Archive for Sunday, September 13, 2009

Tens of thousands protest Obama initiatives at Capitol

September 13, 2009

Advertisement

Karla Lefin and her son Zack hold up banners as they demonstrate on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., during a taxpayer rally. Tens of thousands of protesters gathered at the capital to denounce President Barack Obama’s policies.

Karla Lefin and her son Zack hold up banners as they demonstrate on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., during a taxpayer rally. Tens of thousands of protesters gathered at the capital to denounce President Barack Obama’s policies.

— Tens of thousands of conservative protesters, many complaining that the nation is racing toward socialism, massed outside the U.S. Capitol on Saturday, angrily denouncing President Barack Obama’s health care plan and other initiatives as threats to the Constitution.

The crowd — loud, animated and sprawling — gathered at the West Front of the Capitol after a march along Pennsylvania Avenue. Invocations of God and former President Ronald Reagan by an array of speakers drew loud cheers that echoed across the Mall. On a windy, overcast afternoon, hundreds of yellow “Don’t Tread on Me” flags flapped in the breeze.

“Hell hath no fury like a taxpayer ignored,” declared Andrew Moylan, head of government affairs for the National Taxpayers Union, urging protesters to call their representatives. The demonstrators roared their approval.

“We own the dome!” they chanted, pointing at the Capitol.

The demonstrators are part of a loose-knit movement that is galvanizing anti-Obama sentiment across the country, stoking a populist dimension to the Republican Party, which has struggled to find its voice since the 2008 elections.

With Democrats in control of Congress, battling the president legislatively has been difficult. But after a spring of anti-tax rallies and summer health care protests proved to be effective, a growing number of GOP leaders are dropping their wariness and seeing the political possibilities of latching onto this freewheeling coalition. Others are cautious about embracing views that can be seen as extremist.

No official crowd estimate was available, but Saturday’s throng appeared to number in the many tens of thousands. The sound system did not reach far enough for people at the edges of the rally to hear the speakers onstage.

“You will not spend the money of our children and our grandchildren to feed an overstuffed government,” Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga., said of the Obama administration, drawing raucous applause.

“Our history is decorated by those who endured the burden of defending freedom,” Price said. “Now a new generation of patriots has emerged. You are those patriots.”

The group’s sponsors included FreedomWorks, a Washington-based group headed by former House Majority Leader Richard Armey, R-Tex., and the groups Tea Party Patriots and ResistNet. They and others involved in the rally comprise a loose coalition of conservative groups that helped organize the health-care and anti-tax demonstrations in the spring and summer.

“Health care is not listed anywhere in the Constitution,” said Brian Burnell, 45, who owns an insurance company on Maryland’s Eastern Shore. His placard read, “How Is That Hopey Changey Thing Workin’ Out For Ya?”

“You want socialism?” said Susan Clark, a District resident marching with a bullhorn. “Go to Russia!”

The White House declined to comment on the demonstration, but Democrats said the rally and other protests in recent months represent a small minority of voters and will not slow Obama’s proposals.

Saturday’s demonstrators spanned the spectrum of conservative anger at Obama, including opponents of his tax, spending and health-care plans and protesters who question his U.S. citizenship and compare his administration to the Nazi regime.

Most signs were handmade: “Socialism is UnAmerican,” “King George Didn’t Listen Either!” “Terrorists Won’t Destroy America, Congress Will!” and “The American Dream R.I.P.” Many protesters carried the now-familiar poster of Obama made up to look like the Joker, captioned “Socialism.”

Some came to protest what they see as government interference with gun ownership. Shaun Bryant, 40, a leadership trainer, was among eight people who flew in from Salt Lake City.

They fashioned a sign with a drawing of an AR-15 assault rifle and the words, “We came unarmed from Montana and Utah ... this time!”

Dozens of signs mentioned Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., who heckled Obama during a Wednesday night speech to Congress.

Dee Meredith, 62, of Callao, Va., said she had never heard of Wilson before he shouted at the president, “You lie!” At the rally, Meredith waved a placard: “Thank You Joe Wilson.”

“We’re the forgotten people,” she said, “and he’s given us a voice.”

Comments

kugrad 5 years, 9 months ago

I can't get over the fact that the media is so ready to report on this staged event when they completely failed to report on the literally millions of people who marched nationwide on a single day to protest the upcoming war in Iraq prior to Bush's inititation of said conflict. There were hundreds of thousands of people who were NOT organized by either political party, but just concerned citizens on the streets in perhaps the largest nationwide protests (in terms of numbers of people involved) in our nation's history, and it got scarcely a mention, no real coverage. Similarly, when more people than are in Washington right now to protest showed up on inauguration day 8+ years ago to protest what they saw as an unfair outcome to the national election, this news was not even reported. We had to wait to see it in Farenheit 911 to even know it occurred. There was NO coverage. So much for the liberal media myth.

Flap Doodle 5 years, 9 months ago

So you're saying, "shut up & be a good German", ag?

(throwing myself a Godwin flag)

Alexander Neighbors 5 years, 9 months ago

You know what the title of this story needs to be changed to tens of thousands protest for and against.

There were people from both sides protesting

beatrice 5 years, 9 months ago

Isn't this just what the losers do? Republican conservatives, or rather those who have been representing conservatives recently in the GOP, completely messed up their chances to continue in public office. Now they find themselves on the outside looking in, and they don't like it. That hardly means their complaints are legitimate. Whining about Socialism? Yawn. Threats of bringing weapons to Washington? Treasonous, and evidence of the fanatical right Janet Napolitano has warned us of.

The Million Moron March.

Go home neocon losers! Clean up your party GOP, or it may be a very long time before you experience anything resembling control again.

9070811 5 years, 9 months ago

We're already a socialist leaning nation. We have been for quite some time.

Derek Neibarger 5 years, 9 months ago

"Health care is not listed anywhere in the Constitution,” said Brian Burnell, 45, who owns an insurance company"

gee, wonder why he's against health care reform? were there some pharmaceutical and insurance lobbyists there waving signs too? might as well throw some oil execs in as well, and anyone else who profits by keeping things exactly as they are in Mall-America.

oldvet 5 years, 9 months ago

"The Million Moron March. "

Actually, bea, that was the one held back in October, 1995...

Richard Heckler 5 years, 9 months ago

Look at the way the most expensive medical insurance industry in the world in blowing health care dollars. It's time to cut that industry off tax dollar subsidies.

Richard Heckler 5 years, 9 months ago

I love it. The mideastern families fully agree and they want OUR big government out of their lives and their country. End the war NOW and save dollars and many many lives.

Al qaeda and the Taliban leaders are in full agreement.

Bring the troops home NOW to reduce the size of USA big government.

AND in order to send tax dollars back home to taxpayers all across the country fund HR 676 and stop the subsidies to the most expensive insensitive medical insurance industry in the world.

The U.S. health insurance system is typically characterized as a largely private-sector system, so it may come as a surprise that more than 60% of the $2 trillion annual U.S. health insurance bill is paid through taxes which comes to $1.2 trillion.

What would a new HR 676 Medicare Insurance Plan cost 365 days a year 24/7?

A family of four making the median income of $56,200 would pay about $2,700 in payroll tax for all health care costs. About $225 per month. Today the below insurance coverage actually costs about $1,100 per month.

