The Tea Party is back in business! (1 Viewer)

[BigSteelThrill]

The bottom line is there are no winners or losers here

Bullcrap.

Okay, without using your opinion, which political party actually won something here? I mean, unless you have a crystal ball and can tell us what the results are of the mid-terms some 13 months in advance.

However, as I posted above, it is clear we as Americans are losing on many levels as this impasses continues.

You have had several consistent R voters on this very forum say this was a breaking point for them towards even thinking about voting R again.

Now mind you, they are bit more "centered" and not so "extreme", but the truth remains. And if you don't think that's happened outside of our little FBG wonderland you're kidding yourself.

 

[timschochet]

Polling is no longer a reflection of public opinion; polling is the creation of public opinion. Polling is an effort to manipulate and move public opinion.

As amusing as this comment is, it's also disturbing, because it's part of what David Frum was writing about:

Habit 5: Self-reinforcing media.

The actor Hugh Grant once bitterly characterized his PR team as “the people I pay to lie to me.” Politicians do not always need to tell the truth, but they always need to hear it. Yet hearing the truth has become harder and harder for Republicans. It takes a very unusual spin artist to remember that what he or she is saying isn’t actually true. Non-politicians say what they believe. Politicians sooner or later arrive at the point where they believe what they say. They have become prisoners of their own artificial reality, with no easy access to the larger truths outside. This entombment in their own artificial reality was revealed to the entire TV-watching world in Karl Rove’s Fox News election night outburst against the Ohio 2012 ballot results. It was the same entombment that blinded Republicans to the most likely outcome of their no-compromise stance on Obamacare—and now again today to the most likely outcome of the government shutdown/debt ceiling fight they started.

Rush Limbaugh began his career, over 20 years ago, by claiming that the mainstream media had a liberal bias and could not be trusted to report the "truth"- a "truth" which generally favors conservatism. Over 2 decades, that belief has grown to the point where nearly every conservative accepts it.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

The bottom line is there are no winners or losers here

Bullcrap.

Okay, without using your opinion, which political party actually won something here? I mean, unless you have a crystal ball and can tell us what the results are of the mid-terms some 13 months in advance.

However, as I posted above, it is clear we as Americans are losing on many levels as this impasses continues.

You are correct. This is just another nail in the coffin of the GOP as we have known it the past 18 or so years. Whether America wins or loses depends on what emerges to take its place. Or more importantly how the 7 or so ideological factions reorganize into coalitions. Oh, and whether we continue with the current "fiscal conservative/responsible" definition or if we somehow manage to return the responsibility.

 

[timschochet]

The bottom line is there are no winners or losers here

Bullcrap.

Okay, without using your opinion, which political party actually won something here? I mean, unless you have a crystal ball and can tell us what the results are of the mid-terms some 13 months in advance.

However, as I posted above, it is clear we as Americans are losing on many levels as this impasses continues.

http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/opinion/op_ed/2013/10/obama_s_in_tight_spot

Did you perhaps notice that not once in that article did Scott Rassmussen, who is a well-known conservative pollster, cite any numbers? He claims, in opposition to nearly everyone else, that Obama is the one losing among the public, and yet he doesn't offer a single poll result to back it up. Doesn't that seem just a little odd to you?

 

[dparker713]

Tim, the problem is you have such a hard on for the Tea Party that you have lost all objectivity in this thread. You are like a doll with one of those pull strings in its back that can only say three different phrases.

The bottom line is there are no winners or losers here (well, other than the American people losing again). A deal will get done. Both sides will claim they won something or got something done. Americans, with their attention spans of gnats, will move on to the next subject and a year from now we will be discussing the next big political "thing".

CNN/ORC poll from earlier this week:

63% of those polled were angry at the GOP

57% of those polled were equally angry at the Dems

53% of those polled also blamed the President.

These numbers were also echoed by a Pew poll.

The WSJ/NBC Poll and many,many others have waaayy different numbers that were extremely damning to the GOP. See how each side can cherry pick their numbers to substantiate their legitimacy or their position?

And keep this quote in mind from ABC News:

"Overall, views now look very much like those after the government shutdowns in 1995-96. In ABC/Post polling in January 1996, Bill Clinton had a 42-50 percent score for handling the situation, the Republicans in Congress 20-74 percent. Neither seemed to much impact the 1996 election 10 months later, in which Clinton won re-election but the Republicans held the House and Senate alike"

I know you are hoping with all your might that this is some kind of continuing mandate, but this country has been down this road before and in the grand scheme of our political history, this is nothing but a blip.

Court Jester, you were one of the handful of conservatives in this forum that criticized what the House was doing when this crisis first started, and I respect you greatly for that. Of course I am biased against the Tea Party. Of course I want them to be discredited and repudiated. So I am hopeful that happens. If it does not, it does not.

