TPM LiveWire
Obama To Republicans: 'You Had Ten Years' To Focus On Health Care Costs -- 'What Were You Doing?' (VIDEO)
President Barack Obama
Share
Send to a friend!
President Obama spoke about health care reform today, and hit Republicans for only talking now about controlling costs, when they "had ten years."
"What happened? What were you doing?" he asked
Speaking at Arcadia University in Glenside, PA, Obama first talked about people "in Washington who respond to every issue, every decision, every debate, no matter how important it is, with the same question. Well, what does this mean for the next election?"
"They're obsessed," he said, "with the sport of politics."
You want people in Washington to spend a little less time worrying about our jobs, and a little more time worrying about your jobs.
He also stressed that "we've been talking about health care for nearly a century," and "we have failed to meet this challenge during periods of prosperity, and also during periods of decline."
"If not now when? If not us, who?" Obama asked.
The President also took the opportunity to hit Republicans: "I got all my Republican colleagues out there saying 'No, no, no, we want to focus on things like costs.' You had 10 years. What happened? What were you doing?"
Watch:
Obama also briefly referenced the public option, noting that he "didn't think it was going to be practical and realistic to do it here."
He concluded that "the opportunity is here. Let's seize reform. It's within our grasp."
Comments (76) | 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.
madmatt
March 8, 2010 12:30 PM
FU BARACK, a century to work on healthcare and all you come up with is a life support system for the Ins Co's. You should be ashamed and know that your "Reform" will keep a broken system running for years to come...and the only winner is Wellpoint.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
agio
March 8, 2010 12:44 PM in reply to madmatt
Well that was certainly productive.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tommy Douglas
March 8, 2010 2:16 PM in reply to agio
Get that PUBLIC OPTION in the bill!
Dodd has come out in support. Only 13 more Senators and we will have a PO now!
We are so close, so let's not give up and allow Wellpoint be rewarded with 30 million new costumers with no real competition.
ALSO, if we went along the lines of the House bill that INCLUDES A PUBLIC OPTION, we would cover about 5 million more people than the Senate's bill. That's a lot of people. About the COMBINED population of Vermont, North Dakota, Alaska, Wyoming, Montana, Delaware, and South Dakota.
The differences in these bills effects too many people. These people NEED HELP too.
But I guess Rahm would feel bad if Obama broke the deals he made with the Health Care Industry::
http://dumprahm.wordpress.com/2010/02/24/rahm-and-the-back-room-deal-to-kill-the-public-option/
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Alixman984
March 8, 2010 12:50 PM in reply to madmatt
'...and the only winner is Wellpoint'
I agree, that's why they are fighting the reform with all they've left with...because they are going to be the winner
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ericf
March 8, 2010 1:27 PM in reply to Alixman984
I agree with alixman9. The fact the insurance industry is fighting so hard to stop this is a dead giveaway of what they think of it. Special interests don't fight against bills that are a giveaway to them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
DA in LA
March 8, 2010 4:28 PM in reply to ericf
Sure they do. They were spending a million a day, but now they are spending much, much less. Why? They are getting what they want. They defeated the public option and they are keeping the pressure on making sure it stays out. You're just producing a ridiculous, flawed and amazingly simple argument.
They stand to make billions no matter what, maybe a little more without the bill, but a lot with it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
glblank
March 8, 2010 8:45 PM in reply to ericf
Ka-ching. All this yelping about the P.O. is useless hand wringing.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JorgeOrwell
March 8, 2010 12:52 PM in reply to madmatt
Indeed. His "plan" is simply corporate welfare. With no PUBLIC OPTION, it's another HUGE Wall Street bailout.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Alixman984
March 8, 2010 12:59 PM in reply to JorgeOrwell
Well I guess you can vote for someone else in 3 years times, they might be able to magically produce votes for PUBLIC OPTION - or who knows maybe even single payer!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
T Groan
March 8, 2010 1:25 PM in reply to Alixman984
Egads, looks like another obamabot has joined the fray. In addition to losergirl and freeloader this board does not need another suck up to power and those that unquestioningly follow and obey.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
March 8, 2010 1:33 PM in reply to T Groan
And it doesn't need another useless nothing to say but negative troll either.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JorgeOrwell
March 8, 2010 1:36 PM in reply to T Groan
You know what I find interesting, is that none of these serial posters, aside from a few of us actual working stiffs, ever post over the weekends. And their posts tend to end around 5 or 6 pm
Pretty sure these "Obamabots" are simply paid staffers.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
March 8, 2010 1:41 PM in reply to JorgeOrwell
You would find something like that interesting. How about maybe some of us have other things to do on the weekend and how about the stories are the same old stories and there isn't anything new to discuss. You are pathetic.
