TPM LiveWire
Axelrod Says GOP Reconciliation Complaints Ring Hollow (VIDEO)
Christina Bellantoni | February 26, 2010, 12:23PM
White House Senior Adviser David Axelrod
Share
Send to a friend!
White House senior adviser David Axelrod called out Republicans who complain about the possibility of using reconciliation for health care reform, saying on CNN last night that the GOP has done the same thing.
"Every single Republican Senator in that room I believe has cast votes for reconciliation, including for the largest tax cut in history that dwarfed this legislation," Axelrod said, an exchange which comes about 4 minutes in to the video below.
Axelrod also offered a key tell about the White House's willingness to move forward with health care legislation using reconciliation.
"The American people ... all they want is an up or down vote. They want to move on, have the vote, let's finish the debate. The American people say let the vote be held, let the majority rule and let's move on," Axelrod said.
"Let's move forward," he repeated several times.
Watch:
Comments (92) | Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
Most Popular
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2010 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
JC Aevaliotis
February 26, 2010 12:33 PM
FINALLY. GET IT DONE.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tommy Douglas
February 27, 2010 11:55 AM in reply to JC Aevaliotis
GET IT DONE WITH A PUBLIC OPTION!!!
ITS MORE POPULAR THAN THE SENATE BILL!
DON'T LISTEN TO RAHM, OBAMA. LISTEN TO PELOSI INSTEAD AND PASS REAL REFORM.
http://dumprahm.wordpress.com/
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mJJ
February 28, 2010 6:18 PM in reply to Tommy Douglas
Pass the bill however it can be passed. this comes from a Republican till yesterday when I changed my mind about the party of big bucks and those who stall no matter what! All the Republican legislation blockers in my party have sealed the deal for me. Tomorrow I shall be a Democrat. Pass this present health care bill if that is all that is possible. It can be tweaked later. It is more than time for middle class folks to get a break after the long dry years they endured under Bush Jr.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jweb271
February 26, 2010 12:35 PM
The defense here is so simple. The Republicans passed tax cuts for the rich with an up or down vote. The Democrats want to pass health savings for the middle class the same way.
Or: The Republicans were willing to have an up or down vote to benefit themselves, but aren't willing to do the same for the rest of you.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bill57
February 28, 2010 11:41 AM in reply to jweb271
Very good. It would work to frame it that way. Unfortunately that means that the Dem leadership probably wouldn't even consider it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
oskieoskie
February 26, 2010 12:36 PM
"Let majority rule."
What a concept.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cal Gal
February 26, 2010 5:01 PM in reply to oskieoskie
Republican Talking Point (straight from the Newster): Obama is a Hugo Chavez majoritarian.
LOL. Can you believe it?
Republicans: Anti-majoritarian since 2010
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
February 26, 2010 11:08 PM in reply to Cal Gal
The far-right ELITIST lunatic fringe has argued for decades against the "theory" that our system is intended to be "majoritarian". Even Newt Getrich has asserted those Hamiltonian America-hating spewing points.
It's also seen from time to time when a troll asserts the false trial bloon that the US "is a Republic, not a democracy".
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Brownbagger
February 26, 2010 5:51 PM in reply to oskieoskie
Duuuude. That's coooool. The most votes wins, right? Awwwwsome.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
badtartin
February 27, 2010 4:08 PM in reply to oskieoskie
Our system isn't supposed to be entirely majority rule- Things like the Bill of Rights, the Supreme Court, the fact that small states and big states all get two Senators- these were all designed to protect minorities from the majority.
That being said, I don't see that the Democrats have any choice but to use reconciliation at this point, and Republican criticism of it is hypocritical.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
badtartin
February 27, 2010 5:36 PM in reply to oskieoskie
Our system isn't supposed to be entirely majority rule- Things like the Bill of Rights, the Supreme Court, the fact that small states and big states all get two Senators- these were all designed to protect minorities from the majority.
That being said, I don't see that the Democrats have any choice but to use reconciliation at this point, and Republican criticism of it is hypocritical.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
justaJ0e
February 26, 2010 12:36 PM
It's about time they start using the Republican's own battle cries against them.