  • long term care such that cancer would require
  • prescription drugs
  • hospital
  • surgical
  • outpatient services
  • primary and preventive care
  • emergency services
  • dental
  • mental health
  • home health
  • physical therapy
  • rehabilitation (including for substance abuse)
  • vision care
  • hearing services including hearing aids
  • chiropractic
  • durable medical equipment
  • palliative care

A family of four making the median income of $56,200 would pay about $2,700 in payroll tax for all health care costs. About $225 per month. Today the above insurance coverage actually costs about $1,100 per month.

HR 676 ends deductibles and co-payments. If a deductible and/or co-pay policy is in effect this usually indicates under-insured.

HR 676 would save hundreds of billions annually by eliminating the high overhead of the private health insurance industry and HMOs. The privatized medical insurance industry is anything but efficient. AND DOES NOT PROVIDE HEALTH CARE.

HR 676 contains costs and saves about $350,000,000,000 annually. But special interest politicians don't want to talk about HR 676. So they present bills that will increase the cost. Why? Special interest campaign funding(the industry) is writing those bills.... foxes in the chicken coop!

Changing nothing certainly will save nothing ever!

Senate Report Finds Insurers Wrongfully Charged Consumers Billions = BIG TIME CORRUPTION http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/24/AR2009062401636.html

Go to : http://www.healthcare-now.org/hr-676/

Again the U.S. health insurance system is typically characterized as a largely private-sector system, so it may come as a surprise that more than 60% of the $2 trillion annual U.S. health insurance bill is paid through taxes which comes to $1.2 trillion. $1.2 trillion is a sweet gravy train for the industry. STOP THE SUBSIDIES TODAY!

Flap Doodle 5 years, 9 months ago

Everyone should print out a copy of HR 676. TP could be in short supply some day.

Richard Heckler 5 years, 9 months ago

The 60-70k that showed up in Washington are very likely medical insurance shareholders or other financially connected individuals more interested in their personal wealth than in what's best for the USA.

Scott Drummond 5 years, 9 months ago

“We’re the forgotten people,” she said, “and he’s given us a voice.”

Forgotten for a reason, honey. The views of the ignorant, ill-informed and racist fringe are frequently, easily and justifiably forgotten. Speak up when you have something useful and productive to offer, otherwise, go back to whatever backwater you came from. Blathering at the top of ones lungs to prove how dumb you are is not going to change anything.

More accurate headline:

FreedomWorks event produces modest rally at Capitol.

Scott Drummond 5 years, 9 months ago

"It must be a bitter pill to swallow to see 100k protesters protesting nothing else but––––our president."

Where, oh where, do you get 100K, Tom? The article says tens of thousands which is something clearly south of the 100K mark.

"I'm eagerly awaiting the racist accusations."

And of those thousands, how many are, in fact, protesting for racist reasons? None? One? One hundred? One thousand? Please do tell. You know so much about the intent of these folks, I'd be interested to hear what the number is & more importantly an explanation of how you know their intent.

Scott Drummond 5 years, 9 months ago

"Saturday’s demonstrators spanned the spectrum of conservative anger at Obama, including opponents of his tax, spending and health-care plans and protesters who question his U.S. citizenship and compare his administration to the Nazi regime."

It is my opinion that the vast, vast majority of the "birthers" and those who are comparing him to the Nazis have some significant degree of racism in their intent. Their professed issues are merely proxies for their real complaint - a half black man in the White House.

beatrice 5 years, 9 months ago

Of the roughly 60,000 who were protesting, I wonder how many of them would have marched against Obama on the day after he was sworn into office? Maybe 57,000 of them? These are almost exclusively people who are part of the radical right. Period. There would be no making them happy even if Obama could have somehow turned the world economy around in one month.

Since their party lost they are just unhappy. We have clear examples of this here on these boards. They would only be happy if America were actually a one-party system led by conservative kooks like themselves. This whole thing warrants a resounding -- Whatever!

oldvet, gee, that was clever. Work all day on that response? At least in '95 that got around 10 times as many people to show up. This current display wouldn't have been enough to fill most professional football stadiums. If the event were a sporting event, it would have been blacked-out in the D.C. area for not having enough people in attendance.

A big, fat whatever!

Scott Drummond 5 years, 9 months ago

From today's Nashville Tennessean, a quote from one of the attendees at the Nashville Tea Party thing:

"I think people have had enough and it's more than just health care at this point. I don't want anything to happen to President Obama. I want him to be there to take all the blame."

What's the subtext of that quote? Racist? And even if this guy is not a racist himself (not entirely plausible given the statement) does he not very clearly reveal the sentiment swirling around him in the birther/tea party/"Freedom"Works movement?

notajayhawk 5 years, 9 months ago

beatrice (Anonymous) says…

"Go home neocon losers! Clean up your party GOP, or it may be a very long time before you experience anything resembling control again."

http://www.gallup.com/poll/122333/Political-Ideology-Conservative-Label-Prevails-South.aspx

We are home, bea. This is our country. And that just eats at you 'til you can't stand it, doesn't it?

jumpin_catfish 5 years, 9 months ago

Listen up liberals, we are coming and Obama's days are numbered. Hiliary Clinton was correct, he just is not qualified to be the president. Americans will vote him and his party out starting in 2010. The countdown has begun: 1225 days until Nobama.

Scott Drummond 5 years, 9 months ago

"Admit it. It pains you to know America is turning on your barrier-breaking saviour. Obama is a loser, to borrow a phrase from Harry Reid."

Admit what Tom? 50,000 people attended an anti-Obama rally in DC? In what conceivable universe is that America turning on Obama? That is 1/2 of 1/10 of 1 percent of the electorate in the last election. Please start grounding your statements in some sort of reality.

oldvet 5 years, 9 months ago

"Work all day on that response?"

Nope. Those responses just pop into my mind any time I see a stupid comment.

Jim Phillips 5 years, 9 months ago

Judging from the comments, it seems only the Elitists are the only ones who can partake fully of the First Amendment to the Constitution.

Richard Heckler 5 years, 9 months ago

The Republican party has become irrational and has no solutions to any national problem

Jim Phillips 5 years, 9 months ago

porch_person,

Your knowledge of the Bill of Rights is lacking.

notajayhawk 5 years, 9 months ago

scott3460 (Anonymous) says…

"In what conceivable universe is that America turning on Obama? That is 1/2 of 1/10 of 1 percent of the electorate in the last election. Please start grounding your statements in some sort of reality."

Here's a little reality, scottie.

Despite the speech, support for the president's healthcare plan is split evenly. Yes, that's a slight improvement - but the increase came exclusively from Democrats; Republican support is unchanged, and the speech actually lowered support from unaffiliated voters - you know, the ones who aren't listening to the party-line BS from either side.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform

Current generic congressional ballot now has Republicans with a 7-point lead.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/generic_congressional_ballot

63% of likely voters say the country's on the wrong track, with only 33% saying it's moving in the right direction. (While better than when Bush left office, it is falling for the current officeholder, down about 7 points since May.) Once again, almost 3/4 of the unaffiliated voters (you know, the ones who decide elections) think 'wrong track'.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/right_direction_or_wrong_track

The president's approval index took a bounce with the speech, but that still only brought him to 51% that at least somewhat approve. The Rasmussen approval index, the difference between those that strongly approve minus those that strongly disapprove, is at -4 (34% to 38%, respectively).

