post.

Did I mention thin-skinned hysteria? I think I did.

the only sexual favor/threat was in the form of Obama holding up a photo of Dennis's wife and telling him "either vote for this or I'm going to ream her so hard you will never be able to touch the sides again"

#48 LOL. You really need help Corky. That you can't see it only makes it worse. You, just like the DNC, has become 100% of what you hated. I pity you.

Now call me a fence sitter and pretend I never take stands on issues. Go on, show even more of how little you comprehend.

You, just like the DNC, has become 100% of what you hated.

actually, it only proves he never hated it.

just selective and faux outrage

-Yeah, you did start it.

uh-huh.

"Obama holding up a photo of Dennis's wife"

I'm thinking it was a piture of both thier mother-in-law...

again,

calm down cork.

Corky at the Sperm Bank: Give me some of that sweet LOD sugar!

Back on topic, I don't think it would've been possible to pass anything like what Dennis K. wants, so I just can't blame him for caving. He's at least getting something resembling minor reform. I still think the Dems could've gotten some form of a Medicare buy in if they weren't such wusses all the time.

-calm down cork

I'm having fun. Reminds me of the good 'ol Dem primary days.

-I still think the Dems could've gotten some form of a Medicare buy in if they weren't such wusses all the time.

I wish I didn't think you were right.

Hil may not have done any better than Obama has, but she would have least left heel-prints on some Rethug foreheads.

"-I still think the Dems could've gotten some form of a Medicare buy in if they weren't such wusses all the time."

So we still have to keep pushing. This bill is just a first step towards real health care reform.

the only sexual favor/threat was in the form of Obama holding up a photo of Dennis's wife and telling him "either vote for this or I'm going to ream her so hard you will never be able to touch the sides again"

#50 | Posted by eberly at

yeah and barry wouldnt need a step ladder either...

I don't think it would've been possible to pass anything like what Dennis K. wants, so I just can't blame him for caving. He's at least getting something resembling minor reform.

~LoD

Pretty much THIS.

The entire political process in the US is systemically corrupted by corporate monies. From the time a congressman gets elected he has to raise around 10 K a week just to retain his seat. Those monies come from primarily from wealthy individuals and massive corporations with an agenda that is pro-profit and anti-people. With that grim reality in mind it's easy to see how the US has come to the place it is now. Which is to say with one party so thoroughly corrupted they are obstructionists out of power and corporate shills with a "starve the beast" mentality while in power. The other team, the Dems, are more well intentioned but the are seemingly incapable of achieving their own goals without finding their legislation either watered down or loop-holed into a half-assed semi victory at best.

Half a loaf versus none at all.

Thems yer options.

Denny K obviously realizes this.

Until true campaign finance reform is enacted there can only slow, painful, incremental change in DC.

You have built yer house on shifting sands.

Be Well.

Obama put the Bill in front of Dennis while Hillary put the DNC to his head and assured him that either his vote or his career would be on the contract.

So we still have to keep pushing. This bill is just a first step towards real health care reform.

#62 | Posted by danni at 2010

a real scary thought but it only makes me more resolved to see that your kind is stopped in its tracks by any means necessary....and NO...there is no physical intent in that line at all..
constitutional challenges and the senate as several pages of LEGITIAMATE rules and proceedures to stall it.
the opposition party's job is to oppose. something dems THRILLED the left at for most of the last decade.

AND its another thread but lets put it here as well
the PROCESS DOES MATTER..

look at the LONG list of deals in addition to thenebraska. florida, lousianna, and with the UNION GOONS AND THUGS...
last night on cspan I started getting 'riled' as the three gop reps READ THROUGH them from the senate bill itself

-Until true campaign finance reform is enacted there can only slow, painful, incremental change in DC.

Absolutimently!! Key to it all, don't 'cha know.

oh please

come on
what a DULL subject....

Dennis will claim the little green guys crawled out of the Space Ship in Shirley McLane's backyard and made him do it.

"NObody wants to vote on the senate bill"

nancy pelosi

march 16,2010

Kucinich was one of a very few who was brutally honest about what the health care bill is really all about. Apparently Kucinich no longer consider Obama's totalitarian care plan a sham. In October, he said the entire legislative package was "a bailout for insurance companies." The American people are "being mandated to buy private insurance. If you read the bill, the people are going to end up paying the insurance companies can raise rates 25 percent right off the bat, if you read the bill," said Kucinich.

In O's fantasy world, health care at gunpoint will reduce premiums. Obama has now managed to arm-twist one-time totalitarian care opponent Dennis Kucinich into backing the plan Democrats say they will enact without votes in Congress. Obama summoned Kucinich to Air Force One. The result: "Even though I don't like the bill, I've made a decision to support it in the hope that we can move to a more comprehensive approach once this legislation is done," he told reporters.

What could the big O have possibly said that has not won over the hearts of America to the plan? That is, what argumentation toward the plan? Obvious there is nothing that could be argued. So the question is what were the strong-arm tactics used? A democrat telling continuing to tell the truth about the plan in conjunction with the most sleazy tactic of passing the draconian totalitarianism without ever voting would have been a major political suicidal move by Democrats.

In October, he said the entire legislative package was "a bailout for insurance companies." The American people are "being mandated to buy private insurance. If you read the bill, the people are going to end up paying the insurance companies can raise rates 25 percent right off the bat, if you read the bill," said Kucinich.

"but it is still a great first step!!"

-Dannicorkspud

Aetna is sure pleased.

their stock price is up 45% since last April.

One might think that this bill was designed to do just that.