MAKE IT SO!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Noam Sane
February 26, 2010 12:37 PM
Fine, let's do it, as long as Jim Bunning doesn't miss any sports competions.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mcjam
February 26, 2010 12:42 PM in reply to Noam Sane
Rather, I suggest that they schedule all of the votes for the rest of his term during these games.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
pol
February 26, 2010 12:51 PM
Can a Senator put a hold on a bill that's been through reconciliation?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Vincent F
February 26, 2010 12:54 PM
I'm shocked Axelrod didn't agree that the Dems should start over. After being disappointed by Democratic timidity over the years, I will believe passage of slightly controversial legislation by a Democratic majority when I see it. These guys have been spineless gutless patsies for so long I'm not confident they can get this done.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Economides
February 26, 2010 1:02 PM in reply to Vincent F
Wanna bet?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
itsallaboutthemoney
February 26, 2010 1:17 PM in reply to Vincent F
Sadly, I agree. They have made a complete cynic out of me. It won’t happen. Reid is spineless. 291 bills sit in the Senate, passed by the House and into oblivion.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
gdunn45
February 26, 2010 1:21 PM in reply to itsallaboutthemoney
Is there a link to all the bills the House has passed and the Senate is sitting on? It would be good to know.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
itsallaboutthemoney
February 26, 2010 2:13 PM in reply to gdunn45
Read it and weep
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/83057-290-bills
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
itsallaboutthemoney
February 26, 2010 2:14 PM in reply to gdunn45
Utterly dysfunctional
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
DoubleFelix
February 26, 2010 1:34 PM in reply to itsallaboutthemoney
Here's a scenario for you. Let's say that they pas this with reconciliation. That accomplishes two things, apart from the actual passage of HCR:
1) It shows the GOP that Majority Rules is not just an idle threat.
2) It shows Democrats that, despite the handicap of being invertebrates, they can actually get something done.
Considering the upcoming election, they take a fresh look at those 291 bills and figure out there are some really popular ones in that pile which can be passed under reconciliation rules.
It is at exactly that moment that the GOP realizes there is a downside to being nothing but obstructionists. When they stand on the sidelines shouting "NO, NO, NO" they have very little voice in the legislation, we end up with popular bills we can run on, and the GOP has to be accountable for voting against those popular ideas.
It all seems pretty obvious. If we didn't have moron DLCers like Emanuel putting a monkey wrench into everything, this scenario would be happening right now.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Fred Moolten
February 26, 2010 12:55 PM
For reconciliation to be needed in order to pass a comprehensive healthcare reform bill, the Senate would have to act first, via reconciliation, to modify the bill it has already passed in ways that the House will accept. However, if the House votes to approve the current Senate bill, President Obama can sign it into law, and then reconciliation would be needed only for the agreed-on modifications, not the basic package.
Since a reconciliation approach is likely to be beset by Republican obstructionism as a delaying tactic, I wonder whether some consideration is being given to the first alternative. In that circumstance, Republicans creating reconciliation delays would be obstructing not healthcare reform but a scaling back of taxes on high end ("cadillac") insurance plans as well stalling provisions to close the Medicare D "donut hole". The public might react unfavorably to that attempt to modify the law in a direction that appeals to them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
itsallaboutthemoney
February 26, 2010 1:18 PM in reply to Fred Moolten
Whoa, way too many multi-syllable words in there for Senators.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Economides
February 26, 2010 1:26 PM in reply to Fred Moolten
It's about time that someone acknowledge that both the Senate and the House have already passed bills. All that is needed procedurally for either bill to become law is for either house to pass the bill from the other body.
The Budget "Reconciliation" process is only necessary as alternative to the usual conference process that would (ironically) reconcile the House and Senate versions. You only need Budget reconciliation to square the differences among democrats in certain tax and subsidy provision. Reconciliation is not necessary to enact reform.
It would be interesting as Fred suggests to take some of the items that nobody likes that would have been settled in conference (like the Nebraska deal) and set them up as votes separate from the passage of the main bill or reconciliation. republicans would have to vote for them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lok52
February 26, 2010 4:24 PM in reply to Economides
While it is true either bill can be passed and then changed with reconciliation, for all practical purposes, the Senate bill will be the one that the House has to get through. There is no chance at all that the Senate can pass the House bill. Right now, they would not be able to pass the Senate bill again.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
toddincabo
February 26, 2010 5:42 PM in reply to Fred Moolten
Like the Rethugs give a shit about what the public says.
I wish someone yesterday would have called them out on voting for a public option. They kept bringing up poll after poll and saying they are just doing what The American People want.
Everyone in that room knows that the hightest poll out there is for the PO.