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

The Dems who think 'Hey, we won, we don't have to listen to the conservatives any more' are the best hope we have of booting Obama back to Chicago in 2012, scottie. Especially as there are more conservatives than liberals in almost every state.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/122333/Political-Ideology-Conservative-Label-Prevails-South.aspx

Scott Drummond 5 years, 9 months ago

"The Dems who think 'Hey, we won, we don't have to listen to the conservatives any more' are the best hope we have of booting Obama back to Chicago in 2012, scottie. Especially as there are more conservatives than liberals in almost every state."

Anyone who saw the speech, of course, witnessed Obama explicitly solicit and voice support for such conservative ideas as malpractice "reform." Some of the decline in his approval ratings, in fact, is from progressives and democrats who think he's gone too far in seeking bipartisan consensus and is far to cozy with the pay or die insurance industry. I know facts don't necessarily trouble many on the right fringe, but you cannot make that claim and expect anyone who watched the speech or follows politics in even a casual manner to not know that you are lying. Lying, I suppose, is easier than forming your argument around actual facts and knowledge, but lie often enough and you will find there will be few who value your opinion.

notajayhawk 5 years, 9 months ago

scott3460 (Anonymous) says…

"Anyone who saw the speech, of course, witnessed Obama explicitly solicit and voice support for such conservative ideas as malpractice “reform.” ... Lying, I suppose, is easier than forming your argument around actual facts and knowledge, but lie often enough and you will find there will be few who value your opinion."

Well, I never mentioned torte reform, and I wasn't talking about Obama.

I was talking about people like you.

By the way, scottie, here's a fact for you - support for the president's healthcare plan dropped after his speech among unafilliated voters - you know, the ones that decide elections. Anyone that watches politics and can deny the president is in trouble is either lying or an idiot - and in your case it's apparent the two are not mutually exclusive.

notajayhawk 5 years, 9 months ago

porch_person (Anonymous) says…

"Especially someone who presumes to call someone else a liar or an idiot when he himself clearly doesn't know the polling numbers."

I posted the links to my numbers, under-the-porch-troll. Too bad you don't possess the intelligence to click on the links, let alone read what's there (or god forbid understand the numbers).

Speaking of idiots, troll - from your own post: "When he took office, his approval rating was 63-68% with a 49-56 point spread. Currently he's at 52.9% approval with a spread of 10.9."

Now, I realize I'm talking to a five-year-old, poochie, but 52.9% is down 10-15% since he took office. And I also notice that, as usual, you didn't answer the whole question, because (again, as usual) you couldn't - once more, from your post: "I don't have any longitudinal data on the popularity of other Presidents and quite frankly, in the first year, it doesn't matter." Too bad you're not old enough to remember any previous president, pooch-troll. Maybe you'd have a glimmer of understanding of why those numbers are important.

By the way, troll - if you were capable of reading the polls, not the sound-bites, you'd know that the president is still marginally popular personally, while his policies are not. Which I guess doesn't matter to people like you, that couldn't understand the policies anyway.

(Just keep telling yourself people are laughing with you, not at you, troll - maybe you'll convince yourself.)

Scott Drummond 5 years, 9 months ago

"Well, I never mentioned torte reform, and I wasn't talking about Obama.

I was talking about people like you.

By the way, scottie, here's a fact for you - support for the president's healthcare plan dropped after his speech among unafilliated voters - you know, the ones that decide elections. Anyone that watches politics and can deny the president is in trouble is either lying or an idiot - and in your case it's apparent the two are not mutually exclusive."

My original response was to the claim that the Saturday "Freedom"Works sponsored Tea Party event represented the country turning on Obama. Your off-topic response claimed that Democrats who ignored conservatives would make republican victories in 2012 more likely. My response to you was to simply point out that the chief Democrat in the country, the President, spent part of his address to Congress reaching out to republicans. Stating the world is as you see it despite facts in the real world may work in the right wing hate radio echo chamber, but here you should count on having someone point out that which flies in the face of your fantastic world view.

Support dropping among unaffiliated voter? OK. Not surprising given the barrage of anti change propaganda put forth by the pay or die insurance industry and their Congressional water carriers. Does it matter? There's a significant Democratic majority, so I'm guessing not. This is all just a lot of noise and smoke to sell the corporate media's product. But please do continue believing things are swinging the way of the right wing fringe that is now the republican party. It's great comedy.

Katara 5 years, 9 months ago

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says… Well, I never mentioned torte reform, and I wasn't talking about Obama. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I am completely against torte reform. All cake is good and should be encouraged.

puddleglum 5 years, 9 months ago

tea baggers, birthers, astroturfers, child-congressmen. a very loud, and tiny group of people who voted for palin.

these pinheads have every right to protest and express their opinions.
I encourage them to do so, because it continues to illustrate the group as a mixed-up minority of uneducated fools.

My personal favorite? Obama gonna give poor people insurance, but he ain't gonna take my guns. (shaking head) what's next? I heard that Obama was gonna take all of the cars out of nascar, because it harms the environment.

JohnBrown 5 years, 9 months ago

When does the discussion about policy issues begin?

beatrice 5 years, 9 months ago

nota, the "go home losers" comment was about those people who traveled to D.C. No, it does not eat at me that neocons live in this country. Their protest against all things Obama, however, clearly demonstrates that it eats at them. (and you?) These are folks who just can't handle the fact that they are in the minority so they are going to stomp their feet and yell "socialist" and basically throw a temper tantrum in public. It clearly isn't proof that the American people aren't still supportive of the President.

More people attended the Cardinals / 49ers game yesterday, so what does that tell you about this "wave" of unhappiness?

I'm not claiming -- never would -- that Obama is perfect, or that I agree with his every policy move. However, this is just faux outrage by the FauxNews crowd, expressing their upset-ness over being upset. It is a non-story in the end.

Shane Garrett 5 years, 9 months ago

Betrice: "The Million Moron March. Go home neocon losers!"

That reads like fighting words.
No wonder your rational is flawed and your logic is biased. I actually kept switching between MSNBC and FOX for coverage. It was like reading comments form Betrice and then reading someone's comments that have actual concerns about the direction this country is going.

Satirical 5 years, 9 months ago

I don't listen to opposing arguments, and when I do listen I don’t understand them. So whenever anyone doesn’t think the same way I do, I find it easier to label them as unintelligent (even though I have only listened to straw man versions of their arguments) , or claim they have bad motives so their sound arguments shouldn’t be considered.

Who am I? - A typical liberal

Satirical 5 years, 9 months ago

Obama claimed in his speech he would consider Republican ideas to help save costs, but when he was asked about Tort reform recently in an interview he said, “You know what I would be willing to do is to consider any ideas out there that would actually work in terms of reducing costs, improving the quality of patient care. So far the evidence I've seen is that caps will not do that.” http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/10/60minutes/main5301098_page2.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody

So based on HIS research tort reform doesn’t really qualify as a valid argument because HE didn’t think it would make a difference. (Except it has made a difference in the states which have enacted it.) Heaven forbid he does extensive research or actually debate whether it would make a difference before he in his ultimate wisdom decides it wouldn’t make a difference. Nope he just preemptively tosses it out without discussion. Obama has spoken, and his word should be good enough without debating it....

This is how Obama operates. No one is ever allowed to have a real discussion with Obama because he claims all opposing arguments are invalid or based on bad motives (whether it is true or not). In his speech he said he is willing to work with Republicans, but they have been trying to work with him since May.

What he meant to say was, “I am willing to listen to any proposals with which I already agree, and will claim any other ideas aren’t worth listening to because they don’t fit my definition of an idea. But I won’t actually debate whether it is a valid idea, I will just claim that anyone saying it is a valid idea is trying to distort the truth. Because by definition the truth is only the reasons I use to justify my proposals.”