Kucinich Sell-Out Price Established To Insurance Industry Bailout After Ride on Air-Force One?

Someone even as simpleminded as la Contra should know Kucinich has realized that half a loaf is better than none.

Which is the Noper Plan.

None.

Kucinich Sell-Out

#74 | Posted by L_RContrarian at 2010-03-17 02:17 PM

Kucinich isn't the sell out here. I'm not even pro-this-bill, but at least I can see who the sell out is. Kucinich is just taking flak becauase he's helping pass the bill and a lot of butts and egos are hurt as a result.

Dennis will claim the little green guys crawled out of the Space Ship in Shirley McLane's backyard and made him do it.

#70 | Posted by wisgod at 2010-03-17 12:54 PM

Which is the Noper Plan.

None.

#75 | Posted by donnerboy at 2010-03-17 02:18 PM

Disagree with their plans but at least keep it factual.

#76 lod
DK put up a fight, but he lost

Really LOD? Why's that, because O won the election and he may now strong-arm whoever/however he wishes?

How does a Congressman "lose" during debate of a bill and therefore must vote with "the winners"?

A "sellout" is anyone who has a "price" that when ascertained will vote against his conscience.

And what, specifically, was Dennis' "price"?

What was he "paid"?

Check his blue dress for stains. Mile High Club

That's likely a better answer than I'll get from numbnuts.

Dennis wasn't paid.

If he were then he would have praised the legislation.

He didn't.

he called it the POS it is.

he is holding his nose as he votes for this.

I don't think he was given anything.

if I'm wrong then I'll retract.

I don't believe Dennis was paid, I believe he is being a martyr and doing what he feels is wrong for a greater good- strengthening Obama and the DNC before November. He basically says as much.

How does a Congressman "lose" during debate of a bill and therefore must vote with "the winners"?

A "sellout" is anyone who has a "price" that when ascertained will vote against his conscience.

#79 | Posted by L_RContrarian at 2010-03-17 03:36 PM

And there is no information saying he was "paid" in any way.

re #78

Oh they "exist". But, Interestingly the Rethugs were in power for 8 years and none of these proposals were even discussed or passed. Can you explain that?

In fact, In 2007, Bush opposed and vetoed State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) legislation, which was added by the Democrats onto a war funding bill and passed by Congress. The SCHIP legislation would have significantly expanded federally funded health care benefits and plans to children of some low-income families from about six million to ten million children. It was to be funded by an increase in the cigarette tax.[128] Bush viewed the legislation as a move toward the liberal platform of socialized health care, and asserted that the program could benefit families making as much as $83,000 per year who did not need the help.

they "exist"

#86 | Posted by donnerboy at 2010-03-17 03:57 PM

"Meanwhile, in a rare public disagreement that will reverberate among the nation's 70 million Catholics, leaders of religious orders representing 59,000 nuns sent lawmakers a letter urging lawmakers to pass the Senate health care bill. Expected to come before the House by this weekend, the measure contains abortion funding restrictions that the bishops say don't go far enough.

"Despite false claims to the contrary, the Senate bill will not provide taxpayer funding for elective abortions," said the letter signed by 60 leaders of women's religious orders. "It will uphold longstanding conscience protections and it will make historic new investments ... in support of pregnant women. This is the real pro-life stance, and we as Catholics are all for it."

That is all bullshit, AU

Pro-lifers don't give a shit about people once they aren't a fetus any longer.

Really. all the dems told me so.

Time to get on the phones Ohio. This is a career ender to be sure

"Take health care. He has pushed a program that expands coverage, creates exchanges and moderately tinkers with the status quo.... To call this an orthodox liberal plan is an absurdity.

"In a sensible country, people would see Obama as a president trying to define a modern brand of moderate progressivism. In a sensible country, Obama would be able to clearly define this project without fear of offending the people he needs to get legislation passed. But we don't live in that country. We live in a country in which many people live in information cocoons in which they only talk to members of their own party and read the blogs of their own sect. They come away with perceptions fundamentally at odds with reality, fundamentally misunderstanding the man in the Oval Office."

- David Brooks - Conservative Columnist

#90 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2010-03-17 04:30 PM | Reply | Flag: Sensible.

A rare event one of those.

Good find, AU.

Be Well.

Nice quote, AU.

Months ago, even the bloody Necon David Frum showed exasperation with Repubes saying that if Obama and the Dem's wanted to take on health care and put up a plan that actually takes on some of teh problems with social security and medicare, why in the hell would Repubs get in his way?

The Brooks column deserves a thread

Another liar flip-flopper. Trashes the bill, but votes for it anyway. The Progressive is strong in this one.

WE already have this thread Rcade

listed first on your new backpage thingy....

The closer the dems get to victory the more the holdouts will join the party. It's either that or watch the party go down in flames just like the republicans did in the last election.

Denace the Menace just needed a little encouragement, that's all.

Seriously, that's what people called him when he was the Mayor of Cleveland. No joke.

He was made an offer he couldn't refuse.

i.e. they paid him off.

Sadly, David Brooks is one of the few remaining journalists on the right who's consistently reasonable. He may not agree, but he doesn't demonize. His weekly bit with Mark Shields on PBS NewsHour is always enjoyable. A throwback to a time before Newt Gingrich when we discussed issues in a more reasonable tone and facts weren't an inconvenience, but something vitally important.

I don't always agree with Brooks, but I respect the hell out of him for how he conducts himself.

-His weekly bit with Mark Shields on PBS NewsHour

One of the last bastions of news and opinion over entertainment and ideology.

uh-huh. What, specifically , was he paid?

