Rep. Barney Frank Lays The Smackdown

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by wittynickname

You can push it through without bipartisan support--but if you push it through without bipartisan support, you run the risk of destroying any semblance of harmony between the two parties. It's possible, certainly, but is it worth the risk?

For say business tax cuts no, but if Healthcare reform is so important as everyone seems to think it is they should push it through. Some things the party(s) just has a different opinion. Dems won because of their policies, not because people think they Reps-lite.

It would require politicians taking a stand, and as we all know they are are all spineless.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by wittynickname

You can push it through without bipartisan support--but if you push it through without bipartisan support, you run the risk of destroying any semblance of harmony between the two parties. It's possible, certainly, but is it worth the risk?

Apparently it is...at least according to the Democrats...cause I believe they want to try it.

[troutman]

There is no harmony between the parties, so the Dems having nothing to risk there by pushing through a health plan. See Rachel Maddow's "Pizza Parable":


http://video.msn.com/video.aspx?mkt=...8-7c2e5ccd5bf7

Aug. 18: Republicans oppose single-payer, public option, and co-op insurance options in the healthcare reform bill, so what do they actually support? After an enlightening TRMS skit on ordering dinner, Rachel Maddow is joined by Richard Trumka, secretary-treasurer of the AFL-CIO.

I think the Dems are more worried about public opinion, not harmony with the GOP.

[Azure]

The problem is that there are a lot of blue-dog Democrats that don't necessarily fall in line with the top Democrats.

They would need their support.

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by troutman

There is no harmony between the parties, so the Dems having nothing to risk there by pushing through a health plan. See Rachel Maddow's "Pizza Parable":


http://video.msn.com/video.aspx?mkt=...8-7c2e5ccd5bf7

Aug. 18: Republicans oppose single-payer, public option, and co-op insurance options in the healthcare reform bill, so what do they actually support? After an enlightening TRMS skit on ordering dinner, Rachel Maddow is joined by Richard Trumka, secretary-treasurer of the AFL-CIO.

I think the Dems are more worried about public opinion, not harmony with the GOP.

That's actually more what I was getting at--the reason the Dems have control of everything right now is because for 8 years the Republicans carried much of the control, and it all went to hell in a handbasket. If the Dems push this through without at least reasonable support from both sides, they risk falling out of favor the same way the Republicans did in the last few years.

The goal is to get, and then keep the upper hand--pushing this through too quickly, with too little support, would negatively impact the Democratic party for the next several years.


Again, I want to state that I'm not a Democrat, nor a Republican. There are values of each party with which I agree and disagree.

But for me, health care reform is a hot button issue. One way or another, something needs to be done. I still don't think this current bill is going to happen, and I don't necessarily think that is a bad thing, because rarely does the initial draft fix the problems. However, this shows that at least there are people in Washington realizing that the current system does not work. And that is a very good thing, maybe not at this exact moment in time, but I'd like to think that when I hit my parents' age, this country will have figured something out so that I don't have to go without insurance because it's out of the price range of the average working citizen.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by wittynickname

You can push it through without bipartisan support--but if you push it through without bipartisan support, you run the risk of destroying any semblance of harmony between the two parties. It's possible, certainly, but is it worth the risk?

Also, there's a fairly large group of democrats that don't support the bill anyway, which is actually refreshing. It's nice to see people willing to stand up for what they think is the right thing to do rather than just doing what the letter beside your name says your supposed to do.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by wittynickname

There was a fantastic segment on the Daily Show tonight showing how all these people who are tearing down Obama right now were saying what a travesty it was for people to refuse support to Bush just two or three years ago. But clearly now it's okay to refer to the President as Hitler? Really?

It goes both ways though. Some of the same folks crying foul (rightly) about the venom being spewed at Obama were the same folks comparing Bush to Hitler for the previous 8 years and calling him a war criminal.

It's not right, either way.

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

It goes both ways though. Some of the same folks crying foul (rightly) about the venom being spewed at Obama were the same folks comparing Bush to Hitler for the previous 8 years and calling him a war criminal.