I am opposed to the Democrats' economic policies as a general rule. I would like a centrist, moderate Republican party which continued to press for free trade, slashing corporate tax rates, reforming entitlements, making it easier for start up companies and technologies with less red tape restrictions, but also is more open to immigration concerns, social issues, and in general is able to compromise with the other side to achieve big things. In order to have the sort of political party I would support, the Tea Party people have to be defeated.

$1.5 Trillion in cash isn't enough?

 

[timschochet]

The bottom line is there are no winners or losers here

Bullcrap.

Okay, without using your opinion, which political party actually won something here? I mean, unless you have a crystal ball and can tell us what the results are of the mid-terms some 13 months in advance.

However, as I posted above, it is clear we as Americans are losing on many levels as this impasses continues.

BIgSteelThrill and other progressives are hoping, obviously, that this will result in a Democratic swing in the next election and perhaps even a House reversal. It might, especially if they don't reach a deal fairly quickly, but I doubt it. Too much gerrymandering as Nate Silver correctly points out.

The larger issue is that this situation, on top of immigration and several other dynamics, will lead to a dominance for Democrat candidates for President over the next two decades or more. That is my main fear. I don't want that. I would like a strong Republican party, not a weak one.

 

[timschochet]

Tim, the problem is you have such a hard on for the Tea Party that you have lost all objectivity in this thread. You are like a doll with one of those pull strings in its back that can only say three different phrases.

The bottom line is there are no winners or losers here (well, other than the American people losing again). A deal will get done. Both sides will claim they won something or got something done. Americans, with their attention spans of gnats, will move on to the next subject and a year from now we will be discussing the next big political "thing".

CNN/ORC poll from earlier this week:

63% of those polled were angry at the GOP

57% of those polled were equally angry at the Dems

53% of those polled also blamed the President.

These numbers were also echoed by a Pew poll.

The WSJ/NBC Poll and many,many others have waaayy different numbers that were extremely damning to the GOP. See how each side can cherry pick their numbers to substantiate their legitimacy or their position?

And keep this quote in mind from ABC News:

"Overall, views now look very much like those after the government shutdowns in 1995-96. In ABC/Post polling in January 1996, Bill Clinton had a 42-50 percent score for handling the situation, the Republicans in Congress 20-74 percent. Neither seemed to much impact the 1996 election 10 months later, in which Clinton won re-election but the Republicans held the House and Senate alike"

I know you are hoping with all your might that this is some kind of continuing mandate, but this country has been down this road before and in the grand scheme of our political history, this is nothing but a blip.

Court Jester, you were one of the handful of conservatives in this forum that criticized what the House was doing when this crisis first started, and I respect you greatly for that. Of course I am biased against the Tea Party. Of course I want them to be discredited and repudiated. So I am hopeful that happens. If it does not, it does not.

I am opposed to the Democrats' economic policies as a general rule. I would like a centrist, moderate Republican party which continued to press for free trade, slashing corporate tax rates, reforming entitlements, making it easier for start up companies and technologies with less red tape restrictions, but also is more open to immigration concerns, social issues, and in general is able to compromise with the other side to achieve big things. In order to have the sort of political party I would support, the Tea Party people have to be defeated.

$1.5 Trillion in cash isn't enough?

No, but we can argue it later in a different thread.

 

[Courtjester]

The bottom line is there are no winners or losers here

Bullcrap.

Okay, without using your opinion, which political party actually won something here? I mean, unless you have a crystal ball and can tell us what the results are of the mid-terms some 13 months in advance.

However, as I posted above, it is clear we as Americans are losing on many levels as this impasses continues.

You have had several consistent R voters on this very forum say this was a breaking point for them towards even thinking about voting R again.

Now mind you, they are bit more "centered" and not so "extreme", but the truth remains. And if you don't think that's happened outside of our little FBG wonderland you're kidding yourself.

You make a very good point, but in the amount of defining who won, we won't know that until the mid-terms. If you see the Dems pick up seats, then you are right.

But keep in mind, all this means a hill of beans in the big picture if let's say enrollment problems for the ACA continue or they don't get the numbers they need to fund the program or let's say the premiums and coverage are not what was promised. The public perception will be "shutdown?? what is this shutdown you talk of??

Polls mean jack right now in determining who the real winners ultimately will be in this case.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

But keep in mind, all this means a hill of beans in the big picture if let's say enrollment problems for the ACA continue or they don't get the numbers they need to fund the program or let's say the premiums and coverage are not what was promised. The public perception will be "shutdown?? what is this shutdown you talk of??

Cool! We tried health care reform the conservative way and it failed. Lets try it the right way now - single government payer!

 

[Carolina Hustler]

I say the dems refuse to sign a funding bill until marijuana is federally legalized and blame the shutdown on the GOP.

That would be nice... Not that I partake, but I think fighting marijuana is a waste of time and resources..

 

[Henry Ford]

I say the dems refuse to sign a funding bill until marijuana is federally legalized and blame the shutdown on the GOP.

That would be nice... Not that I partake, but I think fighting marijuana is a waste of time and resources..