You don't know.... but then, we all knew that.

Interesting move by Kucinich, who votes his conscience more than most members of Congress. I'm glad that he's seen the light. This is a good bill.

I don't think he or most of us think it a "good Bill".... just a barely adequate one that is much better than nothing and that can be improved upon.

Rc-de,
He doesn't support the bill, he supports the President and the party.

"This wasn't about the kind of deal-making that is essentially self-defeating," said Kucinich. "That's not what my support is all about here. I come at it from a different level, taking a more historic, long-term view, [with the aim to] empower our president and the Congress to start to move the country forward, notwithstanding the differences we have."

"Kucinich explained his decision in the following terms:

He fought to make the bill better as long as he could. The bill is now written and the decision is not whether it's the bill he'd want but whether it is better to support it as it is or oppose it. If this health care reform effort failed, just as Clinton's effort failed a decade and a half ago, it would make future attempts at reforming the system that much more difficult. "This is a defining moment for whether or not we'll have any opportunity to move off square one on the issue of health care. And so even though I don't like the bill, I've made a decision to support it in the hopes that we can move towards a more comprehensive approach once this legislation is done," he said."

statement vid

Interesting move by Kucinich, who votes his conscience more than most members of Congress. I'm glad that he's seen the light. This is a good bill.

#103 | Posted by rcade at 2010-03-17 05:00 PM

What he supports is health care reform, which he was working on long before he or anyone else ever heard of Barack Obama.

We have to be very careful that the potential of President Obama's presidency not be destroyed by this debate. And I feel, even though I have many differences with him on policy, there's something much bigger at stake here for America,"

-there's something much bigger at stake here for America,"

Health care reform

"there's something much bigger at stake here for America,"

Yes. The empowerment of the right. As bad as Obama has been, the only conceivable, electable alternative is worse.

-His weekly bit with Mark Shields on PBS NewsHour

One of the last bastions of news and opinion over entertainment and ideology.

#101 | Posted by Corky

Amen!

I believe DK. I accept his statement as to why he has decided to support the HC bill at face value. He says it is important not to cripple this presidency or lose sight of the forest for the trees. DK is an honorable and honest man. He calls it as he sees it.

He doesn't support the bill, he supports the President and the party.

He's voting yes, therefore he's supporting the bill. He may not be supporting it with his words or his heart -- his comments seem weird to me -- but his vote is what counts most.

He may not be supporting it with his words or his heart -- his comments seem weird to me -- but his vote is what counts most.

At the end of the day, yes. I guess it would be more proper to say he is throwing his support behind the bill rather than he supports the bill, because his words show a man who clearly does not support it.

He may not be supporting it with his words or his heart -- his comments seem weird to me -- but his vote is what counts most.

At the end of the day, yes. I guess it would be more proper to say he is throwing his support behind the bill rather than he supports the bill, because his words show a man who clearly does not support it.

He may not be supporting it with his words or his heart -- his comments seem weird to me -- but his vote is what counts most.

At the end of the day, yes. I guess it would be more proper to say he is throwing his support behind the bill rather than he supports the bill, because his words show a man who clearly does not support it.

WTF? It kept saying it didn't post it and told me to hit the back button and try again. Sorry for the 3

I got this again :

There were problems with your submission:

* You did not make a comment.

Use the Back button of your web browser to reload the form and make corrections.

This is a good bill

so you disagree with Dennis?

He said it "doesn't lead to anything that I wanted"

WTF? It kept saying it didn't post it and told me to hit the back button and try again. Sorry for the 3

Oddly enuff the same thing just happened to Spud on the last post.

Clicked back and resend then C&P'd the text (just in case) and then went back one more screen only to find the post actually had posted.

THAT was a new one on Spud.

Spud's no techno-wiz but GREMLINS is most definitely a possibility here.

Or Demons.

Again, not a certified geek or nothing.

Just a hunch.

Be Well.

Just happened again.

Be Well.

/Also noticed this time when you go to the preview screen it just sez "Posted by At 05:45PM"

Not user name thingy.

Oddish stuff.

Perhaps the Drudge Gerbil is totally wasted on green beer and playing silly buggers?

Again, not an expert opinion.

Be Well.

Kucinich wanted a Public Option.

In a nutshell, that's his only beef.

Grayson (FL) is going to offer a bill to open up Medicare for all.

St. Paddy's Day Special: DOUBLE POSTS!!

St. Paddy's Day Special: DOUBLE POSTS!!

one ride on air force one and all your principles go out the window,did anyone would vote anything but yes?

one ride on air force one and all your principles go out the window,did anyone think he would vote anything but yes?

Nancy Pelosi is not someone I understand very well. She is unnecessarily pandering to Republicans with her broadly proclaiming "the public option is off the table" - appalling. How could she unilaterally make such a claim when it's the PUBLIC who have demanded it's inclusion? But then Dennis Kucinich - someone I admired has apparently been cowed into voting against the best interests of the American citizens. Disappointing.

I suspect the majority of Republicans in office who acted with such disdain for health care reform are inoperable, but now it's plain they are inhuman. They deserve no pity for what changes they are going to face as millions of Americans can't even afford their basic mandatory scam health coverage.

Whomever actually wrote this legislation does not include any of these Senators and Congressmen to whom we can hold account. Industry composed this crap - for it's own sake, nothing else. This represents ZERO reform and almost no changes in costs. If President Obama enacts this corporate preservation legislation I'm afraid that we won't have actual reform ever. The closest we've come is the delay in a final vote - for over 40 years. Health Insurance is a scam.

