On today’s “Morning Meeting with Dylan Ratigan” on MSNBC, Iowa Senator Charles Grassley, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, said that even if the
committee’s final version of a health insurance reform bill gives him everything he says he wants, he will vote against it.
When NBC’s Chuck Todd, in a follow-up question on the show, asked the Iowa Republican if he’d vote against what Grassley might consider to be a “good deal” — i.e., gets everything he asks for from Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus (D) — Grassley replied, “It isn’t a good deal if I can’t sell my product to more Republicans.”
In short, Grassley says he’s willing to walk away from legislation in which he gets everything he wants. Over to you, Max Baucus…
Why won’t our politicians lead nowadays? Is it really that hard to explain to your constituents why unpopular legislation should be passed? It seems that everyone’s afraid to stick their necks out on anything.
#130 Phydeau: Then based upon your arguments, I suppose you have no problems with the Obama-Bush administration using your tax dollars to bail out Wall Street? After all, what’s good for Wall Street is good for Main Street, right?
Would you let 10 strangers die or your wife? /// Usually that question is answered by whether or not affirmative action is required or mere passivity will get the job done. Something deep wired in the human psych as it exists cross culturally. Fun to read about with the several different examples they give.
My wife??? I wouldn’t let 10 cockroaches die instead of my wife. But then she’s a LIEBERTARIAN too. Maybe not a good example.
#129, You missed the point. Just because Medicare was wrong, doesn’t mean passing something else that is wrong makes it right.
#133 A lot of economists seem to agree with some of what Obama’s doing, i.e. putting money in to avoid a bigger crash. But the way it’s being done seems to put no accountability on the banks. If we the taxpayers are propping up the banks, then we by god should get some say in how the money gets spent, and not just handing it to them to spend on whatever you want. Obama seems to be falling down on the job there. But on the other hand, the Republicans would have given even more to the banks if McCain had been elected, because the R’s are owned even more by the big money boys than the D’s.
#132, The only two people griping about it are the two who don’t have the balls to answer it.
#135 LL, we’ll just have to agree to disagree. Medicare was passed, probably even Republicans voted for it. If there were any complaints about it being unconstitutional they were dismissed. Medicare is now the law of the land. So it’s not unreasonable to extend health care to more people. You can claim both are unconstitutional, and that’s a more internally consistent argument, but good luck convincing anyone that Medicare should be revoked because you think it’s unconstitutional.
#126, Loser,
You really want to take this personal. Who said I would let 10 strangers die to save my wife? Oh, that’s right, YOU did. Because you are trying to prove some silly point that I am a hypocrite or selfish or whatever. You fail to understand the difference between what an individual is capable of doing and what society as a whole is capable of. That is the hallmark of a juvenile.
Again, through your postings you have shown you are still a poser.
You claimed you have a wife, yet your attitude shows you don’t.
You claim to work 10 hours per week for charity; but court ordered community service doesn’t count. Those that do, don’t boast about it.
You claim to be making big bucks taking taxpayer money while claiming governments are wasteful. Is there a disconnect here or are you just making shit up as you go.
You claim to own a business with good health benefits yet have no idea about what the costs are to small businesses. You then claimed to have an even better plan for you and your wife, ya right.
You claim you offered Misanthropic Scott a job but he turned you down; even though you never told him what that job would be or any of the intangibles.
You have been careful NOT to be exact about your ‘supposed’ business as there are too many people here that would see right through your facade.
Just another phony on the right.
#135, Loser,
Just because Medicare was wrong, doesn’t mean passing something else that is wrong makes it right.
Again, you are letting your selfishness show.
Medicare is geared for those who are retired and have little income. That means the elderly. The same ones as built this country even before you were a gleam in your daddy’s eye. The ones who sacrificed themselves through sweat and blood. Those who lost brothers, sisters, parents, and even children through our various wars. Those who created the society you want to destroy.
If you care so little about the infrastructure and America’s freedom, why not pay for what you have. Ya, the whole, true cost and then you can just shut the fuck up and move to some Central American country where they like selfish assholes.
Medicare, Social Security, and most other programs designed for the elderly were earned by those receiving them.
>big Health Insurance Companies that contribute so heavily to the Republican party.
Care to look up contributions to Obama and Hillary and McCain, or would you just like to hold on to your stereotypes?
#141 Brace yourself for a shocking revelation, MikeN: Big Biz covers their bets and contributes to *both* parties. Usually more to the party in power, but over time history has shown Big Biz and Republicans are most comfortable with each other.
Social Security and Medicare are not handouts per se because citizens pay into these programs (by force of the government, I might add). The problem is that they provide a very poor return on investment. The benefits one receives from Social Security pale in comparison to the amount that was paid in. To add insult to injury, these benefits are taxed as income. In other words, Social Security is a loser. If given the choice between an individual retirement account or Social Security, I would chose the former. That is why participation in Social Security is mandatory. If it were voluntary, the system would collapse because no one would participate.
#143 Given the recent collapse in the stock market (thanks to those smart Wall Street boys operating without parental supervision), you should thank your lucky stars that you weren’t allowed to invest your share of SS in the stock market.
Kind of an unfortunate example you came up with there, pal. 🙂
But overall, I agree with you that it’s basically a pyramid scheme, and with people having fewer and fewer kids to pay into the system, it will eventually collapse.
#138/#139,
For you, Fido, it’s very simple. You either wish to save your wife’s life or 10 strangers’. Which is it?
For you, Confusion, you’ve already said you would do anything in your power. It is in your power to send those 10 husbands packing. Now we just need to know why?
I’d bet a shiny silver dollar anybody with a set of balls would actually answer this question if it were posed to them.
As I’ve said before, I’m not going away on this until you either see this through or I’m banned. Eventually, you’ll run out of excuses.
#145
Loser,
You are refusing to answer why you didn’t save my father. Why won’t you answer?
#120 LibertyLover:
‘Perhaps that is where Liberals get their definition of a “right?” From two wrongs?’
Nope. Three LEFTS!
#146, You are avoiding the question like all good liberals do.
Please answer the question.
WHY would you save your wife instead of 10 strangers?
#148, Loser,
Why didn’t you save my father?
#148, You are avoiding the question like all good liberals do with a weak attempt to change the subject.
Please answer the question.
WHY would you save your wife instead of 10 strangers?
The sad irony of course is all the “angry callers slamming grassley” are medicare recipients.