It's not right, either way.

Absolutely, both sides have idiots, both sides have their strong points. The hypocrisy of both ends of the spectrum makes me crazy. Bush did some things that were questionable constitutionally, so the liberal side villainized him. The same people are now praising Obama. Then conservatives throw a fit if you try to take away their right to own a firearm, but I don't think many of them were complaining when the State of California gave homosexuals the right to marry--and then took that right away.

Both sides are self-serving and care only for their own agenda, and unfortunately, most of the citizens in the middle get the worst from both sides.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by fotze

So white people are calling a black guy and a gay jew, nazis? WDF?

People who probably failed high school history.

Seriously, the allies weren't fighting the Nazis due to their health care reform plans.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Also, there's a fairly large group of democrats that don't support the bill anyway, which is actually refreshing. It's nice to see people willing to stand up for what they think is the right thing to do rather than just doing what the letter beside your name says your supposed to do.

I don't look at that as refreshing, I look at it as a bunch of politicians who have been bought off by the health care companies.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

I don't look at that as refreshing, I look at it as a bunch of politicians who have been bought off by the health care companies.

Of course you do....because anyone who disagrees with your view has to be evil or corrupt.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Of course you do....because anyone who disagrees with your view has to be evil or corrupt.

Yeah, sure so following your logic I guess I think you are evil and corrupt too?
I just get tired of listening to people who don't use any logic with their answers, so just to be clear, I really don't think you are evil and corrupt, just misinformed.

[wittynickname]

I love listening to Jon Stewart work people. If you can watch tonight's Daily Show, do it: He's talking to the "death panel" woman right now, and listening to her talk exasperates me.

I have family who dealt with these issues. My grandmother did not want to be kept alive by artificial means. She had a living will and a directive card stating as much. She was adamantly against taking blood transfusions, etc.

While in advanced stages of cancer, she was unable to answer these questions for herself. If it had gone to next of kin, my uncle, her wishes would've been compromised, because he was insistent on keeping her alive by any means necessary--though it would've compromised her wishes and her faith. Had she not had a legal document--the medical directive/living will--her wishes wouldn't have been carried out.

You can have that living will say anything. You can tell doctors to keep you alive by any means possible. The point of a directive is to ensure that family doesn't emotionally decide something that would compromise the faith/beliefs/decisions of someone who may not be able to answer for him or herself.

It isn't about getting rid of grandma because she's of advanced age. It's about encouraging people to know what they want, to make those decisions at a time when they're level-headed, of sound mind, etc, so that when an emergency arises, doctors aren't left trying to deal with family who may be arguing, estranged, of different beliefs, etc.

There are plenty of issues with the bill as it stands--but that part I fully, 100% support.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

Yeah, sure so following your logic I guess I think you are evil and corrupt too?
I just get tired of listening to people who don't use any logic with their answers, so just to be clear, I really don't think you are evil and corrupt, just misinformed.

Oh, I am not misinformed.

I thought it was implied that we were speaking about politicians. Next time I'll spell it out more clearly so we don't get caught up in this illogical mess. Where else in the thread were we talking about anything but politicians?

And I'm the illogical one.....

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Oh, I am not misinformed.

I thought it was implied that we were speaking about politicians. Next time I'll spell it out more clearly so we don't get caught up in this illogical mess. Where else in the thread were we talking about anything but politicians?

And I'm the illogical one.....

Well when you said what you said 'anyone who disagrees with your view', I took it as an attack at me, not at the politicians.

You actually believe most of these politicians aren't beholden to the health care companies? I believe 90% of them are a bunch of crooks both left and right wing and the odd time some of them try to do something right like this health care bill.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

I don't look at that as refreshing, I look at it as a bunch of politicians who have been bought off by the health care companies.

You damn right.

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama's push for a national health care overhaul is providing a financial windfall in the election offseason to Democratic consulting firms that are closely connected to the president and two top advisers.