The Dems blew a great chance to see that perpetual stupid look on Bohner's face freeze for good!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Walter Mitty
February 26, 2010 1:10 PM
And isn't Campbell's husband toying with the idea of running for the Senate against Gillibrand?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cal Gal
February 26, 2010 5:04 PM in reply to Walter Mitty
That's what TPM reported yesterday.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
DKDC
February 26, 2010 1:12 PM
I will give a million dollars to the first congressional Dem/Admin Official who says, in answer to a media troll asking, "Republicans say that reconciliation has never been used for [health reform/such a consequential bill/fill in the blank] before - what's your response?" - "That's a lie."
Say it with me now, just try it "That's a lie. And they know it's a lie."
OK
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Backcountry
February 26, 2010 1:14 PM
I definitely want to see an end of this health care "debate."
To me this has been as personally stressful as a presidential campaign. But at least with a political campaign, you know it's going to come to an end on a specific date.
The fact that this issue has just gone on and on and on begins to border on psychological torture for a lot of people, not least of whom are people who don't have health insurance.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
itsallaboutthemoney
February 26, 2010 1:24 PM
Agreed, I too want to see it end. But you speak as though these are two different things; presidential campaign/HCR debate. This IS the GOP presidential campaign. They know if they lose they will wander in the wilderness for 40 years. They cannot let Obama win anything, especially something that benefits a huge cross section of Americans.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hollywood
February 26, 2010 1:41 PM
Why the hell is everyone in the media always rooting for the republicans? Campbell Brown might as well go to fox and friends if she wanted to push republican talking points any harder. The republicans got their ass handed to them on SUBSTANCE in the summit and yet this morning I have to listen to how "weren't they right?" and "didn't they win?" Politico says they won by just showing up and not looking completely stupid ..... well they did look stupid! On any matter of fact or common sense they pissed their pants. The stupid talking points only work when no one is in the room to speak to the relevant facts. How can these 'reporters' sit through the flat earth society pep talks the republicans offer and not just say game over? Oh yes, Campbell Brown's hubby is a republican!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nomad28
February 26, 2010 1:45 PM in reply to hollywood
were you watching the same summit I was? If even Politico, The Atlantic, Slate, etc, (all liberal outlets) are calling it a "tie," then it must mean that the Republicans did something right... I think Obama thought he could duplicate his performance at the Baltimore House GOP retreat last month. The GOP came prepared and ready to for battle this time, and they smacked down the Dems pretty good.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hollywood
February 26, 2010 2:15 PM in reply to nomad28
Are you trying to be funny? Politico is Liberal?
Because Obama was being polite and calm does not make the republicans sad talking points any more factual. When one of the thuglicans was musing that it would be so much more practical if all of congress and/or federal employees just had catastrophic insurance only Obama needed to point out that the average American has an income closer to 40K which obviously makes that thuglican talking point absurd in simple honest math. If of coarse you aren't real good with math you might think the thuglican had a good point and Obama is just too partisan to listen. Honestly I see the same bullshit with global warming debates all the time. One big snowstorm does not cancel out a century of ever faster rising temperatures ........ except in the mind of a partisan hack or a idiot. The woman from Tennessee had a great time explaining to we Californians that we wouldn't be getting gouged by Blue Shield if only we could walk over to Oregon and buy insurance! Problem solved in her small mind! Obama again has to point out how that is just nonsense but does the media point it out as well? Of coarse not. Just two different OPINIONS!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
docrocktex
February 26, 2010 2:17 PM in reply to nomad28
were you watching the same summit I watched? because to me it looked like the GOP had their uppity rich asses handed to them every time a Dem opened his/her mouth. especially the part that took place after lunch.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nomad28
February 26, 2010 2:51 PM in reply to docrocktex
were you watching the same summit I watched? because to me it looked like the GOP had their uppity rich asses handed to them every time a Dem opened his/her mouth. especially the part that took place after lunch.
"uppity rich asses"- you do realize that almost everyone in that room is a millionaire, right? You do realize that the richest member of Congress if Sen. Kerry, right?
Point in fact: Obama/Dems spoke twice as long as Republicans, but yet almost every single news outlet called it a "draw." Why is that? Could it be because Obama/Dems are speaking out of their a$$es and they think they can "talk" their way into the country accepting their proposal? Sorry, we ain't buying what they're selling.