I just can't wait to see the screaming lunatics here when the bill is passed. Gonna take a lot of popcorn and beer.

Your post 91 is spot on AU... gonna give that a NW flag!

He may not be supporting it with his words or his heart -- his comments seem weird to me -- but his vote is what counts most.

#115 | Posted by rcade

Dennis strongly believes (like a lot of us) that basic health care is a civil right. He wanted a much stronger bill that did not reward the insurance companies and one that moved us closer to single payer mode. He really wanted the Public Option and was disappointed that it was "sacrificed".

I think that he just wanted to make that clear.

But, that is never going to happen as long as the GOP can have a say and as we are learning half a loaf is better than NONE. Which is what the GOPers would have given us. NONE!

I know LOD disagrees but they have made it perfectly clear that they (the GOP) were Obstructionists not Negotiators. Let us NEVER forget that This was to be Obamas Waterloo.

Just because the GOP now has plans on a web page doesn't mean they would ever have enacted ANY of them without being forced to do so by the Dems.

DONNERBOY

All I did was copy and paste Brook's comments.

Very true they are. He's one of the couple remaining Republican voices of reason. His PBS NewsHour bits on Friday with Mark Shields is a throwback to pre-Newt Gingrich politics (which Lee Atwater started).

Yes, it sums up the situation very nicely.

gonna keep it in me pockets

thx

he got a check.

pigs at the trough.

Just in case right wingers believe yet one MORE bit of bullshit:

New England Journal of Medicine says it didn't publish or produce health care "survey"

March 17, 2010 12:50 pm ET by Julie Millican

Right-wing media have seized on a dubious, three-month old email "survey" that purports to show that physicians are concerned about health care reform and that 46 percent of the primary care doctors surveyed "indicated that they would leave medicine - or try to leave medicine - as a result of health reform." Many media figures have falsely attributed this survey to the New England Journal of Medicine. For example, on Fox & Friends, co-host Brian Kilmeade said: "The New England Journal of Medicine has published a report and did a survey, and they said the impact of reform on primary care physicians, 46 percent, they say, feel reform will force them out or make them want to leave medicine."

This is false.

Media Matters for America contacted the New England Journal of Medicine, which confirmed it neither conducted nor published the "survey."

This is a surprise that Kukucinich would vote for this pos bill??

It is slightly better than his preferred public option plan. Still has the same tax hikes and kill the insurance industry, same deals with NE LA FL the unions and wherever else.

Not to mention what he is going to get in return when he flew on AF1 with Obama.

"As Speaker, Newt Gingrich "Set New Records" For The Amount Of Self-Executing Rules"

One set of rules for the GOP when they're in, another when they're out!

The next interviewer needs to ask Newt, straight-up: was it unconstitutional when you did it, or did it just become unconstitutional in your mind when the folks in power had (D)s after their name?

It doesn't matter if they use the 'slaughter house rule'--

The dems are toast and so is Obama--because if they vote for this it is the same as voting for the bill.

Repubs run on REPEAL!

Obama is a real wheeler dealer:

"Did Obama Buy California Congressmen's Votes with Water to the Central Valley?"

"Water in California is as valuable as gold. Since there isn't enough to go around, it has been rationed and supplied only to those whom the government believes need it the most. Unfortunately, the people who live in California's San Joaquin Valley have had their water turned off in order to protect a tiny fish called the delta smelt. As a result farm land that used to be prime agricultural land are now dust bowls. It devastated the economy as well, driving up the the unemployment rate in some areas to as high as 41 percent. Yet for months on end, President Obama said and did nothing to help the people in the Central Valley.

But now the president's health care reforms are on the ropes and the San Joaquin Valley's two blue-dog Democratic congressmen Dennis Cardoza and Jim Costa have been reluctant to support the president's reforms. So imagine everyone's surprise when the Department of the Interior announced yesterday that it is dramatically increasing the water supply to the valley's parched lands. And what a coincidence, now the two California congressmen who were once "undecided" are being moved over into the "yes" column"

Call the congress

202-224-3121

If you can get through.

No answer right now--just tried..

MURPHY

Step away for FoxNews!! I repeat, STEP AWAY FROM FOXNEWS!!

Every single 'point' you've gotten from FoxNews has been debunked

Save yourself. There's still a few minutes to salvage your sanity!!!!

LOL

202-224-3121

CALL IN SUPPORT!!!

The aides I spoke with today are laughing off out-of-state right wing idiots.

(They have called ID)

wizbangblog.com

#141 | Posted by KBM

And those bozos really think Obama will keep his promise for water in the valley?

When he hasn't kept one promise from the campaign.

And is that deal supposed to be written in the reconciliation bill??

Dennis, if you vote yes, then Area 51 is yours!

- Barak

Dennis, if you vote yes, then Area 51 is yours!
- Barak
#146 | Posted by Eddie at 2010-03-18 12:24 AM

Damned you, but that is funny.

As Speaker, Newt Gingrich "Set New Records" For The Amount Of Self-Executing Rules. According to the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars:

When Republicans took power in 1995, they soon lost their aversion to self-executing rules and proceeded to set new records under Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.). There were 38 and 52 self-executing rules in the 104th and 105th Congresses (1995-1998), making up 25 percent and 35 percent of all rules, respectively. Under Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) there were 40, 42 and 30 self-executing rules in the 106th, 107th and 108th Congresses (22 percent, 37 percent and 22 percent, respectively). Thus far in the 109th Congress, self-executing rules make up about 16 percent of all rules. [Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, 6/19/06]
#136 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2010-03-17 11:14 PM

Okay, I suppose that "half a loaf" bullshit should be considered a massive "victory" for our strategically inept Democrat party - but why didn't the public option get kept if they could have just made this self-executing in the first place.

