If the Republicans regain control, I wonder if they’ll take the blame for not being able to fix a non-fixable set of problems (or don’t really want to fix since it will hurt their friends) in two years. Yeah, right…
With Election Day still a week away, Democrats are previewing what promises to be a main line of argument if Republicans make strong gains in Congress: Conservatives bought their way to power with a flood of spending by outside groups.
These post-mortems, made before the patient is actually dead, have slipped into public statements from top Democrats in recent days. And the argument is being made even more strongly in not-for-attribution comments to reporters from party operatives: A tough-but-manageable political climate turned much more lethal with the infusion of tens of millions of dollars from anonymous donors funding ads for right-leaning independent groups.
The denunciations of outside money by President Barack Obama and others began as a tool to rally the Democratic base before the Nov. 2 election. But in recent days it has morphed gradually into something else: A main talking point to explain—and fend off the recriminations over—what many Washington Democrats assume will be a brutal election night.
I doubt this will be any more brutal than any mid-terms of the past. But the Dems will probably lose the House. The problem is that they had everything to themselves for two years and did nothing other than raise the cost of health care by a LOT. They needed to enact single-payer to end the abuse of the system, but with massive majorities could not do it. And the wars drag on too. Both parties seem intent on keeping the wars going forever.
It does have the advantage of being the truth too. Not the whole truth of course.
Is health care reform like global warming? I hear credible sources say it is going to save money over the next 10 years, and then JCD says it is going to raise the cost “a lot.” Is that a lot more or less than the a lot is going up every year right now? When OMB says it is going to save money, do we disregard that in favor of what we heard at the bar last night or what?
Massive Majorities seems like a total hack partisan spin. By definition: it takes more than a massive majority to pass something when the Senate Republicans are willing to filibuster anything offered by the Dems. That characterization sounds more like Massive BS to me.
Fool, Tool, or ideologue?
The majorities weren’t massive enough to avoid seemingly virtual Republican blocking and filibustering threats. A single-payer bill would’ve probably had every single R-Senator volunteering to filibuster.
Did they ever have a filibuster? Did Americans, by a majority, even support single payer?
Bobbo says: I hear credible sources say it is going to save money over the next 10 years,
The NEXT 10 years – until 2020?
He conveniently avoids mentioning that the Obamacare costs don’t start until 2014. So Bobbo slips 4 cost-free years into his outrageous comment. The real wallop of ObamaCare will come in 2014, when most of the spending begins and businesses and individuals are hit with intrusive and expensive mandates.
To be honest and transparent, the correct question should be: What’s the impact on the 10 years from 2014 to 2024? Hmmm?
And just this week, ObamaCare subsidies are five times higher than originally predicted. The CBO said the cost would be $20 billion on health-exchange subsidies and associated costs. But now the amount is up to $110.1 billion for just the first year. http://bit.ly/carNRS
Analysts have been questioning the alleged savings for months. http://usat.ly/amJbR5
Bobbo asks:
Fool, Tool, or ideologue?
After reading his distorted comment about the Obamacare health savings over the next 10 years and sidestepping the fact that the costs don’t kick in for 4 years, I would have to say:
FOOL
Yeah, both are true. Unlimited corp money has tilted the field to the GOP. Obama is too weak and cautious to push for transformative legislation. Had Obama capitalized on the anger at the GOP after his election he could forced the change he spoke of in his campaign.
My view is that he is a shameless self-promoter who ultimately lacks the strength to twist arms. The extent of his ability is to intelligently describe problems facing the country. Sadly all the big problems that face us are problems of will, not understanding. Obama seems to have become more of a spectator than change agent.
Well said Chris, and if my memory refreshed serves me, JB as well.
Presidents have been trying to make needed changes to our health care system for the last 40 years: none could/did. Obama does look weak, but now that the egg has been broken, hopefully we can move towards single payer once everyone gets on board with omelette days are here.
JB–how firm do you think estimates are 15 years out? “If everything stays the same …. blah, blah, blah.” Indeed, only a fool thinks everything stays the same for 15 years.
Hee, hee=JB forming conclusions based on everything staying the same. Good wingnut thinking there. Did you compare those costs with the costs of healthcare going up as they are now if everything stays the same?
Did you do that Bunky?
#6 “Yeah, both are true. Unlimited corp money has tilted the field to the GOP.”
You should check out this website before making those kinds of generalizations: (especially this one: http://tinyurl.com/5mjamt ) Every voter should have this website bookmarked.
Wanna bet a $100 as to which party gets the most money out the top 10 recipients for this election? Out of the top 20?
Bobbo said: JB–how firm do you think estimates are 15 years out? “If everything stays the same …. blah, blah, blah.” Indeed, only a fool thinks everything stays the same for 15 years.
Glad to see you see the foolishness of predicting costs 15 years out. I saw the fallacy of long-term financial estimates when I lived in Boston and saw the initial predictions of the Boston Big Dig costs.
You’re the one who brought up the subject of a 10-year plan and conveniently sidestepped the issue that the massive costs don’t kick in for 4 years.
I came back with rebuttals and links that are blasting the “savings”. These savings are simply figments of the Obama administration yes-men. All of this courtesy of the Democrats who refused to allow the bill to be publicly reviewed before it was signed.
What do I say, about your support of Obamacare?
I’ll stick with: FOOL
Well JB==you only left out the word/concept of “credible.” And I went with 10 years because I think that is what the OMB report said. Anyone more accepted than the OMB for credibility? No, there isn’t.