Same here. Cutting funding for dealing with marijuana being illegal and taxing it would be a bigger revenue issue than the ACA. Let's make this happen.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Tim, the problem is you have such a hard on for the Tea Party that you have lost all objectivity in this thread. You are like a doll with one of those pull strings in its back that can only say three different phrases.

The bottom line is there are no winners or losers here (well, other than the American people losing again). A deal will get done. Both sides will claim they won something or got something done. Americans, with their attention spans of gnats, will move on to the next subject and a year from now we will be discussing the next big political "thing".

CNN/ORC poll from earlier this week:

63% of those polled were angry at the GOP

57% of those polled were equally angry at the Dems

53% of those polled also blamed the President.

These numbers were also echoed by a Pew poll.

The WSJ/NBC Poll and many,many others have waaayy different numbers that were extremely damning to the GOP. See how each side can cherry pick their numbers to substantiate their legitimacy or their position?

And keep this quote in mind from ABC News:

"Overall, views now look very much like those after the government shutdowns in 1995-96. In ABC/Post polling in January 1996, Bill Clinton had a 42-50 percent score for handling the situation, the Republicans in Congress 20-74 percent. Neither seemed to much impact the 1996 election 10 months later, in which Clinton won re-election but the Republicans held the House and Senate alike"

I know you are hoping with all your might that this is some kind of continuing mandate, but this country has been down this road before and in the grand scheme of our political history, this is nothing but a blip.

Enough of this reality, back to the ignorance.. Bigsteelthrill, Tim, carry on please..

 

[spreagle]

Polling is no longer a reflection of public opinion; polling is the creation of public opinion. Polling is an effort to manipulate and move public opinion.

As amusing as this comment is, it's also disturbing, because it's part of what David Frum was writing about:

Habit 5: Self-reinforcing media.

The actor Hugh Grant once bitterly characterized his PR team as “the people I pay to lie to me.” Politicians do not always need to tell the truth, but they always need to hear it. Yet hearing the truth has become harder and harder for Republicans. It takes a very unusual spin artist to remember that what he or she is saying isn’t actually true. Non-politicians say what they believe. Politicians sooner or later arrive at the point where they believe what they say. They have become prisoners of their own artificial reality, with no easy access to the larger truths outside. This entombment in their own artificial reality was revealed to the entire TV-watching world in Karl Rove’s Fox News election night outburst against the Ohio 2012 ballot results. It was the same entombment that blinded Republicans to the most likely outcome of their no-compromise stance on Obamacare—and now again today to the most likely outcome of the government shutdown/debt ceiling fight they started.

Rush Limbaugh began his career, over 20 years ago, by claiming that the mainstream media had a liberal bias and could not be trusted to report the "truth"- a "truth" which generally favors conservatism. Over 2 decades, that belief has grown to the point where nearly every conservative accepts it.

The default setting of peoples brains is to automatically believe what they are told, especially if it comes from someone projecting authority and confidence, like the liberal media hammering the tea party or Obama giving the same speech 3 times a day (People believe what they are told because it is too much work and stress to call BS on everything). After such a media blitzkrieg, a pollster projecting confidence with a leading question can turn the dial to whatever poll result they want.

Only after a period of time do people sometimes reconsider whether what they were told was BS or not. The fact Limbaughs theory has stood the test of time with innumerable examples means it is generally true, not that it is untrue and he has simply conditioned his audience to believe it.

 

[The Commish]

I say the dems refuse to sign a funding bill until marijuana is federally legalized and blame the shutdown on the GOP.

Were you a fly on the wall of my house last night? These very words came out of my mouth to my wife. I'm even good with damning up the funds for the "war on drugs"....one of the biggest wastes in this country's history.

 

[RCon]

Most likely the deal will be done by Monday or Tuesday at the latest. Per Politico, it's a huge victory for Obama, and a total defeat for conservatives. The turning point was the Thursday night Wall Street Journal poll which showed Republican approval down to 21%- the lowest ever. Both Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin angrily tried to claim the poll was a fraud today, but the Republican leadership knew better: it was time to surrender and fight another day.

Do you ever S T F U? How many posts of pure speculation do you honestly need to make on this forum? The deal will be done will it's done, not when you think it will. We don't need you to needlessly drone on and on with your opinions!

Getting upset with the probable outcome here? I can see why. Your stance and the people you like are about to be thoroughly repudiated and embarrassed. Feel free to continue to take if out on me; I don't mind.

To be fair, that was about the seventeenth time you've posted something along the lines of "looks like a deal is in the works now".

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Senate Republicans fillibustered today's vote on a clean debt limit bill.

 

[RCon]

But keep in mind, all this means a hill of beans in the big picture if let's say enrollment problems for the ACA continue or they don't get the numbers they need to fund the program or let's say the premiums and coverage are not what was promised. The public perception will be "shutdown?? what is this shutdown you talk of??

Cool! We tried health care reform the conservative way and it failed. Lets try it the right way now - single government payer!

We have?