It was removed by industry whom invented this legislation. Damned them all, both sides are entirely responsible for passing this steaming pile off as reform.

REDLIGHT

The Senate scrubbed a public option.

However, Grayson (FL) will introduce a 3 1/2 page bill to open Medicare for all.

This isn't over. It's just begun.

REDLIGHT
The Senate scrubbed a public option.
However, Grayson (FL) will introduce a 3 1/2 page bill to open Medicare for all.
This isn't over. It's just begun.
#148 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2010-03-18 01:26 AM

The only thing that the Senate have presented us with is their half-baked shit sandwich which is shamefully still not covering all Americans, not even with Medicare. The Democrats had plenty of ability to utilize rules on our behalf and pass the proper legislation using Republican dirty tricks, instead pretending to require or desire "compromising" which has merely removed the public option without Republicans assistance. They neutered this legislation before it could grow balls on purpose.

Fuck the Democrats, they operate independent of Republican interests as much as Hamas does the Likud = indistinguishably.

REDLIGHTROBOT

What would you have done?

Lay on your back and kick your heels on the floor until you got what you wanted?

Hold your breath maybe until your face turned blue?

Obama did what every good negotiator does. Ask for everything and work backwards from there.

I've heard him say before that nobody is going to get everything they want. Not even him.

As AmericanUnity said, this isn't over . . . it's just begun.

If Obama spills the beans right now about his plan to get the Public Option incorporated into his health care bill at a later time, the Republican NOpers would go into attack mode instantly.

As Obama has pointed out, passing legislation in the hallowed halls of Congress is a sausage factory. Eventually, however, the President will get what he wants because . . . well, because he's the President.

My guess is that it will happen in time to coincide with something else the country wants . . . the troops out of Iraq. Good news (two is better than one) always puts the public in a good mood . . . and that's a plus for encumbants.

So try to think ahead a little bit, narrow your eyes, and ask yourself what you would do. If you're honest with yourself, you'd do exactly what Obama is doing . . . keeping your eye on the ball.

#150 | Posted by Twinpac

Spud agrees with yer analysis.

As Obama has pointed out, passing legislation in the hallowed halls of Congress is a sausage factory.

Ah, a reference to the ole "laws and sausages" quote often misattributed to Bismark.

"Some twenty years ago, as I was sitting in the House of Representatives of the Illinois legislature, watching its closing hours, a member who had never spoken during the entire session arose to address the House... He said: '...I have come to the conclusion that the making of laws is like the making of sausages the less you know about the process the more you respect the result.'"

~Frank Tracy (1898)

Be Well.

When this bill helps families cope with illnesses that would have qualified as pre-existing conditions or prevents their bankruptcy due to their lifetime benefits hitting a cap the nay sayers who want ideological purity should realize that accomplishing anything in Congress today is going to require getting down in the mud. Those too ideologically pure to do that have no business in Congress. If anything, my respect for Dennis Kucinich is increased by his putting American families before his own desires. Real people will benefit from this bill, real suffering will be averted for millions. It will also help reduce our long term deficits. Bill Clinton realized that it would have been self-defeating to not take what we can get now and then come back with other bills later. I'd have to say President Clinton knows more about politics than anyone who posts here.

When this bill helps families cope with illnesses that would have qualified as pre-existing conditions or prevents their bankruptcy due to their lifetime benefits hitting a cap the nay sayers who want ideological purity should realize that accomplishing anything in Congress today is going to require getting down in the mud. Those too ideologically pure to do that have no business in Congress. If anything, my respect for Dennis Kucinich is increased by his putting American families before his own desires. Real people will benefit from this bill, real suffering will be averted for millions. It will also help reduce our long term deficits. Bill Clinton realized that it would have been self-defeating to not take what we can get now and then come back with other bills later. I'd have to say President Clinton knows more about politics than anyone who posts here.

#152 | Posted by danni at 2010-03-18 08:03 AM | Reply | Flag:

Hey Danno, didn't you just advise that a person must stay ideologically pure in regard to the party line in order to receive any funding or position in the party? Oh, in you post you mean too ideologically pure in regard to what their constituents want, or what their own personal conscience tells them.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Give me and h: "H"
Give me a y: "Y"
Give me a p: "P"
Give me an o: "O"
Give me a c: "C"
Give me an r: "R"
Give me an i: "I"
Give me a t: "T"
Give me an e: "E"

Whats that spell: "HYPOCRITE!"

You have to decide if you want them to vote what is best for the situation, vote what their constituents actually want, follow their party line to a t (in order to get funding and stay in the party in your words), remain non ideological, or be so ideological to their party that they get funded and stay in the party.

You love ideology when it suits your personal thought, but hate it when it does not, even if it is not objectively best for you.

Case in point your difficulty with reps making the best decision for the people regardless of what they desire, and then calling the representative to vote directly along the party line regardless of what they think is best for those they represent, while at the same time ignoring those who represent them.

Good show Danno, Good show.

You have so many conflicting views on how a representative is supposed to act or vote it is not even funny.

Vote your Conscience
Vote along the party line
I hate ideology it's bad
Vote for the healthcare because you are a democrat
Vote what you think is best for the people, but make sure either way that you vote for health care deform to pass.

This might be the worst bill of all time.

So, we get all of the problems inherent in a single-payer system without the benefits???

It's no wonder hard-core lefties hate this shit.

