Comments on: Obamacare Vote Count (Update #147)

By: Kar

Kar — Mon, 22 Mar 2010 01:19:59 +0000

are we going to see civil disobedience against Obamacare , and secession of Texas, Virginia, etc. ?

By: Kar

Kar — Mon, 22 Mar 2010 01:19:00 +0000

are we going to see civil disobedience against Obamacare , and secession of Texas, Virginia, etc. ?

By: macaoidh

macaoidh — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 14:18:42 +0000

I think you have it right, Gil. I've more or less expected once Obamacare didn't die after Scott Brown's election that they would find a way to get the thing done, but it's such an in-your-face overreach that it's unimplementable. This, if it passes (perhaps even if it doesn't), assures a Democrat nightmare on Election Day; they will lose both houses of Congress and I expect now that they will lose more than 80 votes, and in the meantime the parts of this bill that would be enacted this year will crash the health-care sector. That might actually be a good thing, because the health care system we've got is inefficient and needs to be brought in line with the market on the local, and even individual, level,and when doctors stop serving Medicare and Medicaid patients it will create a hole in the market that entrepreneurs will seek to fill.

But next year, a Republican majority will simply de-fund the program, and a Republican president in 2013 will sign legislation repealing it altogether. The Democrats have destroyed the center in American politics, and the result will be a GOP far more conservative than they've ever seen on fiscal policy.

By: macaoidh

macaoidh — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 14:18:00 +0000

By: Gil

Gil — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 03:55:27 +0000

continued

That is also why I am very optimistic about the outcome of this bill one way or the other. These twits in Congress , 216 twits think they are going to keep about 150 millionpeople who don't want this bill under their thumbs. It won't happen.

I saw someone write about a democrat win as a Phyrric victory. Pelosi is spending so much political capital to the point that she is out of it and now running on fumes and credit. She is blowing up the party to buy something she cannot afford health care.

Were it not for the web we would be dead. There are 150 million people who know what is happening and you just can't subjugate that many people.

Not to mention that Pelosi is so erratic now that it is very obvious that she is trying to put deals together full of contradictions. They are cornered with no way out. Or if they pass the bill it will be attacked from so many angles because it has much too many legal weaknesses. I'd like to see the Feds take on 37 states.

Thanks agian for all your help. Gil

By: Gil

Gil — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 03:55:11 +0000

First let me say for the third time what an outstanding job you are doing. There is absolutely nothing like this on the networks. The blogger nationwide grid can outreport anything the networks have to offer. You are so much faster to the draw and your reporting feels so sincere and honest. How refeshing. The networks and cables are drowning in overhead and that stops them from reporting honestly. Plus they cannot compete with bloggers because we outnumber them 50 to 1.

By: Gil

Gil — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 03:55:00 +0000

continued

Were it not for the web we would be dead. There are 150 million people who know what is happening and you just can't subjugate that many people.

Thanks agian for all your help. Gil

By: Gil

Gil — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 03:55:00 +0000

By: Ryan Booth

Ryan Booth — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 00:21:05 +0000

Gil, the problem is that this new monstrous health care system that we will have will have so many potential loopholes and back-door ways to possibly fund abortions, something that I'll admit I haven't studied in depth. Stupak wanted to shut those down, but in doing so, his amendments would have made it harder for some women to purchase insurance that included abortions. Since we haven't seen the proposed Executive Order, we can only guess, but I expect that it basically restates the Hyde rule that the government can't fund abortions, without making sure that all the loopholes are closed. That may be enough of a fig leaf for some of Stupak's group to accept. Of course, an Executive Order can be reversed by the President at any time, unlike a law enacted by Congress.

By: Ryan Booth

Ryan Booth — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 00:21:00 +0000

By: Ryan Booth

Ryan Booth — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 00:07:55 +0000

That's right. I knew that, but had forgotten it. It still plays into their biases, though, about how people will vote.

By: Ryan Booth

Ryan Booth — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 00:07:00 +0000

That's right. I knew that, but had forgotten it. It still plays into their biases, though, about how people will vote.

By: oyster

oyster — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 23:37:12 +0000

"Update 3-19, 6:10 PM Firedoglake, which is a very liberal blog, is depressed about their prospects."

FYI: The principal of FDL– Jane Hamsher– despite being liberal, is opposed to the bill.

By: oyster

oyster — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 23:37:00 +0000

"Update 3-19, 6:10 PM Firedoglake, which is a very liberal blog, is depressed about their prospects."

FYI: The principal of FDL– Jane Hamsher– despite being liberal, is opposed to the bill.

By: Gil

Gil — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 22:07:57 +0000

Wait a second. If the Prez is issuing an executive order so there is no abortion funding, then what happens to the 41 pro aborts. Are they going to be happy with that? This makes no sense.