Satirical 5 years, 9 months ago

(1) Does Obama really think the American people believe him when he says most of the 900 billion costs for his proposal will come from reducing waste and fraud from Medicare and Medicaid?

(2) Does Obama really think the American people don’t see that tort reform isn’t being considered because the large majority of trial lawyers support democrats?

(3) Does Obama really think he is fooling the American people when he says no one will be “required” to change their health insurance? He knows business will chose the cheapest option. He knows many employers who currently offer health insurance will drop it if paying the tax penalty is cheaper. Employers save money, employees still have insurance through the government, and everyone wins….right?

(4) Does Obama really think the American people don’t understand basic economics, and understand how competition lowers costs? Most Americans know that allowing insurance companies to compete across state lines will bring some of the savings he wants, but why won’t he consider it? Oh wait, it is probably an invalid arguments because HE said so. Once Obama has spoken, I guess the debate is over.

How about we start thinking for ourselves rather than just parroting what Obama rhetorical tactics when questions need answers.

jimmyjms 5 years, 9 months ago

"How about we start thinking for ourselves rather than just parroting what Obama rhetorical tactics when questions need answers"

Geez, I would laugh if this wasn't so depressing.

The above statement from the side of the aisle that repeats, ad nauseam:

Obama wants to kill grammy Obama is a socialist/fascist/Kenyan Obama is coming for yer guns Obama wants to pay for healthcare for illegals Obama is a terrorist etc.

Please. If you believe a word out of Glenn Beck's mouth, if you think the 9/12 Project makes a shred of sense, if you're a birther, if you think Joe Wilson is anything but a hypocritical child - well, you're too damn stupid to comment on this, or any, issue.

Scott Drummond 5 years, 9 months ago

"So based on HIS research tort reform doesn’t really qualify as a valid argument because HE didn’t think it would make a difference. (Except it has made a difference in the states which have enacted it.) Heaven forbid he does extensive research or actually debate whether it would make a difference before he in his ultimate wisdom decides it wouldn’t make a difference. Nope he just preemptively tosses it out without discussion. Obama has spoken, and his word should be good enough without debating it…."

So, of course, you'll provide us some proof that tort "reform" has worked. One thing that it has unambiguously NOT done is lower pay or die insurance premiums, at least in my understanding.

BigPrune 5 years, 9 months ago

Some claim the Maya predicted the world would end in 2012 because that is when their calendar stops. I wonder if this will be the same year Obama declares a halt to free elections? If this were to happen, the leftists would embrace such an action.

As for the poll numbers, I saw one a few days ago that polled twice as many democrats than republicans and Obama's slide had slowed was the headline in so many words.

It's not the color of his skin the conservatives protest - we don't give a sh*t about that, it's his policies that suck.

G_E 5 years, 9 months ago

I just wish people would actually take the time to understand what socialism is before throwing the idea around so carelessly.

meggers 5 years, 9 months ago

Big Prune says: "Some claim the Maya predicted the world would end in 2012 because that is when their calendar stops. I wonder if this will be the same year Obama declares a halt to free elections? If this were to happen, the leftists would embrace such an action."

What in the hell are you talking about? Are seriously that delusional? It's people who spew out unsubstantiated, hysterical blather like that who give reasonable republicans a bad name. If you don't tlike Obama's policies, perhaps you should debate them on their merits (or lack thereof), instead of just making sh** up.

Satirical 5 years, 9 months ago

Scott3460…

“So, of course, you'll provide us some proof that tort “reform” has worked.”

I could easily do so, (as could anyone using google), but all this will lead to is us having a debate as to the interpretation of data. This is a debate which Obama/Dems and the Republicans need to be having. That is my point.

Obama, like jimmyjms, stereotypes the opposition and thinks everyone who disagrees with him is a loon, without looking at the arguments and debating, or simply pushing over straw man versions of the arguments. You don’t appear to be afraid to get into a debate, but Obama is clearly afraid. And any counter-arguments to his position he calls misinformation or a lie.

Most people want Health Care reform, but do we want to replace something horrible with something terrible?

Satirical 5 years, 9 months ago

porch_person...

That you for providing a great example of stereotyping. And you blame conservatives for the political discourse in this country?

You like the other liberals, can't respond to actual arguments.

jimmyjms 5 years, 9 months ago

"Obama, like jimmyjms, stereotypes the opposition and thinks everyone who disagrees with him is a loon, without looking at the arguments and debating, or simply pushing over straw man versions of the arguments"

Satirical, all you're doing is attempting to recast the argument by ignoring the data - the republicans have acted like pure loons, and have attempted to propagate loonary.

There are lots of conservatives making rational arguments against Obama and the Dems. Unfortunately, they're being ignored by the GOP, which seems to be happy to foment the fringe.

"You like the other liberals, can't respond to actual arguments."

Funny, I don't seem to recall you making one...

Satirical 5 years, 9 months ago

jimmyjms...

"Funny, I don't seem to recall you making one…"

You still taking your cues from Obama - if you can't respond to an argument you simply pretend it doesn't exist?

How about you read my post at 10:03. If you still pretend those aren't really arguments (whether you agree with them or not), then it is clear you have fallen into the Obama rhetorical trap.

jimmyjms 5 years, 9 months ago

Repeating talking points does not an argument make, satirical.

jimmyjms 5 years, 9 months ago

"Obama, like jimmyjms, stereotypes the opposition and thinks everyone who disagrees with him is a loon,"

Ha - the evidence speaks for itself:

Satirical 5 years, 9 months ago

jimmyjms....

So in other words, you can't respond to my arguments. Okay, enough said.

MyName 5 years, 9 months ago

@Satirical:

The four points you brought up all began with "Does Obama really think..." which is more of an appeal to JJs mind reading abilities than anything remotely resembling a cogent argument.

But to answer your stupid list point by point:

1) I think the answer is that, unlike Bush's medicare prescription drug benefit, Pres. Obama actually intends to find a way to pay for the (far cheaper) health plan without borrowing a ton of money.

2) Your argument is bogus. Just because you claim that the "majority" of "trial lawyers" support the democrats doesn't mean that it is true (where's your proof?). Moreover, there are far more non-trial lawyers who vote and support Democratic candidates than do. Finally, as the Obama administration would need support from the state legislatures to pass tort reform anyway, he could legitimately claim to be reaching across the aisle to those states where the democrats don't control the legislatures.

3) Obama isn't in the business of "fooling people" so I don't think your statement is relevant. However, I will say that, if businesses decide to drop the insurance benefits en-masse, that will actually result in more money being paid to employees (both indirectly through less of it being withheld to pay for premiums, and directly since not paying the premiums will allow companies to, finally, raise wages). This money can be used to buy whatever type of coverage the employee wants including private insurance. So how would this be a bad thing again??

4) I think allowing interstate competition may be one of the "cost-savings" he is talking about doing. He certainly hasn't ruled it out. The problem is that even if these barriers were removed, the insurance industry is still tightly regulated, more bureaucratic than state government, and with huge barriers to entry. Which means that removing the barriers could just result in even bigger insurance companies with the same monopoly pricing structures. So not necessarily cost savings.

But hey, I'm sure you thought of that since you're one of the Americans with "basic" economic understanding.

jimmyjms 5 years, 9 months ago

See the post directly before yours. I don't have the time to play "educate the unwilling" today.