This might be the worst bill of all time.

Wow, those hyperbole lessons are really starting to pay big dividends!

It's no wonder hard-core lefties hate this shit.

Lefties oppose the bill because it doesn't do enuff.

Rtards hate it cos they think it does too much.

Half a loaf is too much?

LOL!

Now THAT's too much!

Be Well.

#155 | Posted by dethspud

I think you are wrong in your assertion here. Both groups don't like the bill because it does not do enough in terms of reform. Some would like it to do more in non reform areas, some would like it to do less in non reform areas, however you must admit that both parties are just as upset at the bill because it is not reform enough to be called "Health Care Reform"

This is more of a "Health Care Name Brand Change"

We are going from "Amway" to "Quixtar" and eventually it will go back to "Amway"

Or you could say it is the same as repackaging Sweet'n'Low as whatever they are packaging it as now, with the same problems.

New package, same crap. People don't like it, not reform.

I think you are wrong in your assertion here. Both groups don't like the bill because it does not do enough in terms of reform. Some would like it to do more in non reform areas, some would like it to do less in non reform areas, however you must admit that both parties are just as upset at the bill because it is not reform enough to be called "Health Care Reform"

In order for that to be true both parties would have to have an equal record on attempts to reform HC and on that score the GOP rather obviously is against any sort of change there that doesn't either A) Benefit Big Insurance or B) Hurt lawyers and by extension people with legitimate grievances.

Be Well.

#157 | Posted by dethspud

Oversimplification. I would say the same thing about Obama's recover plan then, his plan only deals with hurting citizens, and hurting small business by supplementing big business.

This is not true, as you and those who think similar to you say that sometimes you have to make things worse so that they can get better, yet that logic is definitely not allowed when it is the other side.

Also, you do not know all of what the rupublican's would do in regard to health care reform, you do not know what the impact would actually be until it happens, same with the Obama health care bill. We cannot be certain until it takes place.

When parties talk in terms of certainties you can almost guarantee it is a lie. If they tell you the possibilities and make an educated decision (doesn't happen much) that is usually a better course of action.

All that both parties have been telling us are certainties of what will happen if their side goes through. However, the certainties have changed as new information keeps coming out. That means it is not reform, it is prepackaged, shiny, pretty, garbage.

We are only buying a well designed package, not a well functioning product.

This is no different.

You can keep leaning if you desire, just be careful you don't fall over.

I think the bill will pass, heads will explode. Don't be too near any right wingers this weekend, it could be quite messy.

"Also, you do not know all of what the rupublican's would do in regard to health care reform,"

We know what they did not do when they held power.
They only want to talk about health care when Democrats propose health care reform.

I think the bill will pass, heads will explode.

On the plus side there's not too much flying brain matter to be concerned about there.

^_^

Be Well.

-not too much flying brain matter

More like a huge echo.....

So I guess you are saying that this is the only time that Democrats proposed health care reform as well?

The problem is that neither party really has the best interest of the public in mind, they are too busy voting their agenda to really meet the needs of their constituents.

"The problem is that neither party really has the best interest of the public in mind, they are too busy voting their agenda to really meet the needs of their constituents."

Their constituents don't need health insurance reforms???
Their constituents don't have pre-existing conditions???

More like a huge echo...

It's always the empty can that makes the most noise! ^_^

Whee! Spud is having fun now!

Be Well.

Looks like the CBO report appears to be more promising than expected I guess. Will it prove to be sufficient? Have to wait for the analysis.

Their constituents don't need health insurance reforms???
Their constituents don't have pre-existing conditions???

#164 | Posted by danni

Who said this Ms. Emotional? There is no insurance reform, it is still going to cost the same amount (unless you believe in the 3000% reduction that Obama talked about) it is just that the government is going to subsidize those who cannot afford it for a while, until they can no longer afford it.

Yes they do need health insurance reforms, but they don't really get that here.

Yes their constituents have pre-existing conditions, however a great number of constituents also have pre-existing conditions because of their personal actions. I understand doing something about pre-existing conditions that are out of ones control, but when they are a result of their personal choices, they are going to have to pay more for insurance, unless they prove they are going to do what is necessary to resolve the issue.

Fee healthcare sounds great when you think of it ideally, but when it comes to practicality and actual cost (which there is) it is not that simple.

However, that does not matter to you because you are all for people voting for ideology, well at least you were before you were against it, and then for it again.

Either way, this is not the reform that the constituents are looking for. Pretty Package, Poor Product.

When the government is going to get into subsidizing something, or helping the people, it helps if they make it as well as possible the first time, as then they only have to subsidize it once, but when they do it poorly just to get it done and get something to people, they end up subsidizing it over and over, fixing it, replacing it, fixing it, replacing it.

It is better to buy a quality car that will last for 20 years than to buy a cheap care for half the price that is going to need to be majorly fixed or replaced every 7 year.

This bill is all about quantity. People like quality.

one line from his SURRENDER speech.

said something about
'after much discussion'

translation....obama said do it or else I would be thrown off the plantation and then he gave me a kazillion dollars to spread out amoungst the unions and others who will make millions off the taxpayers,..

okay,..maybe not a direct quote but I believe it might not be far off the mark

I'm guessing Kucinich joined the "mile high club" on Air Force One.

his wife wouldnt fit in it

well maybe in AF1

OR MAYBE if there are pharma companies in his district.,
SINCE mccain wanted to make it easier to get cheaper drugs from canada and DEMS said NO because we have a 'DEAL" with big pharma...
maybe he got a 'waiver' on this in his district

fuckin liars.