The only one who fits the trolling profile is you.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cornelius
March 8, 2010 1:51 PM in reply to lousgirl84
Good question Lousgirl - what DO you do on the weekends?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JorgeOrwell
March 8, 2010 2:09 PM in reply to Cornelius
I'm sure she leads a pretty charmed life with all of that lobby money at her disposal.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
March 8, 2010 9:38 PM in reply to JorgeOrwell
Your comments prove just how stupid you are. You don't know crap about me and what you think you know is also crap. You need to buy a new crystal ball
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JorgeOrwell
March 8, 2010 10:53 PM in reply to lousgirl84
Nice! Workin' from home, eh? Should earn you some Brownie points with Rahm.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
March 8, 2010 2:12 PM in reply to Cornelius
Lots of things and different things on different weekends. And you??
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JorgeOrwell
March 8, 2010 7:49 PM in reply to lousgirl84
I work on computers.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
WaitWut?
March 8, 2010 5:28 PM in reply to JorgeOrwell
I honestly wish that were true. It would be much more rewarding than what I do for 8 hours each day, 5 days every week, 52 weeks of every year...for the rest...of...my...life. But, now that you mention it, how do we know that you and your kind aren’t paid plants from the right to cause disruption to the left? Unfortunately, I’m not paranoid enough to think that way. But...there was that one time...nah.
I am but a lowly supporter of my President. And, I do it for free. And, I support a Public Option, but know the reality of the situation. 35 does not a bill make. A majority of a majority is still a minority.
This isn't meant to be an insult, but why don't Progressives (typically) understand progress? If we can get further than we have been able to in over 40 years, is that not progress? I'm pretty sure that if I was starving in the street that I wouldn't balk at a McDonald's cheeseburger offered in the dining room. I doubt that I would accuse the one offering of not caring enough because he didn’t give me a steak served on fine china.
I’m not going to dismiss this bill because it isn’t everything I wanted. I know it will be better than what I had before...nothing.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JorgeOrwell
March 8, 2010 11:09 PM in reply to WaitWut?
You don't. That's my diabolical plan. Make the Dems live up to their party platform promise of...
"Ensuring quality, affordable health care for every single American."
And making Obama live up to his campaign promise of a "government run" health care system.
Yes, Herrn Karl, our plan of destroying the Democratic Party with their own platform is nearly complete! Moo,ha,ha,ha,ha!
http://www.democrats.org/a/national/american_dream/affordable_health_care/
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Nutter
March 8, 2010 1:45 PM in reply to T Groan
Looks like another teabagger has join the fray. Really, people, you hate Obama when the public option is dead. You hate it when it is gaining steam.
Look at where we are now. You have the House removing the monlopoly law exemption, which I am sure will pass the Senate. The Senate is more than halfway there in getting a reconcilation public option.
What more can you ask for?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JorgeOrwell
March 8, 2010 1:51 PM in reply to Nutter
Why is it that only 30 senators have signed onto the Bennet letter? What are they afraid of?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
xargaw
March 8, 2010 1:57 PM in reply to JorgeOrwell
37 Senators as of today.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JorgeOrwell
March 8, 2010 2:07 PM in reply to xargaw
But, have they ACTUALLY SIGNED? One of my Senators (Cantwell) said she supports the public option, but she didn't SIGN.
There is a HUGE difference, because once they sign, they actually commit themselves to adding the PO back in a reconciliation. If they don't sign, they can simply take cover and say...