BTW:

"They are "wild accusations and the paranoid delusions coming from the fever swamps," said David Frum, a conservative author and speechwriter for President George W. Bush who is among the more vocal critics of the party base and of the conservative talk show hosts helping to fan the unrest.

"Like all conservatives, I am concerned about this administration's accumulation of economic power," Frum said. "Still, you have to be aware that there's a line where legitimate concerns begin to collapse into paranoid fantasy."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-gop-fringe14-2009sep14,0,940651.story

Let me guess - Frum is a traitor/biased media type/manchurian speechwriter?

georgiahawk 5 years, 9 months ago

Every time I see the wingnuts out in mass or I look at the wingnut responses like those above I can't help but wonder when one of them will get a message from God (who is evidently not liberal or a socialist) to off the President. How long before they have to save America from Obama the anti-christ. Granted I live in Georgia and that places me firmly within the right-wing-stupid-camp stronghold, but I know of a co-worker that uses a cut out poster of Obama for target practice. How long before Tom or his ilk goes over the edge totally? I have always known there are a lot of ignorant people out there, I just never knew they were this ignorant and I never suspected how proud of it they are! Conservatism is a disease of the mind, it is a cotification (not really a word) of the brain!

Satirical 5 years, 9 months ago

MyName...

(1) Plants to pay for it with what? Imaginary savings and monopoly money? If the Medicaid/Medicare waste was so apparent, why hasn’t any previous administration dealt with it, and why hasn’t Obama and the Dems already taken care of it? You don’t need to overhaul the whole system to remove waste. Do you really trust some bureaucrat with a red pen to not cut some programs that benefit seniors? How convenient that the most important part of this plan, how to pay for it, had the fewest details.

(2) Seriously, I need proof? LOL. How about you read the question Kroft asked Obama, and notice how Obama didn’t deny the heavy contributions form trial lawyers. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/10/60minutes/main5301098_page2.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody

Anyone who pays attention to politics knows this fact. You must be new to the game. Whether there are more non-trial lawyers doesn’t change the fact the Dems don’t want to bite the hands that feed them such as trial lawyers and unions. Finally, Obama and the would not need state approval to pass a tort reform in federal courts.

(3) Perhaps I need to explain the scenario again and break it up into small parts so you can understand it. If an employer has choice of paying $100 for keeping an employee on its current health care plan, or paying an $80 penalty and dropping them, what decision do you think it will make? The employer isn’t going to pass the $20 in savings on to the employee, it will keep it. Thus Obama Care will affect people’s current health care because many employers will drop their coverage.

(4) He hasn’t ruled it out…how much of his speech talked about it. Let me save you some time. None. If the barriers are removed instead of choosing between 2-5 insurance provides, everyone in the country can choose hundreds. This will of course lead to lower costs and increased efficiency. Over a long period of time, it is possible the companies will merge, etc and we will have fewer companies but the benefits will be there because of economies of scale, and monopoly prices couldn’t exist because of federal anti-trust laws. And even if monopoly prices could exist, eventually, it wouldn’t be any worse than the monopoly prices many individuals pay in states where a single company already has 90% of the market.

I have work to do right now and don't have time to educate everyone.

jimmyjms 5 years, 9 months ago

"Dems don’t want to bite the hands that feed them such as trial lawyers and unions."

I wonder...does this mirror any parallel situation?

Like, I don't know....the GOP's resistance to HC reform and their, shall we say, "cozy" relationship with the insurance industry?

No! It couldn't be!!

MyName 5 years, 9 months ago

1) You're right that paying for this plan is the least talked about, probably because it also involves the most political horse-trading. That doesn't mean we can't pay for it, and again, Obama has clearly stated they're going to pay for it with cuts, restructuring and taxes which is already better than the previous administration which put Medicare D on the credit card.

2) Your claim that "trial lawyers" are some how going to barricade any possible tort reform is ridiculous. They aren't all involved in medical malpractice in the first place, and secondly, the proposal that most people are trying to pass (caps on emotional damages claimed) wouldn't exactly put them out of business. Whether your right that it may ultimately not pass is debatable, but your claim that the President wasn't interested in making an honest effort is clearly bunk.

Additionally, the majority of malpractice and other suits are filed in state court, so, yes, the Pres. would have to get State legislatures to go along with the plan in order to pass tort reform (or try and coerce them like they did when they lowered the age limit on drinking).

3) I disagree that the employer would necessarily keep any cost savings. Even if they split the difference they'd still have to pay more to keep good employees who would be more likely to jump ship if they are getting benefits cut and seeing nothing in return. In any case, it still would free up the money the employees paid on premiums to put to any insurance plan the want (public or private). And that's only if eliminating the double tax deduction causes all of the businesses to remove health insurance. So how is this a bad thing again?

4) I was merely explaining why your point about it being "basic economics" was crap. Just because the barriers to interstate competition are lifted, doesn't mean that costs will go down in every case or even in most cases because of the barriers to entry. And the fact is, having barriers or removing them will not make or break any health care reform.

"I have work to do right now and don't have time to educate everyone."

You haven't done anything to education anyone, and have instead spouted off a list of nonsense that can be easily refuted. The bottom line is that this is a complex issue that no one is going to be able to hash out with a list of bullet points on an internet message board, and to pretend that you've got some magic insight that the administration has overlooked is disingenuous at best.

It's taken years of planning to come up with a solution that will work and be politically palatable. And even what we're coming up with now won't solve the rising cost side of the equation. It'll just solve the holes in coverage side. But at least now we're closer than we've ever been.

MyName 5 years, 9 months ago

Also, for people who have some time and want to read something that might help understand the issue better: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200909/health-care

It actually made me feel worse about the scope of the health care problem, however.

puddleglum 5 years, 9 months ago

great! Obama is gonna take away nascar, the boy scouts, and now he is going to end democracy on the day that the mayans predicted would be the end of the world?

tea baggers, birthers, astroturfers, death panelers, paliners, mayan calendarers.....next up: nascar

shockchalk 5 years, 9 months ago

There's a great reason why many Democrats and almost all Republicans want a different plan for health care reform.

(laughter...............sheep)

Satirical 5 years, 9 months ago

Porch_person…in a response to you post at 12:59 p.m.

(1) Perhaps you should read the entire speech next time. Obama said, I quote, “Reducing the waste and inefficiency in Medicare and Medicaid will pay for most of this plan.” (And I will provide a link too http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/09/politics/main5299229_page2.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody)

So again, if this waste and inefficiency is so apparent, why has it lasted so long? Apparently there is 450 + billion in Medicare and Medicaid waste that has just been sitting there. Are you really that naïve to believe that? Or to believe that a government which created this waste will so easily remove it?

(2) “Most states have caps on torts and the whole process heavily favors the medical community already.” – PP

You are kidding right? Medical malpractice insurance is a huge cost for doctors, who are forced to pass the costs on to us. In fact even Obama the divine stated "I don't believe malpractice reform is a silver bullet, but I've talked to enough doctors to know that defensive medicine may be contributing to unnecessary costs."

And most (27) states do not have caps on non-economic losses or contingent fees arrangement (but I guess when lawyers earn a huge profit it is okay since they largely support democrats, but insurance profits are evil….right). Also, tort reform caps would benefit plaintiffs with legitimate lawsuits by reducing the number of "nuisance" suits and thereby improving the overall efficiency of the system. Lastly, if every person in America had health coverage, do you think there would be more or less medical malpractice litigation?