 

[timschochet]

Most likely the deal will be done by Monday or Tuesday at the latest. Per Politico, it's a huge victory for Obama, and a total defeat for conservatives. The turning point was the Thursday night Wall Street Journal poll which showed Republican approval down to 21%- the lowest ever. Both Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin angrily tried to claim the poll was a fraud today, but the Republican leadership knew better: it was time to surrender and fight another day.

Do you ever S T F U? How many posts of pure speculation do you honestly need to make on this forum? The deal will be done will it's done, not when you think it will. We don't need you to needlessly drone on and on with your opinions!

Getting upset with the probable outcome here? I can see why. Your stance and the people you like are about to be thoroughly repudiated and embarrassed. Feel free to continue to take if out on me; I don't mind.

To be fair, that was about the seventeenth time you've posted something along the lines of "looks like a deal is in the works now".

That's what Politico is doing.

 

[Soonerman]

But keep in mind, all this means a hill of beans in the big picture if let's say enrollment problems for the ACA continue or they don't get the numbers they need to fund the program or let's say the premiums and coverage are not what was promised. The public perception will be "shutdown?? what is this shutdown you talk of??

Cool! We tried health care reform the conservative way and it failed. Lets try it the right way now - single government payer!

What a joke.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

But keep in mind, all this means a hill of beans in the big picture if let's say enrollment problems for the ACA continue or they don't get the numbers they need to fund the program or let's say the premiums and coverage are not what was promised. The public perception will be "shutdown?? what is this shutdown you talk of??

Cool! We tried health care reform the conservative way and it failed. Lets try it the right way now - single government payer!

We have?

For most of history.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

But keep in mind, all this means a hill of beans in the big picture if let's say enrollment problems for the ACA continue or they don't get the numbers they need to fund the program or let's say the premiums and coverage are not what was promised. The public perception will be "shutdown?? what is this shutdown you talk of??

Cool! We tried health care reform the conservative way and it failed. Lets try it the right way now - single government payer!

What a joke.

It would be funny if the results haven't been so tragic.

 

[Soonerman]

But keep in mind, all this means a hill of beans in the big picture if let's say enrollment problems for the ACA continue or they don't get the numbers they need to fund the program or let's say the premiums and coverage are not what was promised. The public perception will be "shutdown?? what is this shutdown you talk of??

Cool! We tried health care reform the conservative way and it failed. Lets try it the right way now - single government payer!

What a joke.

It would be funny if the results haven't been so tragic.

Yes it is tragic how government has come to dominate health care spending, with all the market failures that entails. And you call this "the conservative way". You might want to read up on what true conservative reforms look like.

 

[RCon]

But keep in mind, all this means a hill of beans in the big picture if let's say enrollment problems for the ACA continue or they don't get the numbers they need to fund the program or let's say the premiums and coverage are not what was promised. The public perception will be "shutdown?? what is this shutdown you talk of??

Cool! We tried health care reform the conservative way and it failed. Lets try it the right way now - single government payer!

We have?

For most of history.

Nah, we've never tried it an intelligent, conservative way. There are plenty of good ideas, but nearly all of them remove power from politicians, and/or would reduce corporate campaign contributions, so they don't get tried.

 

[The Commish]

But keep in mind, all this means a hill of beans in the big picture if let's say enrollment problems for the ACA continue or they don't get the numbers they need to fund the program or let's say the premiums and coverage are not what was promised. The public perception will be "shutdown?? what is this shutdown you talk of??

Cool! We tried health care reform the conservative way and it failed. Lets try it the right way now - single government payer!

I thought you were in favor of ACA no?

 

[RCon]

Most likely the deal will be done by Monday or Tuesday at the latest. Per Politico, it's a huge victory for Obama, and a total defeat for conservatives. The turning point was the Thursday night Wall Street Journal poll which showed Republican approval down to 21%- the lowest ever. Both Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin angrily tried to claim the poll was a fraud today, but the Republican leadership knew better: it was time to surrender and fight another day.

Do you ever S T F U? How many posts of pure speculation do you honestly need to make on this forum? The deal will be done will it's done, not when you think it will. We don't need you to needlessly drone on and on with your opinions!

Getting upset with the probable outcome here? I can see why. Your stance and the people you like are about to be thoroughly repudiated and embarrassed. Feel free to continue to take if out on me; I don't mind.

To be fair, that was about the seventeenth time you've posted something along the lines of "looks like a deal is in the works now".

That's what Politico is doing.

If Politico jumped off a bridge, would you?

 

[DrJ]

But keep in mind, all this means a hill of beans in the big picture if let's say enrollment problems for the ACA continue or they don't get the numbers they need to fund the program or let's say the premiums and coverage are not what was promised. The public perception will be "shutdown?? what is this shutdown you talk of??

Cool! We tried health care reform the conservative way and it failed. Lets try it the right way now - single government payer!

Seems like it's been a pile of liberal solutions so far to me, with Medicare proving to be the greatest failure in modern medical history.If that isn't enough proof that liberals are failures we could just take a look at education, housing, or basically any other liberal pet program.