"well the PO was never being considered in the reconciliation bill, but if it had been I would have voted for it"
They get the cake and eat it too, without having done a damn thing for their constituents. And the Party-line bots will continue to vote them based on "wouldas".
That's exactly how we continue to get do-nothing back in office every election. A clever game on the part of our "elected" leaders.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
madmatt
March 8, 2010 2:54 PM in reply to Nutter
lol sure the senate will do something to harm the ins cos...how dumb are you!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Leftflank
March 8, 2010 3:49 PM in reply to T Groan
Punk alert!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Turnaround
March 8, 2010 5:56 PM in reply to T Groan
So true. Things would be SOOOOO much better if McCain had won. He would have bombed, bombed, bombed Iran in his first week, had a heat attack and died from the thrill after a month, and we'd have Bible Spice leading us through these darkening days. I'm sure she would be able to push through a public option.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
we r all husseins
March 8, 2010 8:25 PM in reply to T Groan
Quite the contrary, we welcome our Republican friends to join in the discussion.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JorgeOrwell
March 8, 2010 1:30 PM in reply to Alixman984
First, I'll vote for someone else in November. Then Obama will be a lame duck prez anyway (as if he already isn't).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
March 8, 2010 1:34 PM in reply to JorgeOrwell
Surprise, surprise.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
IndyLinda
March 8, 2010 1:37 PM in reply to JorgeOrwell
Maybe you can vote for Romney--"my plan in MA is just like Obama's, but I don't want to talk about that because the wingnuts in my party won't like it." Or Palin--"I sneak across the border to Canada for healthcare but don't want to do anything to actually improve healthcare for the US." Or cheer up. Maybe Nader will be running again.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JorgeOrwell
March 8, 2010 1:48 PM in reply to IndyLinda
Naw, Romney is a douchebag. But, I'll vote for the independent candidate running against my Democratic senator this fall.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JorgeOrwell
March 8, 2010 1:56 PM in reply to IndyLinda
Your plan in Mass is just like the Senate's? No wonder Scott Brown won!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
phillygirl
March 8, 2010 2:42 PM in reply to JorgeOrwell
Yes, President McCain would have fixed everything! President Romney and Vice President Palin will be even better! Mitch McConnell is fired up and ready to go to overhaul the whole health care system so that you will be happy. So much better than your crappy Senator! We'll show those Democrats who's boss. Yeah.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JorgeOrwell
March 8, 2010 7:52 PM in reply to phillygirl
Same as the crowd in there now. Out of Iraq? Nope. Government run health care? Nope Jobs program? Nope.
Yeah, what a change!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JorgeOrwell
March 8, 2010 7:57 PM in reply to phillygirl
Its time for Americans to wake up and get more third party candidates in the House and Senate.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
March 8, 2010 1:32 PM in reply to Alixman984
Welcome Obamabot. That's what they call you here if you support the president - but don't let them scare you away. you have plenty of friends here. screw the trolls
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Brownbagger
March 8, 2010 2:20 PM in reply to lousgirl84
Oh, and god help you if you should say you love the president. That sends them into a blue-faced rage. Nevermind that it has taken decades to get this far, they want what they want and not a spec less right now, or else they'll just run off and vote for a Nazi. Good plan.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CityGuy
March 8, 2010 2:41 PM in reply to Brownbagger
Exactly as I feel. HCR will be a work in progress. Let's get what we can achieve right now first.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Brownbagger
March 8, 2010 3:00 PM in reply to CityGuy
What's going to work is for people to see it in action. That's the only way to really overcome the Repug lies and fearmongering. Down the road you'll have people screamin' "Don't let the government mess with my public option!" And maybe, just maybe, we can pay for it by slashing the warmaking budget. Then we'll really be getting somewhere. Maybe I won't see it, but perhaps my grandchildren.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Turnaround
March 8, 2010 6:03 PM in reply to lousgirl84
Everyone who calls someone an "obamabot" is working from a script. They're paid RNC staffers. I've seen the talking points. Ignore them.