Satirical 5 years, 9 months ago

Continued....

(3) “There is a huge difference between “being required to change health insurance” and “picking a better deal”.” - PP

Of course there is a difference between being “required” to change insurance, and de facto forcing companies to change. But idiotic Obama supporters keep claiming no one's current insurance coverage will be affected. Of course it will be affected if Obama gives your employer an incentive to drop your coverage. So the fear that people will lose their current health care provider and doctor is a legitimate concern, which Obama calls a lie. Arguing with people that can’t read can be tiring….


(4) “Your claim that insurance companies are somehow hindered from competing in the free market of the United States is insane, as is your claim that debate is being suppressed.” – PP

I am not going to keep responding when you obviously don’t even read what I originally wrote, and am forced to repeat myself. So this is the last time. Let’s do some simple math. Let’s assume there are 5 major insurance companies in each state (although in some states one company has 90% of the market). 50 (states) x 5 (insurance companies) = 250 competing against each other. Currently the math is 1 (state) X 5 (insurance companies) = 5 companies competing with each other. 250 is greater than 5.

As you and Obama point out, limited competition is bad and more competition is good. Therefore, allowing insurance companies to compete in all 50 states is a good thing. But Obama isn’t considering it. Why?

shockchalk 5 years, 9 months ago

It always takes porch a long time to respond when he has deal with the truth.

(laughter)

Poor little sheep. Don't worry, big government will take care of you........

(laughter)

Satirical 5 years, 9 months ago

MyName…

(1) Why do you keep bringing up Bush as if what he did should affect what we do going forward? The fact that this is the least detailed part of Obama’s plan doesn’t give you pause and concern? You are right to say it doesn’t mean we can’t pay for it, but it doesn’t mean we can. I am not just going to hope and have blind faith that this imaginary waste is sitting there, that everyone seems to have missed the last 50 + years. I want some hard numbers before I am going to believe any claims made by Obama. And if you don’t demand the same thing, then shame on you, because that shouldn’t be political.

(2) “They (trial lawyers) aren't all involved in medical malpractice in the first place” – MyName

Ummmm…..do you know what lawyers do? Some go to court and sue doctors for malpractice. Please tell me you knew that or I will have to find a mature 2nd grader to have an argument with.

“the proposal that most people are trying to pass (caps on emotional damages claimed) wouldn't exactly put them out of business.” - MyName

So, as long as we don’t take all their money, you really think they won’t care? So, if I asked for 1/10th your salary you would be okay with it? Thanks!

Caps need to be in place on non-economic damages, punitive damages, and contingent fees (look it up if you don’t know what those are).

“but your claim that the President wasn't interested in making an honest effort is clearly bunk.” - MyName

So he made an “honest effort” by giving lip service in a speech but then in an interview a few days later say caps aren’t going to work? Wow you have a low bar for “honest effort.” I bet you thought GWB was the best POTUS ever by those standards.

You are correct that the federal government would need to tie tort reform with money the states get. But that isn’t a barrier; it is just the instrument which needs to be used to get the job done.

Satirical 5 years, 9 months ago

Cont'd:

(3) Split the difference? The employer will keep the savings, not the employees. So the employees lose out on a good health insurance plan with good doctors, and are forced to go with the public option, while employers earn more profit. And you are saying that is a good thing? (Whether some employees’ medical benefits don’t get cut doesn’t change the fact that many employees will see a change). And even if being dumped to government insurance is a good thing, it still proves Obama isn’t being completely honest when he says no one will have to change insurance companies of they don’t want to. That is a change! Hello! Do you think lying is a bad thing?

(4) Do you even know what barriers to entry means? It seems like it is a phrase you heard on MSNBC and you just keep repeating it out of context. The barriers are costs. These barrier primarily affect people who want to start a new business. They don’t affect the large corporation with plenty of capital who are always willing to pay the costs to get into a new market. There are always costs when entering a new market or state. Are you claiming no businesses has ever competed across state lines because of this cost?

But to cut past your lack of understanding of economics, those costs could be drastically mitigated with federal laws which streamline the legal requirements. So really, your point is moot, but I just wanted to show you how little you know.

Your refutations are just rambling nonsense which I have easily refuted. I don’t pretend that I have magic insight. Most people who have been paying attention and listening to both sides of the debate understand these arguments. This is why people were/are protesting. But I wouldn’t expect someone like you or Obama, who claims everyone who won’t listen to anyone who disagrees with him, to understand that. Thanks for letting me show everyone your lack of knowledge on this subject.

beatrice 5 years, 9 months ago

Pilgrim, had I taken part in rallies where people carried signs around calling former President Bush a "fascist," or if I just ranted in general that he was one, then this might be a case of the shoe being on the other foot. Since I didn't, I don't see why I need to legitimize the loons in the park now calling President Obama a "socialist." Loons are loons. Sorry you can't recognize this.

Now, have you anything else to add other than, "but, but, Bush ..."?

Satirical 5 years, 9 months ago

Correction: "But I wouldn’t expect someone like you or Obama, who won’t listen to anyone who disagrees with him, to understand that.

Satirical 5 years, 9 months ago

Porch_person

You may have copied and pasted what I wrote, but you either didn’t read it or you have the reading comprehension skills of a 1st grader because my statements already answered most of your alleged counter-arguments.

I never said your quote was wrong, but neither is mine. Again, you failed to read the entire speech to find the quote I used. (I even gave you a link, you could a least try to pretend you are in an argument not simply trying to be obtuse).

I just gave several alternatives. Again, you are proving you don’t read. Plus, I don’t disagree with most of Obama’s proposals, but some of his proposals are idiotic, and there are others which he stubbornly refuses to consider. So you baseless and parroted allegation that I want the status quo is false.

“Torts are a way to recover damages from a bad outcome.” – PP

You clearly are not a legal scholar. And even someone who never went to law school could have looked up the word before making a fool out of themselves. But you are definitely entertaining.

“A harmful wrong (other than a breach of contract) for which courts will provide a remedy, usually damages, to a private party. Torts include injuries to persons, such as injuries caused by negligent automobile accidents, medical malpractice, or product defects; injuries to property, such as nuisances and trespasses; and injuries to reputation. Courts allow recovery when a defendant breaches a legal duty to a plaintiff and this breach proximately causes an injury recognized under the law.” http://www.answers.com/topic/tort

Let me make this so easy my 9 year old can understand it…If you lower the potential liability costs of medical malpractice, the costs for medical malpractice insurance will drop. If medical malpractice insurance drops, doctors’ costs drop. In a free market system this leads to lower prices for the consumer. Aka, a savings which Obama claims he is looking for to pay for his 900 billion dollar proposal.

This would not “limit the ability of people to sue rich doctors when they screw up.” They could still sue them and recover for all of their economic losses. But their lawyers fees, and non-economic damages should be capped at a reasonable amount. You seem to hate health insurance profits, but don’t have any problems with huge profits for lawyers. Oh wait, you are a liberal, it makes sense now.

Satirical 5 years, 9 months ago

Continued:

“In point three, you claim that Obama is going to change people's health insurance against their will and is lying about it. Obama was quite explicit. No changes, just a further option.” – PP

Your counter argument is statement by Obama? As if everything Obama is the gospel truth. Suspend rational thinking when Obama speaks, LOL. You, like Obama don’t even offer a counter-argument. I have explained several times exactly how people’s insurance will be dropped by their employers. Since you have not offered a counter-argument my unrebutted argument stands. (Psst… you could at least try using an argument based on logic, rather than the Obama sheep approach. I will still prove you wrong, but at least you can still pretend you aren’t an Obama acolyte.)