But if we both agree that its not credible to think trend lines/legislation will stay the same for 10 or 15 years, whats the “real” argument????
Health care needs to change in America as it is bankrupting us(A) and providing a poor result. Hardly matters at all, may even be expected that the first change to get things rolling would not be any good. Sad we can’t social engineer any better plan, but thats the eggs that we’ve got.
Don’t get me started on the OMB – part of the executive branch and an advocate for the president’s priorities.
Just google Peter Orszag for an amazing view on the way the numbers were distorted. He had 50 full-time health analysts working for him. And yet, he avoided an honest cost analysis of Obamacare. Orszag warned, the government’s future solvency depended on bringing health-care costs under control. That’s great, but where was his warning about Obamacare?
Republicans are putting in place the best government that money can buy!
Dallas:
As CBS Bob Schiefer said to David Axelrod:
Is that the best you can do?
http://bit.ly/9rnpJt
#9 I never said it was contributions. Look at “2010 Outside Spending by Groups” on the same site you suggest. Day by day and for this cycle the GOP is way up. This is because of the Supreme Court decision in the last session about corp money going for elections.
I think the numbers listed are a bit understated. There’s a lot of simulated grass roots stuff built by the right that isn’t captured in pure electioneering spending reports.
Well, thats embarassing. Since my overwhelming bias is that the government lies without relief, I’ve never really noted the difference between the OMB and the CBO. My bad. It was the CBO that made the “impartial” expert finding that Obamacare would save money.
Do I actually believe them? No. Do I think additional changes will be made in the future making any determination almost meaningless? Yes. Am I aware of the accounting games in starting revenue now but delaying expenses for a few years? Not until reminded of it.
Still, health care needs changes that can’t come without breaking eggs and then fixing the mess. USA rarely does things any other way. eg==we still haven’t fixed the financial failure even after 3-4 increasingly larger boom/busts/bubbles over the past 20 years. Anyone want to bet we won’t have another financial crash in the Next 10 years?
Thats how society works when its government is totally corrupt/ed. Money/greed.
Even Obama is backtracking from the claims of saving money with health care reform.
If the GOP wins any majority they’ll see gridlock like never before. (not convinced they’ll win that majority quite yet)
Anything they propose, mostly crazy wingnut stuff and libertarian voodoo, will be shot down quickly via filibuster or veto.
As a result, they will continue to blame the Dems for everything including Apollo 13 and Sony rootkits.
But God help us if that orange Boehner dude gets control of anything. Pelosi is/was useless, but Boehner is dangerous. And he’s nuts.
#20
If the GOP wins any majority they’ll see gridlock like never before. (not convinced they’ll win that majority quite yet)
Gridlock would be an improvement over pissing away billions of the taxpayer’s money.
As a result, they will continue to blame the Dems for everything including Apollo 13 and Sony rootkits.
And the Dems will continue to blame Bush for everything including rainy days and the common cold.
Pelosi is/was useless, but Boehner is dangerous. And he’s nuts.
You make it sound as if Pelosi isn’t nuts.
#9 “This is because of the Supreme Court decision in the last session about corp money going for elections.”
Let me correct this for you, “This is because of the Supreme Court decision in the last session about corp AND UNION money going for elections.”
I’m with John on this one. I think there is a lot of manufactured hand wringing so the day after the election when it’s not a complete political apocalypse for the Dems they can claim a victory. Clinton was the best at that game.
#23 and #17 I point out that website because I get tired of the “axiom” that the Republicans get all the money from big corporate lobbyists. Christ on a cracker man, look at the huge money going to the Dems from big corporate lobbyists.
#22
Thomas, you must be referring to Medicare Part D….pissing away billions.
Here, let me correct that for you: “You must also be referring to Medicare Part D…pissing away billions”.
Yep. Just like the that. Just like the porkulus bill.
#6
“Had Obama capitalized on the anger at the GOP after his election he could forced the change he spoke of in his campaign.”
How can a plutocrat change a system that is made exclusively of plutocrats?
Like asking a wolf to come and redecorate the wolf’s den.
You all are so naive. The republicans if they get control will then toady to the same corporations that helped the democrats get elected. And when they don’t do enough for them. The corporations will back the democrats with more money and over and over and over.
When will you all realise that we cannot have change with the current system. That no matter what plutocrat you vote in it will not change because it is the same critters.
Wake the fuck up you drunk monkeys! Get off the chemicals and wake up.
Cursor_
Alfred, you’re living in a fantasy world. You really think federal taxes are the reason manufacturing went overseas? You really think wiping out unions (which are only a small part of the working base anymore) would make that much of a difference? Overseas manufacturers produce goods at prices far below what domestic ones can because they pay their workers at levels US workers can’t live on. Cutting what you say would only be a part of the difference.
No, politicians promises aside, manufacturing is gone and not coming back. We are a service- based economy now.
U-Dave…that’s the “regulations” part of the argument. Kill off the minimum wage, eliminate overtime and child labor laws, eliminate unemployment insurance and FICA contributions, neuter OSHA even further, the FTC and EPA too, eliminate all ‘frivolous’ lawsuits, and maybe then businesses will be able to compete with foreign manufacturers.
It’s that simple.
/snark
Uncle Dave, you need to do a bit more research on unions.
The private sector unions are not the problem. It is public sector unions with their 6 digit salaries and multi-billion unfunded sweet-heart retirement packages.
3 unions in California alone are in the hole for $550 billion due to their unfunded pensions. That’s half a trillion dollars in just one state! And guess who is going to bail them out? Yup, we are.