My top 5 reasons the current healthcare bill must NOT be passed:

1) Government-paid healthcare (or health insurance) is NOT a right. (Much less a civil right, as Mr. Kucinich so recklessly emotes) It is a trap, and an excuse to collect and control more tax dollars. Healthcare, like food, is a product/service that we need throughout our lives; we may choose to purchase basics or more costly options, but the market choices and the accompanying cost burdens are rightly our own.

2) The free market benefits everyone. Monopolies (especially government monopolies) harm everyone. (One of the problems at the moment is the market is not free enough insurers are not permitted to compete across state lines)

3) Contrary to what some are saying, insurance choices (the free market) will disappear under the proposed legislation. Private companies cannot compete with subsidized entities. Government insurance will drive all others out of business by collecting more taxes from you and then offering lower prices than the private insurers can sustain - until private insurers are gone - then just watch what will happen to the quality and tax burden.

4) Now, you can seek damages for malpractice. If government takes the helm, such recourse will eventually but inevitably disappear.

5) Much better alternatives exist that do not compromise the free market and do not involve government in the healthcare or insurance businesses, in other words, alternatives that avoid all the pitfalls of the legislation currently under consideration.

REDLIGHTROBOT
What would you have done?
Lay on your back and kick your heels on the floor until you got what you wanted?
Hold your breath maybe until your face turned blue?
Obama did what every good negotiator does. Ask for everything and work backwards from there.
I've heard him say before that nobody is going to get everything they want. Not even him.
As AmericanUnity said, this isn't over . . . it's just begun.
If Obama spills the beans right now about his plan to get the Public Option incorporated into his health care bill at a later time, the Republican NOpers would go into attack mode instantly.
As Obama has pointed out, passing legislation in the hallowed halls of Congress is a sausage factory. Eventually, however, the President will get what he wants because . . . well, because he's the President.
My guess is that it will happen in time to coincide with something else the country wants . . . the troops out of Iraq. Good news (two is better than one) always puts the public in a good mood . . . and that's a plus for encumbants.
So try to think ahead a little bit, narrow your eyes, and ask yourself what you would do. If you're honest with yourself, you'd do exactly what Obama is doing . . . keeping your eye on the ball.
#150 | Posted by Twinpac at 2010-03-18 06:28 AM

I don't usually respond to shit like your post, so forgive me if I make a mess of it.

Imo, this "reform" totally amounts to permitting health insurers cross State lines to insure citizens. That's IT. Both parties PURPOSEFULLY DROPPED the "Medicare for all" ball and then stomped it dead. Whatever you call this "reform" doesn't regulate pricing, drug costs, accessibility and still adds a "required citizen payment" - which will now come out from our taxes directly! The corporations still can deny coverage based on "existing pre-conditions" - whatever the FUCK that means, but you now have your choices as to whom fucks you over the best. Basically, this legislation is GIVING money to these fuckhead insurance agencies that we need to divest ourselves from entirely. Anything less is corporate capitulation. Greed apparently knows how to start multiple illegal wars, pass Patriot Acts, illegally torture, bailout failing manufacturers outside of America, allow the largest bank to purchase ALL of it's small competitors in EVERY State, mortgage bubble millions of families onto the street, offshore our employment opportunities, etc. - but cannot provide health care for all citizens?! Pathetic. I cannot acquiesce what I already understand to be unhelpful "legislation". It's not right, best or even "good" enough.

You want to know what I would have done? Whatever the Republicans have been doing to us for the last 70 years - FORCE the appropriate legislation WITHOUT THEM. Also, if it was so important (which it is) dig up dirt on each one of those Republicans and hold their feet to the fire. It shouldn't be too difficult - they are entirely corrupt after all. Why weren't the Democrats prepared to use the exact same tactics the Republicans have been using? Because they are CORPORATE SHILLS and have ZERO interest in this Nation or it's citizens well-being. None of them are worthy to lead, let alone make even ONE FUCKING DEBATE! Not ONE!

Now that my embarrassing tantrum is overwith, perhaps you are right. Maybe I'm not seeing the forest for the trees, I'll just stfu and watch.

- David Brooks - Conservative Columnist

#91 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY

David Brooks is NOT a "Conservative Columnist". He is just a poser, and and 0bama ass kisser. geeez!

I say fine, but I want to see all of W's
academic transcripts.

My top 5 reasons the current healthcare bill must NOT be passed:
1) Government-paid healthcare (or health insurance) is NOT a right. (Much less a civil right, as Mr. Kucinich so recklessly emotes) It is a trap, and an excuse to collect and control more tax dollars. Healthcare, like food, is a product/service that we need throughout our lives; we may choose to purchase basics or more costly options, but the market choices and the accompanying cost burdens are rightly our own.
2) The free market benefits everyone. Monopolies (especially government monopolies) harm everyone. (One of the problems at the moment is the market is not free enough insurers are not permitted to compete across state lines)
3) Contrary to what some are saying, insurance choices (the free market) will disappear under the proposed legislation. Private companies cannot compete with subsidized entities. Government insurance will drive all others out of business by collecting more taxes from you and then offering lower prices than the private insurers can sustain - until private insurers are gone - then just watch what will happen to the quality and tax burden.
4) Now, you can seek damages for malpractice. If government takes the helm, such recourse will eventually but inevitably disappear.
5) Much better alternatives exist that do not compromise the free market and do not involve government in the healthcare or insurance businesses, in other words, alternatives that avoid all the pitfalls of the legislation currently under consideration.
#172 | Posted by cal23 at 2010-03-18 01:03 PM

WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. "Free market" amounts to monopolization. Isn't that the situation we are currently in?! You freakish pseudo-conservatives all want tax-exemption, subsidization and other freebies while offshoring underpaid jobs that American workers can't compete with, deregulate costs and then blame that massive expense on our standard of living - which is the entire reason you bypass Americans for employment IN THE FIRST PLACE.