“Directly after you argue against the Federal Government providing …….competition.” - PP

Federal Government competition is unfair competition. And an eventual government takeover of the industry isn’t what I call more competition. Again, you fail to counter my argument that allowing insurance companies to compete is a good idea, which Obama should consider. Why am I not surprised?

What is hilarious to me is that you claim insurance companies don’t want competition, but don’t support non-government run competition.

And stop using the word "oligarchy" incorrectly. An oligarch is a form of government genius. I will help you the way I help my 6 year old by telling you the word you are looking for is "cartel" or "trust". I am not here to defend health insurance companies so I don’t know why you keep bringing it up. Seems like when you can’t make a valid argument you switch to default mode and repeat your talking points.

Next time make some arguments rather than just blinding believing Obama, and parroting him like a good little sheep. Oh and the clock is ticking because, as I am sure you know, I rarely come back to the same thread on consecutive days, so unless you want to argue for your own health (pun intended), please hurry.

tkeagleblog 5 years, 9 months ago

Fact. Everything is in the eye of the beholder. That said: Fact. Calling someone else stupid, childish, racist, crazy, loons, ECT... does not makes their points any stronger.

Fact. No one knows what is going to be in this bill, or how it will affect the current system. It’s going to change many times before we see the final version. And it (could) be years before we see how it will affect the system.

Fact. Just because someone is supporting the healthcare bill, does not mean they are a (loon), or far left.

Fact. Anyone yelling (racist) because they disagree with Obama’s policies or goes to a tea party, should really take a good look at themselves.

Fact. Anyone that disagrees with Obama just because of his race, Needs to do the same.

Fact. Right or Left, will say whatever is necessary to get your vote. (Both sides lie)

FACT? 85% of the media has not reported on ACORN or James. Fox has done this. Why only Fox new has done this? (I think this should be headlines on all media)

These are (my facts). In the eye of the beholder. If anyone can convince me otherwise, I’m all up for it. If I’m right, then some of you ppl need to chill out, and be a little more polite to one and another.

Satirical 5 years, 9 months ago

Porch_person

“You got busted claiming that I don't read your content and you didn't see that I had copy and pasted your content and placed my response with them.” – PP

Yeah, I totally missed those huge paragraphs you posted. Wow, what a snappy comeback by not countering my argument that a person (you) can copy and paste without reading (or understanding), which is what you did again.

I realize medical malpractice is a tort, genius, that is why I posted it. You claimed “There a difference between torts and medical malpractice insurance.” When in fact there isn’t a difference, med-mal is one example of a tort.

Also a tort, as the definition shows, is much more than simply, “a way to recover damages from a bad outcome.” So you are wrong on both accounts, again proving how little you understand this debate, and how little you know about the law.

“you provide a definition of torts that matches my own.” – PP

The fact you think A = B is hilarious. The definitions are inconsistent. If you can’t agree A doesn’t equal B, then our conversation is pointless, since you are obviously trying to waste my time, and you think having the last word somehow makes you right.


I mean this seriously when I ask, have you ever taken even a basic course in economics…? I really want to know the answer.

I never said they were “obligated.” Again, please read. In a free market when the cost of something falls, unless there is a monopoly, the costs are at least partially passed to the consumer. The reason is because at least one company will lower its prices to have a competitive advantage. This causes other companies to either have higher prices and fewer customers, and go out of business, or lower their prices as well. You seem to be under the delusion that in a free market all insurance companies will raise their prices as high as they can possibly go without fear of being undercut by any competition.

Again, you fail to counter my argument and instead put words in my mouth so you can respond to an imaginary statement I didn’t make. Tort reform leads to savings, period. Odd how a person who likely has never taken an economics course is lecturing a person who got a degree in economics.

Satirical 5 years, 9 months ago

Cont'd:

Do you even know what economic damages are? Again, please at least look up a term before you rant for a paragraph about what it means. Again, I will do the research for you. http://www.answers.com/topic/damages

“If you are unemployed or in a lower income bracket, you don't have a lot of “economic damages” to claim, no matter how egregious the malpractice.” - PP

Economic damages include lost wages and actual medical costs. If you suffer severe medical costs, then you will (in direct contradiction to your statement) have a lot of economic damages. If the tort simply caused your arm to be broken and you were out of work for a month, economic damages cover it. Pain and suffering is also included in economic damages. Why does a person also deserve 10 million dollars of top of that? They already get fairly compensated and then some. Are you claiming $250k isn’t fair compensation for a lawyer. If so, would you please hire me?

Okay, this discussion is apparently over because you will just keep putting words in my mouth, making up definitions and failing to read (or be able to understand) what I write. I will have a more intellectually stimulating argument with my 3 year old daughter. Congratulations on winning the typical liberal bloggers of the day award. You aren’t worth my time.

tbaker 5 years, 9 months ago

It’s pretty plain that quite a few folks on this blog woefully miscalculate the true nature of the President’s “mandate” last fall. Sure, plenty of you share his leftist world view, but far, far more Obama voters - especially the independents - have abandoned him in droves, and at a record-setting pace I might add. He ran his campaign on the idea of a fiscally conservative platform of efficient government, lower taxes, and the most transparent government in our history. Each day it becomes painfully more obvious that whats going on is simply not the sort of change he promised. Not even close. A lot of Obama voters are mad – not because of liberal government schemes – but because they feel like they’ve been duped.

What we get instead is the smug assertion that we should all just shut up, drink the kool aid, and fall in line with massive new deficit spending, massive new government expansion into our lives. We should be dutiful whimpering serfs, and give our President all the support he wants no matter what social engineering scheme he comes up with. Who cares if the federal government has a 100% record of abysmal failure, we should mindlessly ignore history, ignore the facts and hideous economic track record of federal government. Simply because the man won the election, we should endorse all of his plans for more federal control over private industry, including health care, without a peep of dissension.

The President and congresses’ condescension and demagoguery (exactly like the sort rampant on this blog) is exactly the way NOT to gain the trust of the people. This heavy-handed “ram it through” nonsense upsets people (voters) even in the best of times. People are worried and some of them are a little scared right now. The economy stinks and is getting worse. More spending we can’t afford, massive, thousand-page bills passed in the dead of night without being read, ugly partisan fights on the news every day, all add up to an atmosphere of craziness that people will not tolerate very long.

Obama-ites - savor the moment. Unless the President wises up and stops underestimating the mood of the country toward his plans, he'll lose re-election in 2012 and take quite a few democrats in congress with him.

jimmyjms 5 years, 9 months ago

"The President and congresses’ condescension and demagoguery"

Say what??? This is the GOP you're talking about:

Some no-name nobody shouting "you lie" at the POTUS as he addresses the country? What could possibly be more condescending than that?

tbaker 5 years, 9 months ago

Agno - go to anyone of the big polling websites and look at the numbers yourself. The "independent voter" demographic is, like I said, is leaving him in droves. No President's approval rating has dropped as far, and as fast as Obama's since Gerald Ford pardoned Nixon. (Rasmussen)

My point is simple: the man needs to wise up and pay attention to the people he is alienating or he won't have enough juice left to get anything done. Members of congress will not stick their neck out for a President's with low approval ratings and that is precisely where Mr. Obama is headed.