You start with what you can get, and change and amend and improve things after the lumpy white republicans see the world hasn't come to an end.
You can't always get everything you want. But if progressives don't stick together, we won't get anything.
Except maybe a third war. A repeal of Roe v. Wade. Minimum wage rollbacks. Privatization of social security. All kinds of wonderful things.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
March 8, 2010 6:30 PM in reply to Turnaround
Hey I wear that badge with honor.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
March 9, 2010 2:39 AM in reply to madmatt
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
Except for pseudo-"preogressives" who throw a tantrum in order not to take the first step. Why? Becasue they are against progress if it means they must do something besides whine and smear. Whine and LIE.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
LeeJo
March 8, 2010 12:47 PM
madmatt,
It is sooooo comforting to see that you know everything about not just what should be in health care reform but also how to pass it....NOT!
Politics is the "art of the possible." We pass what we can and then improve on it from there. That is what has been done with every major program passed during the history of the nation. We would all be better served if those who claim to be in favor of health care reform were to grow up and behave like adults. Instead we hear this carping about things not being perfect as an excuse to not do anything it would be productive to work to advance the cause or get out of the way for those who are willing to move the cause forward.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JorgeOrwell
March 8, 2010 1:54 PM in reply to LeeJo
The "art of the possible"? Well, with the pesky filibuster out of the way, it's now possible to pass a PUBLIC OPTION and make it take effect immediately!
Glad to see you guys are back to "YES WE CAN"!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AdAbsurdum
March 8, 2010 3:27 PM in reply to JorgeOrwell
Imagine an eventual future Republican majority and no filibuster to keep them at bay. It would be a true nightmare. It's a longstanding tradition that protects from the excesses of both sides.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JorgeOrwell
March 8, 2010 7:47 PM in reply to AdAbsurdum
That's crap. The institution of the Senate was developed for this purpose. It gives every state 2 votes regardless of the number of citizens of the state.
The filibuster rule, which wasn't introduced until the 20th century (1917) is simply a power grab parliamentary slight of hand designed to take power from the House (representing based on population).
Its another way to subvert the will of the people in favor of the monied interests.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
madmatt
March 8, 2010 2:59 PM in reply to LeeJo
I am all for not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, but this bill is letting shit be the enemy of more shit.
Show me a single cost control mechanism, enforcement option, or even a control on how much money the ins co's can take off the top of their $3 trillion handout (30 million at $1000 a policy which with a 5k deductible). Hell show me a reason why we should trust any senator at all with "improving" the bill?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
pmb50
March 8, 2010 1:01 PM
Finally he found his balls, now if you can get the democrats to grow a pair and talk like this we may be back in business
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
MyMy
March 8, 2010 1:21 PM
The plan does call for at least one non-profit to be in the exchanges. There are now something like 37 or 38 senators on the record for passing a public option through reconciliation. Is what the senate votes for in Obama's hands? Do you honestly think him all-powerful?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Nutter
March 8, 2010 1:47 PM
I want every FUCKING "FUCK YOU OBAMA" troll here to just SHUT UP when we actually get your public option!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cornelius
March 8, 2010 1:57 PM in reply to Nutter
Well Nutter, I will shut up if this legislation includes a PO. But I'm feeling real confident it will not. Think about it before you pull an ALL CAPS outrage again!! Mandated insurance w/o cost controls. An 8th grade class would figure the potential problems with this in about 15 minutes. Really.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
madmatt
March 8, 2010 3:00 PM in reply to Nutter
Fine, and when you get screwed in reconciliation we want an apology for being the shameless corporate shill you are.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
xargaw
March 8, 2010 2:02 PM
As of today, we have 37 Sentors signing on to supporting the PO in reconciliation and yet, Obama says it won't fly. The fact that he won't fight for it is very distressing and suggests that he never was for it. What deal has he made behind our backs that betrays his campaign rhetoric? As someone that worked long hours for his election he has done a 180 on several critical issues that really amount to nothing short of betrayal.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Juble
March 8, 2010 2:28 PM in reply to xargaw
Yeah 37 senators not because of the WH.