 

[DrJ]

The bottom line is there are no winners or losers here

Bullcrap.

Okay, without using your opinion, which political party actually won something here? I mean, unless you have a crystal ball and can tell us what the results are of the mid-terms some 13 months in advance.However, as I posted above, it is clear we as Americans are losing on many levels as this impasses continues.

You are correct. This is just another nail in the coffin of the GOP as we have known it the past 18 or so years. Whether America wins or loses depends on what emerges to take its place. Or more importantly how the 7 or so ideological factions reorganize into coalitions. Oh, and whether we continue with the current "fiscal conservative/responsible" definition or if we somehow manage to return the responsibility.

Yep, enough of the party that's been the liberal lap dogs for 18 or so years (if not more). Time to actually represent their base rather than playing liberal lite like they've done since probably FDR.Don't worry, the Tea Party is going to grow on you guys.

 

[timschochet]

Most likely the deal will be done by Monday or Tuesday at the latest. Per Politico, it's a huge victory for Obama, and a total defeat for conservatives. The turning point was the Thursday night Wall Street Journal poll which showed Republican approval down to 21%- the lowest ever. Both Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin angrily tried to claim the poll was a fraud today, but the Republican leadership knew better: it was time to surrender and fight another day.

Do you ever S T F U? How many posts of pure speculation do you honestly need to make on this forum? The deal will be done will it's done, not when you think it will. We don't need you to needlessly drone on and on with your opinions!

Getting upset with the probable outcome here? I can see why. Your stance and the people you like are about to be thoroughly repudiated and embarrassed. Feel free to continue to take if out on me; I don't mind.

To be fair, that was about the seventeenth time you've posted something along the lines of "looks like a deal is in the works now".

That's what Politico is doing.

If Politico jumped off a bridge, would you?

Yes I think I would.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

But keep in mind, all this means a hill of beans in the big picture if let's say enrollment problems for the ACA continue or they don't get the numbers they need to fund the program or let's say the premiums and coverage are not what was promised. The public perception will be "shutdown?? what is this shutdown you talk of??

Cool! We tried health care reform the conservative way and it failed. Lets try it the right way now - single government payer!

I thought you were in favor of ACA no?

The ACA is a minor realignment of the government with the trends in the health care industry. The industry knows that the economy cannot sustain the explosive costs of the recent past. I just a made a large post in the ACA thread to explain this. (No I am neither an insider nor an expert.)

As to that ACA I don't how much longer our mix model healthcare system that it is based on can last.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

But keep in mind, all this means a hill of beans in the big picture if let's say enrollment problems for the ACA continue or they don't get the numbers they need to fund the program or let's say the premiums and coverage are not what was promised. The public perception will be "shutdown?? what is this shutdown you talk of??

Cool! We tried health care reform the conservative way and it failed. Lets try it the right way now - single government payer!

We have?

For most of history.

Nah, we've never tried it an intelligent, conservative way. There are plenty of good ideas, but nearly all of them remove power from politicians, and/or would reduce corporate campaign contributions, so they don't get tried.

If you are saying that there are probably better ways to implement a public health system than what we have today, I probably agree. If you are suggesting that we shouldn't have the public health care system at all then you are ignoring history. The systems we have here and the systems elsewhere didn't pop into existence on their own. That is they are all attempts to solve the failures of a private healthcare system.

 

[The Commish]

But keep in mind, all this means a hill of beans in the big picture if let's say enrollment problems for the ACA continue or they don't get the numbers they need to fund the program or let's say the premiums and coverage are not what was promised. The public perception will be "shutdown?? what is this shutdown you talk of??

Cool! We tried health care reform the conservative way and it failed. Lets try it the right way now - single government payer!

I thought you were in favor of ACA no?

The ACA is a minor realignment of the government with the trends in the health care industry. The industry knows that the economy cannot sustain the explosive costs of the recent past. I just a made a large post in the ACA thread to explain this. (No I am neither an insider nor an expert.)

As to that ACA I don't how much longer our mix model healthcare system that it is based on can last.

So you're good bypassing this ACA fiasco and trying single payer? Couldn't tell from your original post if you thought this solution was "single payer" or you were suggesting that ACA is basically the repub solution from a couple decades ago and it was time to move on to something else.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

The systems we have here and the systems elsewhere didn't pop into existence on their own. That is they are all attempts to solve the failures of a private healthcare system.

FDA

Social Security

OSHA

Banking Regulation

Medicare

Medicaid

The Voting Rights Act

EPA

ACA

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

All the #### conservatives like to ##### about most are in existence specifically because of the times when some segment of society worked pretty much exactly like conservatives dream about.

Don't like government programs? Stop ####### people.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

But keep in mind, all this means a hill of beans in the big picture if let's say enrollment problems for the ACA continue or they don't get the numbers they need to fund the program or let's say the premiums and coverage are not what was promised. The public perception will be "shutdown?? what is this shutdown you talk of??

Cool! We tried health care reform the conservative way and it failed. Lets try it the right way now - single government payer!

