LawTalkers - You (all) lie!

serious question- and removed from blogs= since you don't have clue 1 about hsas and they are the cutting edge of what is going on now in HC, how do you have the balls to pretend to post about shit? I mean that a serious question. i can fake it in lit situations but you have been proven w/o knowledge about current hc but post like an expert. where do you get the balls? I ask as an admirer.

A ball-admirer. Awesome.

TM

Tyrone Slothrop

02-23-2010 10:54 AM

Re: What gave Cheney a Heart Attack

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy (Post 417302)

5 Rs for the job bill. Is there hope for bipartisanship, or is this the exception that proves the rule?

One view:

Quote:

Republicans Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins and Scott Brown voted to defeat a GOP filibuster of a $15 billion tax break for businesses that hire workers. Ben Nelson voted with the Republicans.

What does this tell you? It tells you that these Senators recognized that the legislation is essentially symbolic, and therefore a good time to burnish their moderate credentials rather than spend political capital to advance their party's agenda.

Chait

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

02-23-2010 11:02 AM

Re: What gave Cheney a Heart Attack

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 417313)

One view:

Chait

But isn't the idea that moderate credentials are even desired in the Republican party a positive development?

Even if we're just talking about a handful of New Englanders and a couple retirees.

Tyrone Slothrop

02-23-2010 11:24 AM

Re: You (all) lie!

“Unfortunately the subject [of the Panic of 1837] has been connected with the party politics of the day. Nothing can be more unfavorable to the development of truth, on questions in political economy, than such a connection. A good deal which is false, with some admixture of truth, has been put forward by political partisans on either side. As it is the wish of the writer that the subject should be discussed on its own merits and free from such contaminating connection, he has avoided as much as possible all reference to the political parties of the day” (Appleton (1857), May 1841).

Tyrone Slothrop

02-23-2010 11:25 AM

Re: What gave Cheney a Heart Attack

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy (Post 417316)

But isn't the idea that moderate credentials are even desired in the Republican party a positive development?

Maybe they're playing to the David Broders of the world, rather than anyone in the GOP. But I would like to understand better how the GOP enforces party discipline.

SlaveNoMore

02-23-2010 11:27 AM

Re: The Economist and the Left Wing

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 417305)

The only reason the procedure is complicated is that the Republican minority is doing its upmost to obstruct, and won't allow and up or down vote in the Senate, where there's no question that the bill can get a majority.

1) The House Bill would not get a majority in the Senate, nor would the Senate bill get a majority in the House.

2) Even these majorities we speak of are no longer a given. I'm assuming you've noticed those folks fleeing to the exit doors?

SlaveNoMore

02-23-2010 11:29 AM

Re: What gave Cheney a Heart Attack

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 417313)

Chait

I hate typing these words, but Chait is absolutely spot on on this one.

Cletus Miller

02-23-2010 11:36 AM

Re: You (all) lie!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 417319)

So, who will be our Teabagger president?

Tyrone Slothrop

02-23-2010 11:39 AM

Re: The Economist and the Left Wing

Quote:

Originally Posted by SlaveNoMore (Post 417321)

1) The House Bill would not get a majority in the Senate, nor would the Senate bill get a majority in the House.

I doubt that either of those statements are true, but we will never find out, because the GOP will not let the votes happen [eta -- presumably because they think you're wrong. If they agreed, they'd let the bills go down to defeat]. There clearly was going to be compromise legislation that would pass both houses, but the Republican Senators will obstruct it.

Quote:

2) Even these majorities we speak of are no longer a given. I'm assuming you've noticed those folks fleeing to the exit doors?

Maybe so.

sebastian_dangerfield

02-23-2010 12:32 PM

Re: The Economist and the Left Wing

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 417305)

No, I understood well before Congress votes, just not before the summit.

And I really don't get the "ram it through" talk. You're talking about legislation that has passed the House and the Senate, albeit in different forms. The only reason the procedure is complicated is that the Republican minority is doing its upmost to obstruct, and won't allow and up or down vote in the Senate, where there's no question that the bill can get a majority.

Politically, procedurally, that is ramming something through. Built into those bills are "infantry" provisions expected to be conceded to get through the obstruction you reference. Blasting through, or end-running around, the anticipated remaining hurdles pushes through a bill far more broad than anyone wanted or expected.

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

02-23-2010 12:40 PM

Re: The Economist and the Left Wing

Quote:

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 417350)

After it's been debated over and over again, time to let the majority rule.

Anything else is just procedural obstructionism.

sebastian_dangerfield

02-23-2010 12:42 PM

Re: The Economist and the Left Wing

Quote:

Originally Posted by SlaveNoMore (Post 417321)

HC Bill everyone hates + Poor Q2 #s + 10% Unemployment through the fall + "Let's throw out all the incumbents" sentiment in November = ???

I think the assumption the Dems will lose tons of seats in November is more reliance on past cycles than careful assessment of the present. The anger has no clarifying vision save, "It's all broken... Fire them all!" If things stay as they are, and they will, this will be one of the most amusing and utterly unpredictable run of midterms in a long time. Perhaps ever.

Tyrone Slothrop

02-23-2010 12:48 PM

Re: The Economist and the Left Wing

Quote:

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 417350)

I thought Slave's point was procedural. Yours seems to be substantive, although how anyone is "blasting through" or "end-running" hurdles is beyond me.

Healthcare reform has been working its way through the House and Senate for more than six months now. I get that neither of you like it. But you both know that your views are unpopular, which is why you're trying to bootstrap a silly complaint about process.

sebastian_dangerfield

02-23-2010 12:51 PM

Re: The Economist and the Left Wing

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy (Post 417354)

After it's been debated over and over again, time to let the majority rule.

Anything else is just procedural obstructionism.

...Which is a part of the process factored in from the outset.

If the Dems slam this thing through right now, I think it will be a nuclear-level disaster for the party. And considering how lousy and toothless the bill is, I have to wonder why the fuck they'd want to let this steaming pile of shit turn into their Waterloo. They can backpedal on this and hold moderates. Ramming it through pushes tons of moderates to the GOP, and no - those moderate losses will not be offset by new voters coming to the Dems because they like the HC Bill. The people this expansion minded HC Bill helps, the poor and underinsured, either don't vote or are already Democrats. And most of them are more immediately concerned with employment than health care.*

* I say "immediately" to avoid having someone respond with, "But HC Reform and employment are tied together. Don't people see that?" No. No they don't.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:32 PM.

Page 171 of 335

171

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page