At some point, Obama has to realize that rhetoric and a speech won't get more people to approve of his plan. It's not the messenger, sir. It's the message.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hollywood
February 26, 2010 3:12 PM in reply to nomad28
My fucking god you are confused! The rethuglicans were arguing every point in FAVOR OF THE RICH MAN'S POINT OF VIEW and the Dems were arguing every point in favor of what would benefit average Americans. Why not just catastrophic insurance and savings accounts? Because that only works if you are RICH! What fucking school did you flunk out of? You are all resentment and no reason. Your stupidity is exactly why the rethuglicans can continue to take advantage of working and middleclass Americans. Because you are just too socially inept to see the broad side of a barn!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nomad28
February 26, 2010 4:11 PM in reply to hollywood
Is having more options by being able to buy insurance across state lines a "rich man's point of view?"
Is putting a cap on junk lawsuits a "rich man's point of view?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hollywood
February 26, 2010 5:15 PM in reply to nomad28
Capping ALL lawsuits in many states has proved to save a trivial amount of money overall. It hurts people whose lives have been ruined by JUNK medicine and leaves them with little or nothing to get their lives back together. The actual number of lawsuits has been dropping rapidly anyway and most remaining involve a small number of bad doctors and institutions. Another pumped up lie designed to excite small minds.
Buying across state lines solves what problem? Because when my rates increase by 40% in California some company in Oregon is going to save me 40% of my doctor bills by doing what exactly? By using the rules of the worst regulated states to sell JUNK insurance across state lines and then let millions and millions of Californians try to collect payments to doctors and hospitals from some underfunded unregulated insurance company in another state? WOW! what a good idea that is! The truth is that it would benefit some bottomfeeder insurance companies and hurt millions of citizens when it comes time to collect benefits. In fact the Dems plan does allow insurance companies from all over to compete in the insurance exchanges. The difference would be that there are minimum standards and regulation enforced by the US government and not small state insurance cons.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
February 26, 2010 11:18 PM in reply to nomad28
"Obama/Dems spoke twice as long as Republicans,"
Do the math:
1. Republicans are the MINORITY.
2. Democrats are the MAJORITY.
MAJORITY RULES. It was President Obama's courtesy that gave the MINORITY opportunity to regurgitate their same-old spew points yet again ad nauseum.
Either get with the program -- MAJORITY RULES -- or STFU.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
geofu54
February 26, 2010 2:21 PM in reply to nomad28
If even Politico... liberal outlet
LOL. That comment alone is enough to not take you seriously.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nomad28
February 26, 2010 3:02 PM in reply to geofu54
If you don't think Politico has a liberal bent, then that's your problem. Do you know who started Politico? Some retread ex-Washington Post reporters? if you really think the WaPo is conservative, then you're a lost cause.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
joeinmaryland
February 26, 2010 3:41 PM in reply to nomad28
Michael Gerson, Charles Krautthammer, George Will, Robert Kagan, William Kristol, Kathleen Parker (I could go on).
I wonder what all of these people have in common?
Oh yes, they write opinion columns for the Washington Post. I guess they are all liberals in your mind.
What a tool.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CareyInLA
February 26, 2010 3:41 PM in reply to nomad28
If you don't think Politico has a liberal bent, then that's your problem. Do
you know who started Politico? Some retread ex-Washington Post reporters? if you
really think the WaPo is conservative, then you're a lost cause.
Let's see: one of the two "retread ex-Washington Post reporters" who started Politico is Jim VandeHei, also former national political reporter for The Wall Street Journal (flaming liberal rag that?). And for what its worth, he is married to a former staffer for House Republican Leader Tom DeLay of Texas.
And the CEO of Politico is Fred Ryan, who worked for Reagan, eventually as his chief of staff, from 1982-1995.
The Washington Post is not a party-line right wing organ like the Washington Times, true, but it employs and publishes the works of many conservatives. Most notably the neo-conservative Fred Hiatt who has been on the editorial board for 14 years, and has been the editorial page editor for a decade.
In 2006, for example, The Post endorsed every Republican incumbent for Congress in Northern Virginia.
But that's the trick, right? Pretend every media outlet is perpetually nothing more than a liberal mouthpiece, and thus no matter how much the right is able to brow-beat the MSM into giving them a free pass, it isn't enough. I've watched this game for over 40 years (Agnew et al) and it never changes.
But what should it? It has worked very well for the right and truth, facts and plain reality are no substitute for naked political advantage.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CareyInLA
February 26, 2010 3:09 PM in reply to nomad28
If even Politico, The Atlantic, Slate, etc, (all liberal outlets) ...
FEBRUARY 26, 2010 2:15 PM in reply to nomad28
Are you trying to be funny? Politico is Liberal?