Thanks to the PCCC for that effort,the WH is still trying to kill the PO just like the Drug re-importation bill.
It's about time folks realize that the WH is more likely to cuddle with Corporations & the wealthy as opposed to ordianry Americans.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rwc
March 8, 2010 2:37 PM in reply to xargaw
Yes, that's what is most distressing to me.
There was a real good chance that no matter what Obama did, the votes were just not there to pass a PO, strong or not. The fact is, even in the House where progressives have more strength, the PO they passed was pretty weak.
But I never got the impression that the WH even tried to pass a PO and heard several reports -- admittedly not conclusive -- that the WH had dealt away the PO early in the proceedings. If Obama had pushed hard for the PO and failed, I'd still be a strong supporter; it's the lack of effort that bothers me.
That said, I still say everyone on the left -- and I include most posters here with the exception of a few like sailor boy and shooter -- should be pushing hard to have this bill passed even without the PO. And then we have to keep pushing to make this reform better. And that includes pushing out the worst corporate Dems in primaries -- I just sent $50 to Halter in Arkansas.
We have to learn how to both scream, complain and threaten the Democrats to push then farther to the left and yet still know when to coalesce with those very same people to consolidate any gains we can make at the moment.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
March 8, 2010 6:28 PM in reply to xargaw
Yes, I also recall your saying that the young voters feel betrayed and he's lost their votes. I guess you didn't see the last article saying that the young vote is totally behind him more than ever.
I find it hard to believe that someone who works as hard as you claimed to have worked would be so done on him, especially at this point.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hollywood
March 8, 2010 2:42 PM
There is a certain depressing circular logic to saying you will not fight for the public option .... because there are not quite enough votes ... because you won't fight for them ..... because there are not enough ... because you won't fight ..... etc....
On the other hand it is exactly true that passing this mess will get us closer to passing the improvements! Social Security and Medicare were done in progressively better versions and are still being improved. When your logic on reform brings you to a place where you are siding with the rethuglicans and fuksnews on killing it and hating Obama, you had better question your logic.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Leftflank
March 8, 2010 6:04 PM in reply to hollywood
I basically tried to say this a few times also & I believe for the same reason you're saying it. No matter what, this isn't the end of the road. The better the bill now the less to improve later, but there will always be improvements needed. First things first though, get the bill passed & then keep pushing for making it better or adding in what was left out.
Complaining about not getting exactly what you want & giving up is self defeating & it's the same complaint everyone makes about Congress. We & Congress must come together to get the ball rolling then go to work on all of the seperate issues.
Also, I totally agree with your logic.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tanjaoui
March 8, 2010 2:45 PM
The President's plan is closely modeled on the current system in Massachusetts, which also mandates individuals to purchase health care from private companies, provides subsidies and establishes an exchange. That might provides us with some idea as to how the President's plan will manage to accomplish one of the two major goals of health care reform: containing cost/expanding affordability. This is from Saturday's Boston Globe:
http://www.boston.com/business/healthcare/articles/2010/03/06/health_rate_hikes_flout_new_state_cap/
My short take is that the system there is fraying. It has accomplished the other main goal of health care reform (near universal coverage). But, clearly, that goal is imperiled by spiraling costs. As costs rise, people will be forced to buy cheaper plans. Obama's bill sets up a 4 class triage based on income - platinum, gold, silver and bronze - rationing health care by ability to pay. When you check into the hospital, for example, one of the first things the triage nurse will want to see is which 'class' (income group) you belong to. The less expensive plans will naturally be more restrictive in their coverage, meaning as someone who can't afford a platinum, gold or silver plan, you'll pay more for the same health care that someone gets on his or her higher tier plan. Your health is being treated as a bargaining chip in the marketplace.