And just for the record, that would be a shame. There is a lot of good this man could do. I don't want to see government grid-lock and partisan fighting for the next three years, but I also don't want to see grotesquely unconstitutional and massively expensive growth in the size and scope of the federal government either.

drake 5 years, 9 months ago

Very good points tbaker. I agree with you wholeheartedly.

porchi- I hate to tell you this but you are going the way of Merrill with your posts.

Your attempt at belittling people with your pretended (laughter) all of the time is childish and therefore removes any credibility that you may pretend to have. I find myself just skipping over them when I see your name as I'm sure most others do also.

tbaker 5 years, 9 months ago

Porch - we're not talking about overall approval ratings. Try and keep up.

beawolf 5 years, 9 months ago

"what it's percieved GWB did to the Republican party?"

Tom,

GWB didn't do anything for the Republican party. Even though he was an incumbent 2 term president, he was avoided like the plague during the 2008 elections. The biggest problem the Republicans had (and still do) is the far right polarization of the party's moderates. The Democrats are seeing some of the same with their far left advocates. The main difference is the Democrats have a stronger moderate base that can that override the extremes, while the Republicans are being seen as adopting the far right extremism.

jimmyjms 5 years, 9 months ago

"but I also don't want to see grotesquely unconstitutional and massively expensive growth in the size and scope of the federal government either."

Um, so where you been the last 8 years?

tbaker 5 years, 9 months ago

Amen Jimmy! I'll make no excuse for W. He is a statist just like BHO, he's just the republican version. Prescription Drugs and the TARP bail-out all add up to a "grotesquely unconstitutional and massively expensive growth in the size and scope of the federal government."

MyName 5 years, 9 months ago

"You do know what lawyers do. Some go to court and sue doctors for malpractice"

Not all trial lawyers are involved in malpractice. So, unless you can find some source out there that clearly demonstrates that the vast majority of trial lawyers who contribute to the Democratic party are 1) involved primarily in malpractice litigation and 2) would magically go out of business if the proposed reforms were put into place then you can't even claim them as a legitimate roadblock. This was my point, and your response that it might take away "10% of their business" is just a red herring.

The law changes every year, and law firms don't go out of business because of changes to one area. This is because they perform a useful service for a high fee. The economics behind the legal profession won't change just because we put something like this in place.

So who is it that needs to go back to grade school again?

I haven't seen that interview you're referring to, but you're going to have to provide something in context that basically says "ha ha, I was just kidding in that last speech" before it seems like more than you grasping at straws here.

MyName 5 years, 9 months ago

Satirical:

Why do you keep bringing up Bush as if what he did should affect what we do going forward? The fact that this is the least detailed part of Obama’s plan doesn’t give you pause and concern?

Why do I keep bringing up the last government healthcare program and how we chose to pay for it? Big government healthcare program in 2001, big government healthcare program in 2009? There's no relationship here, what was I thinking!

And my point is simply that Obama is going to talk the least about how we're paying for it in public because it's the part that is undergoing the most work in Congress and anything he says will affect those negotiations. Unlike the previous administration which had a very simple plan: charge it! And therefore didn't require any negotiations at all.

MyName 5 years, 9 months ago

Split the difference? The employer will keep the savings, not the employees. So the employees lose out on a good health insurance plan with good doctors, and are forced to go with the public option, while employers earn more profit.

I don't see how this will be the case for every employer out there, or even most of them. If my employer cuts of my insurance completely and doesn't give me something to make up for it, then I'm looking for a renegotiation (so I can pay for private insurance) or another job. This is how it's going to work in every industry that has healthcare benefits.

Not only that, but the people who are making the decisions about healthcare would be affected by those decisions so they won't be quick to cut it either. You act like employees have no say in the matter. When the reality is that it's their money that is funding insurance as much as the employers money.

Bob Hechlor 5 years, 9 months ago

After Obama was elected, 70 K showed up at the park in Chicago, thousands more had to be turned away. 50 K employees of the insurance corporations showed up and paid 10 K to do commercials for their companies. This was like a Chamber of Commerce meeting with signs. It was reported that the signs were actually left over from the McCarthy era.

LiberalDude 5 years, 9 months ago

among the "protesters" were the Billionaires for Wealthcare- http://www.billionairesforwealthcare.com/

Awesome!

Bob Hechlor 5 years, 9 months ago

It would not be unusual for a medical or mental health clinic to have 500 insurance companies that are in their database. How has that competition been of help?

Bob Hechlor 5 years, 9 months ago

Vertigo is correct. It has long been known that tort reform did not add up to much more than 1% of healthcare expense. Clinton talked about that during his term and how long ago was that. He got the information from research that has been repeated a number of times. People who make money off of the current healthcare system however, are pleased to ignore the facts.

Tort costs = 1% of healthcare costs Administrative costs = 30%

Wonder what would give us the most return if we were more efficient.

Bogus conservative answer = tort reform.

Liberals trying to educate conservatives = See, 30 is 30 times larger than 1. With 1, even if you save 1/2 of 1, it is still only saving .5% If you save 1/2 of 30, that would be 15 % savings, 30 times the amount saved on tort reform. These are the facts, you know. Facts are kind of important. They can actually help us devise better plans, unless you are just in it for the money and that is all you are concerned about. We could learn from Michael Moore, capitalism must be tempered with democracy. Making a profit is okay in some instances, but some of our goals must be on a higher level than just producing profit, especially those that pertain to the health of humans and the planet.

Bob Hechlor 5 years, 9 months ago

I think the best polls are those used for dancing.

beatrice 5 years, 9 months ago

I think the best polls are used to celebrate Festuvus.

Bob Hechlor 5 years, 9 months ago

Yes, that would be Festivus. For the Rest of Us.

monheim 5 years, 9 months ago

@Guardian:

If you think expecting people to make legitimate concerns based in REALITY is "elitist", then tattoo it across my forehead. No one is trying to stifle these teabaggers' free speech here, we're just pointing out how ridiculous it is. While all speech may be free, it isn't all valuable. Calling Obama a nazi and carrying signs with vague threats of violence (for no reason)--not valuable. Sorry.

monheim 5 years, 9 months ago

@tbaker:

He needs to wise up and listen to the people he's alienating? Let's see....

goes over to teabagger crowd

You mean this guy? The one carrying the AR-15? Or wait...

walks a little further

Ohhhhhh you mean the lady with the Nazi Pelosi sign here. Okay well...I dunno how well that'll go--trying to listen to her. But let's see what else...

Oh! How about this guy with the "We came unarmed....this time." sign. Yeah, great plan, let's see what these people have to say to the President about their concerns and how he can better address those. Maybe he'll come out and say "Yikes! Sorry, folks. I guess I AM a Marxist, Nazi usurper bent on the destruction of the US and turning it into Russia. Sorry about that."

The reason these people are feeling "alientated by him is simple: They are behaving like immature lunatics. They are alienating themselves, they don't need any help from the President.

Mixolydian 5 years, 9 months ago

For the first time (in 9 months) in my adult life I'm proud of my country.

Bernanke and Geithner say the recession is over! Yea! Now Obama doesn't have to spend the remaining $680 billion of the political patronage ....errrrr. stimulus money that's yet to be paid out. That's a huge slice out of the deficit and will ease the sting of rampant energy costs of cap and trade and middle class tax hikes for Obamacare.

Life is good.

danemary 5 years, 9 months ago

POLICE SAY CROWD WAS EXCESS OF 3 MILLION! The JOKER must go!

Commenting has been disabled for this item.