Didn't you know? There are only two types of media outfits: liberal and "fair and balanced" (otherwise known as "Pro-American"). There are not, nor have their ever been, nor can there ever be such a thing as right-wing leaning media outlets since no member of the right has ever seen one, nor can imagine how such a thing could ever differ from such a centrist and even-handed news source as Fox News or Rush Limbaugh.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nomad28
February 26, 2010 1:41 PM
"The American people ... all they want is an up or down vote. They want to move on, have the vote, let's finish the debate. The American people say let the vote be held, let the majority rule and let's move on," Axelrod said.
Um, actually, no they don't. In fact, polls show the opposite of what Mr. Axelrod is spouting. The American people are overwhelmingly against ObamaCare and against Dems using reconciliation. But what the heck, huh? I guess Professor Obama knows best! I mean, us middle-class folks aren't Harvard Law grads, so we must be uninformed and stupid. Yeah, let's just go against the will of the American people! It's for their own good!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hollywood
February 26, 2010 2:35 PM in reply to nomad28
Yes actually you are uninformed and stupid! But it is not because you are not a Harvard grad. It is willful. There is no such thing as "Obamacare" That is a made up word to try to smear any reforms of healthcare by people working for insurance and drug companies. It was fed to you by the right wing media and you swallowed it and keep repeating it because you do not know any better. You seem to resent well educate people studying problems and suggesting solutions .... next time you need some medicine or an operation why don't you just skip those snobby well educated elites and have one of your conservative friends do the cutting. I am sure the outcome will be the same only cheaper!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nomad28
February 26, 2010 2:46 PM in reply to hollywood
Yes actually you are uninformed and stupid! But it is not because you are not a Harvard grad. It is willful. There is no such thing as "Obamacare" That is a made up word to try to smear any reforms of healthcare by people working for insurance and drug companies. It was fed to you by the right wing media and you swallowed it and keep repeating it because you do not know any better. You seem to resent well educate people studying problems and suggesting solutions .... next time you need some medicine or an operation why don't you just skip those snobby well educated elites and have one of your conservative friends do the cutting. I am sure the outcome will be the same only cheaper!
My, my... You liberals sure do have a temper... As to your asinise post, I happen to be educated. I also happen to be insured, as are 85% of Americans. Is your Medicaid not working for you? Is that why you're so resentful? Oh, and why are you against me using ObamaCare? You liberals sure loved to throw around phrases like "Bush's Iraq war" and other bull%$^ like that... but now it's not okay for me to call the plan that OBAMA is proposing OBAMACARE? Are you freaking kidding me?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Moloko+
February 26, 2010 3:11 PM in reply to nomad28
Bush called it Operation Iraqi Liberation.
Liberals did not invent that.
We did not invent Voodoo Economics either...
I for one am happy to call it Obamacare.
Because Obama cares....unlike you.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
celldumceen
February 26, 2010 2:47 PM in reply to nomad28
Please people are only against it because they don't know whats in it! The minute someone in the media actually takes the time to do their jobs and explain what's in it the numbers flip!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nomad28
February 26, 2010 2:57 PM in reply to celldumceen
"Please people are only against it because they don't know whats in it! The minute someone in the media actually takes the time to do their jobs and explain what's in it the numbers flip!"
ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?!?!?!? we don't want it because we can't afford it! Oh, and 85% of us ALREADY HAVE INSURANCE!!!! Damn you liberals to hell (stealing a line from Olbermann) for wanting to send my kids a bill!!! WE CAN'T AFFORD IT, MOST OF US ARE ALREADY INSURED.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hollywood
February 26, 2010 3:24 PM in reply to nomad28
Sadly the only hope for someone with such a prejudiced mind is for you or someone in your family to get sick and loose their insurance. Then your point about how not to care about millions of others without insurance will hit you right between your eyes. You are the guy on the Titanic who was shoving women and children into the cold water to make room for yourself on a lifeboat. Try thinking of health insurance as a lifeboat. Are you really that comfortable floating in your boat while millions around you scream for help and drown in the darkness?
Oh and I am sure you are a "christian" as well .....most of your types are realy realy "christian"...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
PQuincy
February 26, 2010 3:28 PM in reply to nomad28
nomad, you may be insured...but have you paid any attention, between rants, to how much you (and your employer) have been paying for that insurance. And how quickly it's been going up, year after year?
Just because you're the frog slowly being boiled does not mean that the rest of us need to be so stupid. Conservatives like to point out that Medicare and Medicaid will eat the entire Federal budget in a few decades if they keep growing at the rate of the last decade. That's not because of 'waste', that's because health care costs under the wonderful system you seem to have such confidence in are SOARING out of control. Your private insurance, that you seem to think you can afford, will ALSO be out of reach soon, because of the gross inefficiencies private insurance encourages, because of the enormous profits that private insurers are booking, because of the huge wasteful administrative overhead (all intended to DENY claims) that private insurance creates (for perfectly rational, business-oriented free market reasons, of course).