Coalitions of interest groups running at least $24 million in pro-overhaul ads hired GMMB, which worked for Obama's 2008 campaign and whose partners include a top Obama campaign strategist. They also hired AKPD Message and Media, which was founded by David Axelrod, a top adviser to Obama's campaign and now to the White House. AKPD did work for Obama's campaign, and Axelrod's son Michael and Obama's campaign manager David Plouffe work there.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090819/...re_consultants

Politicians with ties to health care. I knew there was a reason Obama was making a push to implement his plan.

Now you've gone and uncovered it.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Azure

You damn right.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090819/...re_consultants

Politicians with ties to health care. I knew there was a reason Obama was making a push to implement his plan.

Now you've gone and uncovered it.

Good to know there is some money on the good guys side, otherwise health care reform would be a lost cause. Except for the pharmaceutical company, they sound like their only reward will be better healthcare.

The firms were hired by Americans for Stable Quality Care and its predecessor, Healthy Economy Now. Each was formed by a coalition of interests with big stakes in health care policy, including the drug maker lobby PhRMA, the American Medical Association, the Service Employees International Union and Families USA, which calls itself "The Voice for Health Care Consumers."

I don't see Obama and his men being directly paid off like the opponents to health care are.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Azure

You damn right.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090819/...re_consultants

Politicians with ties to health care. I knew there was a reason Obama was making a push to implement his plan.

Now you've gone and uncovered it.

Let's not pull the wool over our own eyes here. There are no good guys in the U.S. health care mess--not Obama, not Frank, not the blue dogs, not Pelosi and CERTAINLY not the GOP, whose roster of alternate solutions is shorter than a hobo's grocery list. Everyone's got their fingers in this pie, and when the legislation takes its final form there will be plenty of kickbacks for the health care industry--it couldn't pass otherwise. There are already some pretty nice plums for the pharmaceutical companies, which they got in exchange for allowing price negotiation with the government.

The Democrats do deserve credit for trying to take on a thorny and complicated problem--note that Bush never really attempted anything of nearly this complexity. However, they also deserve blame for failing to come up with a sufficiently simple solution (mostly because they lack political courage) and Obama deserves blame for leaving the details in the hands of the Congress. The U.S. congress could turn a diner lunch menu into an 11,000 page document.

So, there's enough blame to go around. But really, the worst option was to do nothing--and at least they didn't do that. But Obama should perhaps have paid attention to the lesson of the Gordian knot. When a knot can't be untangled, chop it in half and get a new rope. That's the solution the U.S. needs, and sadly for their people it's the one they'll never get.

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Let's not pull the wool over our own eyes here. There are no good guys in the U.S. health care mess--not Obama, not Frank, not the blue dogs, not Pelosi and CERTAINLY not the GOP, whose roster of alternate solutions is shorter than a hobo's grocery list. Everyone's got their fingers in this pie, and when the legislation takes its final form there will be plenty of kickbacks for the health care industry--it couldn't pass otherwise. There are already some pretty nice plums for the pharmaceutical companies, which they got in exchange for allowing price negotiation with the government.

The Democrats do deserve credit for trying to take on a thorny and complicated problem--note that Bush never really attempted anything of nearly this complexity. However, they also deserve blame for failing to come up with a sufficiently simple solution (mostly because they lack political courage) and Obama deserves blame for leaving the details in the hands of the Congress. The U.S. congress could turn a diner lunch menu into an 11,000 page document.

So, there's enough blame to go around. But really, the worst option was to do nothing--and at least they didn't do that. But Obama should perhaps have paid attention to the lesson of the Gordian knot. When a knot can't be untangled, chop it in half and get a new rope. That's the solution the U.S. needs, and sadly for their people it's the one they'll never get.

Thank you for wording it all much better than I have been. There's plenty of blame to go around--but at least now there are people accepting that there is a problem, and that something needs to be done about it.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Azure

You damn right.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090819/...re_consultants

Politicians with ties to health care. I knew there was a reason Obama was making a push to implement his plan.

Now you've gone and uncovered it.

I'm sure you aren't saying this, but that reads like you are saying he's pushing this plan so a consulting firm can get some business.

So since that's not it, what do you mean?