I'd feel very differently about this plan if they eliminated income discrimination by eliminating deductibles and making premiums and co-pays identical.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
madmatt
March 8, 2010 2:53 PM
They win either way...after all they wrote the bill for Baucus, you don't believe they were being altruistic do you?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
teabagger
March 8, 2010 5:49 PM
What do you expect from the Bamster, he's a community organizer turned college professor.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
glblank
March 8, 2010 8:46 PM in reply to teabagger
Pretty humorous coming from a cocksucker turned scrotum dipper
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hollywood
March 9, 2010 1:12 AM in reply to glblank
Hey you say that like there is something wrong with cocksucking? Your mom is a cocksucker and your gramma was a cocksucker. Your sister is a cocksucker and your girlfriends are all cocksuckers ....... so please say something insulting if that is what you meant .... jeezuz!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
March 9, 2010 8:31 AM in reply to glblank
Good one. I must remember that.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
saltjr
March 8, 2010 8:41 PM
Perhaps I should have understood the problem when my local Democratic county party chairperson and her husband explained to me why the requirement to have health insurance was "terrible".
I'm sorry, at age 75, having run several insurance companies and been consultant to many more, I must conclude that anyone who does not support the proposed reforms as a major step in a direction that is positive for most US Citizens is either badly informed, an idiot or some utopian ideologue who for all practical purposes qualifies as an "idiot".
This "idiot" category seems to apply to most of the posters on this site.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
we r all husseins
March 8, 2010 8:47 PM
"A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step".
HCR is not a destination, it is a journey. Not one piece of major legislation passed in the last hundred years has been perfect from the get go. All have been tweaked and improved over time. HCR is taking its first steps, and you're expecting it to run.
Now quityerbitchin.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
saltjr
March 8, 2010 9:29 PM
Perhaps I should have understood the problem when my local Democratic county party chairperson and her husband explained to me why the requirement to have health insurance was "terrible".
I'm sorry, at age 75, having run several insurance companies and been consultant to many more, I must conclude that anyone who does not support the proposed reforms as a major step in a direction that is positive for most US Citizens is either badly informed, an idiot or some utopian ideologue who for all practical purposes qualifies as an "idiot".
This "idiot" category seems to apply to most of the posters on this site.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
March 9, 2010 8:30 AM in reply to saltjr
Agreed and co-signed.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tanjaoui
March 9, 2010 8:57 AM in reply to saltjr
The bill is supposed to (1) move us in the direction of universal health care, and (2) contain costs/improve affordability. It does the first. It will not accomplish the second goal, which, inevitably, will compromise the first (universal access to health care - which is a more realistic criterion than health insurance).
In the President's plan, people who can't afford to pay high premiums (those who enroll in bronze or even silver plans) will have higher out-of-pocket expenses when they use health care. That is a highly regressive - and ultimately self-defeating - approach to health care access/delivery.
It would be better to start over on the issue with a plan that accomplishes both goals. HR 676 or a plan such as that laid out at the PNHP website. There are also proven European models, such as those used in Germany, Holland and Switzerland, that use private insurers as health care 'middlemen', but which are less wasteful and more protective of the consumer than the model under discussion.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Viva!America!
March 8, 2010 10:10 PM
We should wait until Howard Dean is President. With a "true" liberal in the White House and "true" conservatives controlling the House and the Senate, he can get so much more done than Obama. Wooooh!!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JorgeOrwell
March 8, 2010 11:00 PM in reply to Viva!America!
Yep, sadly it will be Republicans running both houses after November, if the Senate doesn't pass a PO that takes effect immediately.
Obama or Dean, what's the dif after this "Democratic" Senate botches it.
Judging by their refusal to listen to their constituents, I'm pretty sure these "two" parties are one and the same anyway.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tanjaoui
March 9, 2010 8:59 AM in reply to JorgeOrwell
Obama to the nation: 'See? I did something!'
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
StewartIII
March 12, 2010 12:35 PM
Hot Air: Obamateurism of the Day
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/03/12/obamateurism-of-the-day-228/
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tosh
May 16, 2010 6:31 PM
That's crap. The institution of the Senate was developed for this purpose. It gives every state 2 votes regardless of the number of citizens of the state.
The filibuster rule, which wasn't introduced until the 20th century (1917) is simply a power grab parliamentary slight of hand designed to take power from the House (representing based on population).
Its another way to subvert the will of the people in favor of the monied interests.
m65 kamagra
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?