Pay attention to what's more than five inches from your nose, please...and think about how safe that wonderful insurance you now enjoy really is!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
itsallaboutthemoney
February 26, 2010 3:33 PM in reply to nomad28
Consider for one minute that we can’t afford not to. Humor us.
Is it just possible that rising health costs may become an even greater burden to all of us under the present system? And that you are, if fact, already paying way too much to cover the uninsured, who put off seeing doctors until they end up in the emergency room?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nomad28
February 26, 2010 4:55 PM in reply to itsallaboutthemoney
Look, nobody's saying the healthcare system is perfect. Even the insurance companies agree that there should be reforms. That's not the issue. The issue is HOW we get there? Do we take a hatchet and re-organize 1/6th of our economy, spending $1 trillion that we don't have or do we take a scalpel and do piece-by-piece, incremental, practical reforms (high risk pools, buy insurance across state lines, ending pre-existing conditions, etc)?
If our system is so broken, how come we have Canadian politicians having their surgeries in our American hospitals? Could it be that he doesn't trust his own Canadian socialist healthcare system?
All I'm saying is this. If Obama was really interested in the American people, why not do a simple bill now that would enjoy large bipartisan support and hit on the major things both parties agree on? If Obama really cared for the American people, we would have a bill by next Tuesday. But, I forgot. He's just a politician looking to leave a "legacy." Someone forgot to tell him that he's no FDR. He should concentrate on helping the american people and not on what historians will say about him 30 years from now.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
itsallaboutthemoney
February 26, 2010 5:09 PM in reply to nomad28
The piece meal approach is suggested by those who want to kill it. It is a huge problem, requiring a huge solution.
My sister, her daughters and grandchildren have Canadian health care and they love it. Our medical care is the world’s best. Our INSURANCE coverage is the issue. The GOP has been very successful at distracting you on this.
If you are suggesting that Obama is less interested in Americans than the GOP or the insurance industry, you lose this argument. The GOP is not interested in cooperating. ever. period. Waiting is foolhardy.
His legacy is exactly why the GOP has dropped anchor, they simply can’t afford to have a hugely popular Democratic President be successful.
Wow, you have bought their garbage hook, line and sinker.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nomad28
February 26, 2010 6:00 PM in reply to itsallaboutthemoney
I'm not interested in what your family thinks about Canadian health care. I could care less. All I know is that I wouldn't want to take part in a system where i have to wait 6 months to get an MRI. Heck, it's easier for your pet go get an MRI than it is for the pet's owner in Canada.
Ok, your argument is bullshit. I don't buy the whole "the GOP is for the insurance industry" bullcrap argument. the GOP is not the one who carved out a back-room deal with PHRMA. Your Democratic president did. I guess he fooled you with the whole "the Insurance Industry is the devil" argument too, huh?
So, you really think that the majority of Americans who are against ObamaCare are simply against it because they don't want a democratic president to succeed? Bullshit. What's next? that we're all racist? Is that what you liberals are going to resort to next?
The fact is that the U.S. is a center-right country. Look at the polls. About 40% in this country identify themselves as conservatives. Only 20% self-identify as liberals. Obama ran as a Washington-outsider, centrist. that's why he was against the radical "individual mandate" during the campaign. But that was all a facade. Now the American people have seen that they voted in a fraud. He's a wolf in sheep's clothing. He did what he had to do to get elected. once in, he thought he had a mandate to ram through his liberal agenda down our throats. What he didn't anticipate was that the AMERICAN PEOPLE WOULD BE AGAINST HIS LIBERAL AGENDA. Cap and trade? Nope. nationalized healthcare? Nope again. radical consumer protections? Sorry.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
itsallaboutthemoney
February 26, 2010 7:03 PM in reply to nomad28
Hahahaha, trolls, sheesh
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jsdc007
February 26, 2010 4:04 PM in reply to nomad28
Actually, large majorities of Americans are for every single provision in that bill. Unfortunately, Obama has done a very poor job of explaining the bill to a public that is generally selfish, incoherent, contradictory and too busy listening to Miley Cyrus.