What a joke.

It would be funny if the results haven't been so tragic.

Yes it is tragic how government has come to dominate health care spending, with all the market failures that entails. And you call this "the conservative way". You might want to read up on what true conservative reforms look like.

Medicare/Medicaid/ACA, etc. weren't responses to the successes of the private healthcare system.

• And making Medicaid a block grant will be fine for those lucky enough to live on the west coast or the north east, but a disaster for the bulk of the needy elsewhere.
• Vouchers for Medicare is fine, but the Ryan proposal is criminal!
• Extending tax expenditures for individuals that purchase insurance might be "fair", but tax expenditures as a whole need to go away.
• Creating a race to the bottom by allowing the state where insurance is sold to set the regulatory requirements rather than where is the insurance is bought will mean we are all covered by Great Benefit.
• I like HSAs
• Medicare C (Advantage Plans) suggests that the private market can't do more for less.
• Medicaid MSOs (at least here in MD) suggests that the private market can do more for the same if it can cherry pick populations

I'll stop here...

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

But keep in mind, all this means a hill of beans in the big picture if let's say enrollment problems for the ACA continue or they don't get the numbers they need to fund the program or let's say the premiums and coverage are not what was promised. The public perception will be "shutdown?? what is this shutdown you talk of??

Cool! We tried health care reform the conservative way and it failed. Lets try it the right way now - single government payer!

I thought you were in favor of ACA no?

The ACA is a minor realignment of the government with the trends in the health care industry. The industry knows that the economy cannot sustain the explosive costs of the recent past. I just a made a large post in the ACA thread to explain this. (No I am neither an insider nor an expert.)

As to that ACA I don't how much longer our mix model healthcare system that it is based on can last.

So you're good bypassing this ACA fiasco and trying single payer? Couldn't tell from your original post if you thought this solution was "single payer" or you were suggesting that ACA is basically the repub solution from a couple decades ago and it was time to move on to something else.

The ACA is certainly an attempt to thwart off moving towards "single payer", but I'm not necessarily certain that "single payer" is the best way to go. It is probably the simplest and easiest to imagine, but I could have also seen something like

• The government provides tax credits making routine care (annual checkups, vaccines, routine diagnostic test, etc.) desirable to have. (i.e. it more than pays for the care. For the same reason that "wellness" plans have been popping up paying you to do stuff that could save money.)
• Have the government fund a HSA for every American every year (lets say $5000 because it is a nice round number)
• The government throws in a senior bonus for those over 65 to account for no more Medicare,
• The government provide "catastrophic" coverage at some level (lets say anything above $100,000 because it is also a nice round number)
• Individuals are mandated to buy coverage between their HSA balance and the start of the catastrophic level. So one could save and eventually be self insured.
• ACA type rules for Insurers (pre-existing conditions, can't drop members, pricing rules, etc.)

Seen because I think the time for the above or some variation was a few years ago and now, I think it is too late.

This stuff was added.

 

[RCon]

The systems we have here and the systems elsewhere didn't pop into existence on their own. That is they are all attempts to solve the failures of a private healthcare system.

FDA

Social Security

OSHA

Banking Regulation

Medicare

Medicaid

The Voting Rights Act

EPA

ACA

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

All the #### conservatives like to ##### about most are in existence specifically because of the times when some segment of society worked pretty much exactly like conservatives dream about.

Don't like government programs? Stop ####### people.

There's a difference between regulating private enterprise and jumping in as an enterprise. I'm not a fan of government being both regulator and participant. Actually, government as regulator is kind of poor in practice, due to corruption and cronyism, but it's still better than government as regulator, buyer, and seller.

 

[RCon]

But keep in mind, all this means a hill of beans in the big picture if let's say enrollment problems for the ACA continue or they don't get the numbers they need to fund the program or let's say the premiums and coverage are not what was promised. The public perception will be "shutdown?? what is this shutdown you talk of??

Cool! We tried health care reform the conservative way and it failed. Lets try it the right way now - single government payer!

I thought you were in favor of ACA no?

The ACA is a minor realignment of the government with the trends in the health care industry. The industry knows that the economy cannot sustain the explosive costs of the recent past. I just a made a large post in the ACA thread to explain this. (No I am neither an insider nor an expert.)

As to that ACA I don't how much longer our mix model healthcare system that it is based on can last.

So you're good bypassing this ACA fiasco and trying single payer? Couldn't tell from your original post if you thought this solution was "single payer" or you were suggesting that ACA is basically the repub solution from a couple decades ago and it was time to move on to something else.

The ACA is certainly an attempt to thwart off moving towards "single payer", but I'm not necessarily certain that "single payer" is the best way to go. It is probably the simplest and easiest to imagine, but I could have also seen something like

• The government provides tax credits making routine care (annual checkups, vaccines, routine diagnostic test, etc.) desirable to have. (i.e. it more than pays for the care. For the same reason that "wellness" plans have been popping up paying you to do stuff that could save money.)
• Have the government fund a HSA for every American every year (lets say $5000 because it is a nice round number)
• The government throws in a senior bonus for those over 65 to account for no more Medicare,
• The government provide "catastrophic" coverage at some level (lets say anything above $100,000 because it is also a nice round number)
• Individuals are mandated to buy coverage between their HSA balance and the start of the catastrophic level. So one could save and eventually be self insured.
• ACA type rules for Insurers (pre-existing conditions, can't drop members, pricing rules, etc.)