We shouldn't have to pay private health insurers - they are not acting in our best interest whatsoever. Besides, government sponsored health care seems to work perfectly well in the other developed Nations. Much better than our current situation.

Health care should be free to all citizens - you merely want to profit. Your greed is noted.

Why did he cave remains a mystery:

In his announcement today, Kucinich said absolutely nothing to endorse the bill on any its "merits". He even condemned the bill, even as he stated simultaneously that he must submit a yes vote. This makes no sense. Clearly, some unusual, and possibly criminal personal threat was made here.

Dennis Kucinich never just backs down and says "oh well, never mind" It is also clear that the U.S. Senate had, and still has, 50 Senators willing to vote in favor of a public option, if the House sends it to them (which Nancy Pelosi has assured they won't at Obama's own request).

Nothing has changed. There are two primary talking points that are complete fabrications:

There is no true "ban on preexisting conditions". First of all, the clause does not even kick in for 4 whole years, so the Insurance Companies can deny care and eligibility all that they want to for the next 4 whole years. Secondly, when the clause does kick in, it only imposes just a very small penalty (a fine) if they reject people. So for an Insurance Company, it is going to be much cheaper for them to pay a simple $5000 fine, then it would ever be to cover a citizen with a health problem of any consequence (especially someone with a past cancer diagnosis). So, this is all just a big lie. There is no "ban on pre-existing conditions".

The second is that" "the bill will get 30 million new people covered." It does nothing of the kind. All the bill does is to mandate that people write horribly expensive checks to the Insurance Monopolies, and become their victims and slaves with no choices and no options. But no actual "care" is ever assured. The Insurance Companies set all the rules, and can continue to deny treatments, deny surgeries, deny tests, and even terminate your entire policy (for a small fine) if you get too expensive.

he got a "BJ" from "Dear Leader"

I wonder how much that vote cost the tax payer

I think the bill will pass, heads will explode. Don't be too near any right wingers this weekend, it could be quite messy.

#154 | Posted by danni

There is also the danger that we could all be sucked in by the vacuum!

I wonder how much that vote cost the tax payer
#174 | Posted by Maverick at 2010-03-18 07:40 PM

A fair question. At least billions per year in paying for this fake insurance coverage, but with the medical costs and drugs not regulated they will continue to escalate bilking even more from taxes.

Imo, the cost is mostly due to what has not been done, rather than what allegedly has.

I'm certain our various number wizards can come up with a more realistic number than the CBO.

what happens when the dems don't have their majorities in the future?

#4 | POSTED BY EBERLY

You assholes always speak in "what-if's" and "fear monger" when not in power and when in power fuck things up or do nothing.

The teabagger and right need to either play ball or go the fuck home.

It's true then - they offered him Area 51?

It's true then - they offered him Area 51?

#178 | Posted by nanc at 2010-03-19 12:23 AM | Reply | Flag:

Only if Soros is given the keys and the Marxists are given the secret code numbers.... (yes, you are a fucking idiot)

I'd far prefer a single payer system without any "for profit" middleman raising costs and trying to cut my health care. Insurance cos not only do nothing for the benefit of actual health care, they are detrimental.

Kucinich has seen the light that that some plan is better than no plan and I hope he is correct.

Isn't this laughable little weasel supposed to be all about principles?

JM

I don't always agree with Brooks, but I respect the hell out of him for how he conducts himself.

#95 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY

translation...he is a moderate to RINO in SOME cases and since those ALWAYS lose elections, this is the goper the left wants to embrace.

the little turd was on f and f this AM

they ran a clip from a month or so ago. in it he LIED his face off with the following,.
"I signed a committment to not support this without a public option...and I kept my word"

oh really???? you lying little turd?
doesnt seem like that now...

his answer when pressed on it..
well after thinking about it. he thought it was a good start..when asked if the pres offered MORE govt intrusion in the future..(my words.) he hemmed and hawed in a manner worthy of the liar in chief.

and lets not forget his main legacy

POLLED AS THe most miserable city in america?

CLEVELAND!!!!!

Jeeze, you guys are being too insulting! The real crime here being the result of this "vote" was cast before Barack Obama was elected President. All of these proceedings are just a facade, the corporate constructed "legislation" adds nothing terribly new because these insurance agencies have nothing but contempt for the public's need for a public option and medicare for all. It's entirely natural to react to competition, but this amounts to going back in time to kill your enemies father, thus preventing his birth = overkill. These "legislators" detest us enough to forcibly institute a profit schema, knowing doing so results in enforcing the existing unfair stasis and healthcare that won't cover everyone. Faithless, hypocritical bitches. Both parties can act cretinous and without concern for the public interest - both pretend to be controlled by external demands, they claim them as "constituents", intimating different strata of backers, etc.. This "shadow government" charade is inexcusable and sickening, they are public employees (far too long, imo) and subject to publicly demanded impeachment. Many skeletons could be circumvented with any kind of universal health care coverage whatsoever. Democrats would be heralded as ushers of a better age for our childrens children. But that's "off the fucking table" because Pelosi is responding to her "constituents". Kucinich is voting for the "constituents". They are concocting a modern tragedy and enabling a victimizing industry, imo.