I know of several people who couldn't care less if others had health coverage because they were covered by their employers, but who changed their tune once they joined the millions of unemployed. I guess even the selfish gain some humanity once subjected to trials and tribulation.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nomad28
February 26, 2010 4:58 PM in reply to jsdc007
If you ask someone if they're "for" everyone having health insurance, of course they'll say yes. But if you preface the question by telling them that it'll cost us $1 trillion dollars and our taxes will most likely go up, then you'll get a different answer.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hollywood
February 26, 2010 5:21 PM in reply to nomad28
Unless you are quite wealthy your taxes will go DOWN. Why do poor conservatives always throw themselves into millionaire status when the subject is taxes? .... because you swallow the talking points hook, line, and sinker! Like the "death tax" is so unfair to people about to inherit over 3.5million$ that someone making 40K should pay MORE TAX to make up the difference. Why are people so damned dumb?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nomad28
February 26, 2010 5:47 PM in reply to hollywood
Haha... you smug liberals.. always thinking that everyone else is just too dumb to understand...
Taxes will go down? tell that to the unions... WHY THE HELL DO YOU THINK THAT PELOSI CAN'T PASS THE SENATE BILL AS-IS? Because they're against the so-called Cadillac tax that many union members have. Is that NOT a tax? Are you anti-union now? haha... get your arguments straight!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
February 26, 2010 1:41 PM
"Up or down vote"
It too only six freakin' months for them to finally frame it in those words? After the Republicans already showed them the way by framing their legislation exactly the same way? It's a wonder they get anything done at all.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
congoman
February 26, 2010 1:42 PM
So Ax comes out the next day with strong, repeated, up / down vote comments.
This is the end game folks!
Soon, US will enter the era of an advanced western society.
US Decline...my ass!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Sagae
February 26, 2010 1:53 PM
David Gergen is a cancer on TV commentary. He never deals with the substance of anything and there he was all day on CNN saying that Obama was diminished and the Republicans won.
What would be the effect of Republican Paul Ryan's Medicare vouchers idea? Within a generation, only the wealthy would leave any estate to children and grandchildren because the cost for 25 years of medical insurance above the voucher for a healthy person who lived to age 90 would wipe out an estate. That is Republican ideology.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hollywood
February 26, 2010 3:02 PM in reply to Sagae
Rethuglican ideology is ALWAYS fact free! Sadly the media never bothers to do the math. If you think 2+2=5 then sure the rethuglicans won it all ... yeah for our side! I used to respect David Gergen but now I wonder why all these guys feel so much pressure to appease the nonsense in rethuglican talking points.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rbeats
February 26, 2010 1:54 PM
Wait we are still talking about this?
I would have been fired long ago if I ran my business this way.
Whatever Axlerod, keep blowing smoke up our asses.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
superking
February 26, 2010 1:55 PM
hahaha I love Campell Brown's facial expression at the end of the video, it's like she's visibly confused by a Democrat repeating Republican talking points and doesn't know how to respond.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Maneesh
February 26, 2010 1:55 PM
Finally, start acting like the Republicans did when they were in power. It would be refreshing to see the White House actually begin shaping the narrative.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nomad28
February 26, 2010 2:12 PM
It was telling that there were only three members of Congress who attended the summit that were physicians. All 3 were Republicans. Would it not make sense for Dems to have taken some of their own members who are also doctors? I mean, if we're talking about restructuring our healthcare in our country, why not seek the counsel of those who are actually in the profession that you want to reform? Coburn hit it out of the park with his thorough and informed discussion on Medicare abuse.
The Dems, on the other hand, only had politicians attend. Hmmm.....
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lok52
February 26, 2010 4:33 PM in reply to nomad28
While there may have been 3 Republicans that were practicing doctors in the room, I can guarantee you that all of the Republicans there were politicians. You do not get to be in the US Senate without being a politician.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
itsallaboutthemoney
February 26, 2010 2:17 PM
don't feed the trolls..don't feed the trolls..don't feed the trolls..