Seen because I think the time for the above or some variation was a few years ago and now, I think it is too late. This stuff was added.

Not bad. Much better than the crapfest we have now, and had prior to ACA. It's not regulation that bothers me; it's inefficient, stupid, and/or corrupt regulation that bothers me. Example 1: disallowing drug reimportation is simply a way to reward drug companies at the expense of citizens. It's an example where simpletons look to government to "help lower health care costs", ignoring the fact that government is actually the cause of high costs in this area.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

The systems we have here and the systems elsewhere didn't pop into existence on their own. That is they are all attempts to solve the failures of a private healthcare system.

FDA

Social Security

OSHA

Banking Regulation

Medicare

Medicaid

The Voting Rights Act

EPA

ACA

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

All the #### conservatives like to ##### about most are in existence specifically because of the times when some segment of society worked pretty much exactly like conservatives dream about.

Don't like government programs? Stop ####### people.

There's a difference between regulating private enterprise and jumping in as an enterprise. I'm not a fan of government being both regulator and participant. Actually, government as regulator is kind of poor in practice, due to corruption and cronyism, but it's still better than government as regulator, buyer, and seller.

My comment wasn't really intended to be about ACA so much as where all these government programs originated. But I'm with you in theory.

In fact I think I'm with you all the way -- I agree government is subject to corruption and cronyism -- I just find those issues easier to live with than the problems associated with unchecked corporate power. Pick your poison I suppose.

 

[the moops]

There's a difference between regulating private enterprise and jumping in as an enterprise. I'm not a fan of government being both regulator and participant. Actually, government as regulator is kind of poor in practice, due to corruption and cronyism, but it's still better than government as regulator, buyer, and seller.

When you go to the health care exchanges, you are not buying healthcare or health insurance from the government.

 

[RCon]

There's a difference between regulating private enterprise and jumping in as an enterprise. I'm not a fan of government being both regulator and participant. Actually, government as regulator is kind of poor in practice, due to corruption and cronyism, but it's still better than government as regulator, buyer, and seller.

When you go to the health care exchanges, you are not buying healthcare or health insurance from the government.

So there are no government run health care providers?

 

[Dr Oadi]

There's a difference between regulating private enterprise and jumping in as an enterprise. I'm not a fan of government being both regulator and participant. Actually, government as regulator is kind of poor in practice, due to corruption and cronyism, but it's still better than government as regulator, buyer, and seller.

When you go to the health care exchanges, you are not buying healthcare or health insurance from the government.

So there are no government run health care providers?

The VA?

 

[Henry Ford]

I say the dems refuse to sign a funding bill until marijuana is federally legalized and blame the shutdown on the GOP.

Were you a fly on the wall of my house last night? These very words came out of my mouth to my wife. I'm even good with damning up the funds for the "war on drugs"....one of the biggest wastes in this country's history.

Of course not. How would I even know which house was yours? Wait, maybe. Do you collect old sex toys?

 

[Homer J Simpson]

But keep in mind, all this means a hill of beans in the big picture if let's say enrollment problems for the ACA continue or they don't get the numbers they need to fund the program or let's say the premiums and coverage are not what was promised. The public perception will be "shutdown?? what is this shutdown you talk of??

Cool! We tried health care reform the conservative way and it failed. Lets try it the right way now - single government payer!

Seems like it's been a pile of liberal solutions so far to me, with Medicare proving to be the greatest failure in modern medical history.If that isn't enough proof that liberals are failures we could just take a look at education, housing, or basically any other liberal pet program.

Gonna need you to explain that Medicare thing.

 

[Lutherman2112]

The dumbest people on earth.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

In case you missed it Senate Dems rejected the most recent proposal. I'm not making any editorial comments here except that I think this is a nice summary of where we stand, and why:

Three main arguments were made against the Collins deal. First, it locks in sequestration levels of spending for six months. Key Senate Democrats see that as a much larger, and more dangerous, concession than the old CR, which only agrees to it for six weeks. Democrats don't know how they're going to get rid of sequestration. But they don't want to agree to it.
Second, the deal's delay of the medical device tax meant it was, in fact, a concession in order to reopen the government -- and Democrats think it's important to convince the GOP that they can't win anything through this kind of hostage taking.

Third, in a few months, we'd be back at another shutdown/debt ceiling debate, and there'd be no reason for the Republican Party to approach it any differently.

Behind these arguments is the fact that Senate Democrats believe the GOP is losing this fight, and badly. What they hope happens next is this: The GOP eventually caves on the debt ceiling and reopening the government for some period of time. Budget negotiations can, at that point, begin.