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Jackster
February 26, 2010 2:19 PM
I still have'nt seen anywhere that they HAVE the votes 51 or otherwise. I'm sure there's some wrangling going on but doe anyone know if they got the votes?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
calbearinillinois
February 26, 2010 2:43 PM
I'm really not worried about how people see reconciliation. I'm much more concerned about a) Whether either the Stupak/abortion mini-faction or the progressives will not be willing to vote for the final bill and b) how well Dems will sell the end result to the middle class (the same folks who still don't understand how the stimulus bill cut their taxes through payroll tax reductions and the Waking Work Pay Credit).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Jerry Kauffman
February 26, 2010 2:44 PM
GOP = Greed Over People
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nomad28
February 26, 2010 2:59 PM in reply to Jerry Kauffman
Cute! Now go outside and play with the children... let the adults have a substantive discussion...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CommieBlaster
February 26, 2010 3:20 PM
OBAMACARE - YEAR IN REVIEW
This Brand New, 5-Star Hilarious and Shocking Video provides a Fast-Paced Look at the No-Lie-Too-Big, Socialist Ideologues Who Now Run Our Country.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Rv7aW3NF7w
MUST WATCH!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rbeats
February 26, 2010 3:24 PM in reply to CommieBlaster
Your youtube link was broken I fixed it for you
http://5z8.info/creditscore_d9y7x_alqaeda-message-boards
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
RobbyLove
February 26, 2010 3:24 PM
I'd be interested to see how many times reconciliation has been used by the Republicans for anything other than the federal budget.
Sen Byrd invented this parliamentary procedure to circumvent filibustering on the federal budget. I don't know if he intended it to be used otherwise.
If the Republicans have used it for non-budget related issues then they need to STFU.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Denver DJ
February 26, 2010 3:28 PM
The public option is the best free-market solution to getting the insurance companies to be more competitive and to guarantee coverage for everyone. Without the public option, the insurance companies will continue to raise their rates and deny coverage to people who need it. Short of a complete government takeover of the insurance companies, there is no other way to get them to be more competitive and provide affordable insurance to everyone. We need the public option now!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
RobbyLove
February 26, 2010 3:36 PM in reply to Denver DJ
Reduce the military budget by $100 billion per year and you have a start at being able to finance the public option.
Since we are currently funding 2 wars and are entrenched in a military industrial complex...good luck with that.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hollywood
February 26, 2010 3:58 PM in reply to RobbyLove
Oh heavens no! You cannot actually spend money on what is killing Americans! 45,000 deaths without insurance but, but, but ........ what if Sadam Hussein attacks New York again?!? Quick borrow ONE TRILLION dollars from the Chinese and attack Iraq! Conservatives make me so proud to be an American.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
itsallaboutthemoney
February 26, 2010 4:11 PM in reply to hollywood
Hmmm, 45,000, that would be 15 9/11s. FIFTEEN. Maybe we should consider HCR opponents enemy combatants.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cwnidog
February 26, 2010 5:16 PM in reply to hollywood
Are we allowed to say that the rethugs are the party that would rather kill kids in Afghanistan than cure kids at home?
I mean, I know it's true, but have any of the Dems got the stones to actually point it out?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hollywood
February 26, 2010 5:29 PM in reply to cwnidog
Alan Grayson from Orlando comes close sometimes. Sadly rethuglicans never hesitate to tell some whopping lie about Democratic policy (communist, socialist, unamerican) but the Dems never seem to be willing to tell the cold hard truth about rethuglican policies. There is some deep personality issues at work here. We need to study them so we can move to a better place.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
RobbyLove
February 26, 2010 3:39 PM in reply to Denver DJ
President Barack Obama today sent to Congress a proposed defense budget of $663.8 billion for fiscal 2010. The budget request for the Department of Defense (DoD) includes $533.8 billion in discretionary budget authority to fund base defense programs and $130 billion to support overseas contingency operations, primarily in Iraq and Afghanistan.
http://www.defense.gov/Releases/Release.aspx?ReleaseID=12652
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
eclecticbrotha
February 26, 2010 4:35 PM
Get it, David, get it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
James J
February 26, 2010 7:04 PM
Campbell Brown is very good
at reciting Republican talking points.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
boycottfaux
February 27, 2010 10:29 PM in reply to James J
She probably recites them in her sleep with HER HUSBAND, THE REPUBLICAN POLITICIAN!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Delguy
March 1, 2010 9:25 AM
Campbell Brown is an idiot. The most life changing bill passed in the last 30 years was Reagan's assinine tax cuts which created the debt we are in today.CNN might as well merge with Fox. I don't watch it anymore due to shills like her!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tosh
April 28, 2010 4:10 PM
David Gergen is a cancer on TV commentary. He never deals with the substance of anything and there he was all day on CNN saying that Obama was diminished and the Republicans won.
What would be the effect of Republican Paul Ryan's Medicare vouchers idea? Within a generation, only the wealthy would leave any estate to children and grandchildren because the cost for 25 years of medical insurance above the voucher for a healthy person who lived to age 90 would wipe out an estate. That is Republican ideology.
kamagra m65
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?