Those negotiations aren't likely to go anywhere for awhile but the next time this fight comes around top Republicans will be desperate to avoid another shutdown that grievously wounds their party and, as a result, they may be more interested in making a budget deal that replaces sequestration in a way Democrats can accept.

This isn't the most persuasive plan in the world. But that's where we are right now: Neither Senate Democrats nor House Republicans nor the White House believe they have a plan to actually resolve this showdown. It's possible for the debt ceiling to get raised for a few weeks at a time, but ultimately, someone has to break, and at the moment, Senate Democrats aren't ready for it to be them.

 

[timschochet]

In case you missed it Senate Dems rejected the most recent proposal. I'm not making any editorial comments here except that I think this is a nice summary of where we stand, and why:

Three main arguments were made against the Collins deal. First, it locks in sequestration levels of spending for six months. Key Senate Democrats see that as a much larger, and more dangerous, concession than the old CR, which only agrees to it for six weeks. Democrats don't know how they're going to get rid of sequestration. But they don't want to agree to it.
Second, the deal's delay of the medical device tax meant it was, in fact, a concession in order to reopen the government -- and Democrats think it's important to convince the GOP that they can't win anything through this kind of hostage taking.

Third, in a few months, we'd be back at another shutdown/debt ceiling debate, and there'd be no reason for the Republican Party to approach it any differently.

Behind these arguments is the fact that Senate Democrats believe the GOP is losing this fight, and badly. What they hope happens next is this: The GOP eventually caves on the debt ceiling and reopening the government for some period of time. Budget negotiations can, at that point, begin.

Those negotiations aren't likely to go anywhere for awhile but the next time this fight comes around top Republicans will be desperate to avoid another shutdown that grievously wounds their party and, as a result, they may be more interested in making a budget deal that replaces sequestration in a way Democrats can accept.

This isn't the most persuasive plan in the world. But that's where we are right now: Neither Senate Democrats nor House Republicans nor the White House believe they have a plan to actually resolve this showdown. It's possible for the debt ceiling to get raised for a few weeks at a time, but ultimately, someone has to break, and at the moment, Senate Democrats aren't ready for it to be them.

I'm disappointed. Personally, I really don't care if the Dems win or not- I want to see the Tea Party lose, but it looks like that's inevitable anyhow.

More importantly, we're getting closer and closer to Oct. 17. I wanted this to be done by now.

 

[timschochet]

The Republicans started this mess and they are to blame for it. But that doesn't mean the Democrats aren't playing politics as well. By rejecting Senator Collins' proposal, they are contributing to people being hurt in order for political gain, and I find that pretty reprehensible.

Per Wdcrop's post, the reason Democrats are rejecting removing the medical device tax, which they were previously in favor of, is that they want to send the message to Republicans that they can't use this tactic of shutting down the government ever again. But the Republicans have already learned their lesson: they've seen the polls, they're not going to try this again. It's already a big victory for Obama and the Democrats. At this point, it seems as if they're kicking dirt in the Republicans' faces, trying to get them to cave without a shred of dignity left. The Republicans probably will do so, but what happens if they get prideful and refuse? Either way, it's not good for the country. The Republicans screwed things up, but now they need to be given a chance to save face. The Democrats seem determined not to give them that chance.

 

[RCon]

<snip>...Per Wdcrop's post, ...<snip>

Just to clear one thing up... wdcrob, with a "b".

 

[32 Counter Pass]

The Republicans started this mess and they are to blame for it. But that doesn't mean the Democrats aren't playing politics as well. By rejecting Senator Collins' proposal, they are contributing to people being hurt in order for political gain, and I find that pretty reprehensible.

Per Wdcrop's post, the reason Democrats are rejecting removing the medical device tax, which they were previously in favor of, is that they want to send the message to Republicans that they can't use this tactic of shutting down the government ever again. But the Republicans have already learned their lesson: they've seen the polls, they're not going to try this again. It's already a big victory for Obama and the Democrats. At this point, it seems as if they're kicking dirt in the Republicans' faces, trying to get them to cave without a shred of dignity left. The Republicans probably will do so, but what happens if they get prideful and refuse? Either way, it's not good for the country. The Republicans screwed things up, but now they need to be given a chance to save face. The Democrats seem determined not to give them that chance.

Maybe the end game for the Dems is to completely humilated the Tea party core of the Republican party, thereby nuetering them.

 

[Rush Limbaugh Fan]

The GOP had this planned before the shutdown...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Jd-iaYLO1A

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

The GOP had this planned before the shutdown...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Jd-iaYLO1A

Wasn't going to get into that since it's deep in the parliamentary weeds. But yes, the House changed the rules in order to keep the usual rules from allowing Dems to bring the Senate bill (reopening government) for a vote. And so that the Speaker of the House would be the only person who could do that.

In other words, yes, they planned it and wanted to make sure Boehner had total control over the shutdown in the event that there were some Republicans were willing to vote with Dems to reopen govt.