Skip to main content

So the sanctimonious Regressive bastards attended the White House health-care meeting today and proved three things :

  1. They are sanctimonious
  1. They are Regressive
  1. They are bastards

--The same old Frank Luntz talking points about Government "takeover" of healthcare - even as they absurdly pretended to be the guardians of Medicare.  

--The same old nonsense about allowing companies to sell health insurance across state lines - without mentioning that they would let the insurance companies set up shop in the Marianas Islands.

--The same old blather about tort reform - to protect the rich from the victims of health care blunders and neglect.

So, what's new?!

They used Reconciliation to pass the Bush tax cuts that have now created a huge debt of nearly $2 trillion dollars and now they call the same thing "nuclear option".  Now, I don't give a Flying *&@# what they call it.  I don't care if they got nuked.  Or screwed. Or rammed.  I just don't care what happens to them.

These guys who talk about the need for 60 votes to pass healthcare reform now were the same thugs whose constant refrain 6,7,8 years ago was - "up or down vote", "up or down vote".   Now, the very same thing suddenly turned into the "nuclear option", eh?

Democrats, don't pay any attention.  Don't even bother to argue that it is NOT the nuclear option.   Who the hell cares after the bill is passed?!   Most Americans would simply move on to the next thing to worry about or the next thing to titillate themselves about even as the Regressives keep yelping that they were nuked!

Once the bill is signed into law, introduce the issue of immigration reform.   That is a good wedge between the fiscal Regressives (who want cheap labor) and social Regressives (who dislike brown people).  Normally, the two sets of Regressives get along very well because their priorities don't collide with one another.  But in case of immigration reform, they do collide - head-on.

But that's all for the future,  Right now, completely ignore the Regressives' squeals about the "nuclear option".  Just take the health care bill and RAM IT!   With Reconciliation.  (Well, when I put it that way, it sounds almost too kind, doesn't it?!  ;-) )

Originally posted to Whirlaway on Thu Feb 25, 2010 at 10:31 PM PST.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (11+ / 0-)

    -7.75,-5.64 "American health care system isn't really a system. If you just let things happen, it'll be like the United States" - Taiwanese health official

    by Whirlaway on Thu Feb 25, 2010 at 10:31:38 PM PST

    •  Do the Dems have 50 votes? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mwm341, nampa45

      Senator Byrd has a letter on record stating that using reconciliation for HCR would be wrong. Given his status I wonder if the Dems have 50 votes for a sidecar using reconciliation? I am sure they have 50+ votes for the sidecar using the normal legislative process. However, I think there are some number of Dems who, like Byrd, feel this is an inappropriate use of reconciliation. It will be interesting to see how many vote no in that basis.

      "let's talk about that"

      by VClib on Thu Feb 25, 2010 at 11:33:26 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Did Byrd even say reconciliation would be wrong? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        We know how much Republicans lie.  They could be taking what Byrd said 30 years ago to use it now to keep the Democrats from passing the bill.

        If Byrd hasn't issued a statement in the past few weeks saying that reconciliation is wrong, I decline to believe what the Republicans claim.

        •  Brook - I haven't seen the letter (0+ / 0-)

          But it was read on one of the news shows. He wrote it in 2009 and I think the letter is genuine, but can't be certain. I would think it will become more public as the Dems move down the path to use reconciliation for the sidecar in the Senate. My question is assuming it's real what impact will it have on the other Dem Senators and their willingness to use reconciliation on the sidecar bill? There are Dem Senators who share Byrd's view and will not vote for the sidecar using reconciliation. I just don't know if that number is five, which is OK, or ten which means it doesn't pass.

          "let's talk about that"

          by VClib on Fri Feb 26, 2010 at 07:51:16 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  They don't have the votes in either house (0+ / 0-)

        At this point with the polls as low as they are, with no public option, with only a mandate to purchase private insurance from a for profit company, there is no way they have the votes to pass this.

        Further, why take the coming ass whipping for forcing this bill without a public option or single payer?  If you are going to take the change in losing massive seats next election, why not go for it all?

  •  With reconciliation. Without it. (6+ / 0-)

    I don't care.  Just get it done and lets all get to work the next day pushing for more.

  •  Rec'd for BULLSHIT, double standard. (9+ / 0-)

    When the shoe is on the other foot, then everything must be done THEIR WAY.

    Elections have consequences and for Republicans it is this health care bill.

    This coming from the same douchebags that passed Medicare Prescription D, unpaid for.  Now that bill is coming home to roost.  Bush tax cuts for the rich that has drained this country DRY.

    The Republicans are the most hypocritical idiots sittin' up there in D.C.

  •  McCain pointed out during the conference with (7+ / 0-)

    Obama that the Republican Senate majority threatened to use the nuclear option in order to defeat filibusters and allow up-or-down votes on Bush's right-wing judicial nominees.  IMO if right-wing judges can get an up-or-down vote, America's struggling middle-class families who need to get medical treatment are also entitled to the same up-or-down vote.

    Barack Obama in the Oval Office: There's a black man who knows his place.

    by Greasy Grant on Thu Feb 25, 2010 at 10:49:42 PM PST

    •  GG - they didn't get an up or down vote (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      HylasBrook, nampa45

      While the nuclear option was threatened, it was never used and many judicial candidates never did have an up or down vote.

      "let's talk about that"

      by VClib on Thu Feb 25, 2010 at 11:28:48 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  IIRC it was only a few (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Greasy Grant, HylasBrook

        of the most partisan nominees who got no vote. In fact, several who are pretty far to the right got their votes and were confirmed.

        Republicans get their way because they use their majorities when they have them. Democrats fail because they still haven't figured out that most voters pay no attention to the process, and only care about the results.

        "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

        by happy camper on Fri Feb 26, 2010 at 05:19:25 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Watching Chris Matthews right now, he has a funny (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike, awcomeon, HylasBrook

    video of Republican clips of "step by step" and "start over"

    How fucking dumb can these guys be? They want to start over? They should have participated in the process instead of just saying "No."

    Of course Tweety has to be fair and balanced and shows a nice clip of Democrats. Their clips are all about saying they included Republican ideas.

    "Don't knock's just like chess but without the dice" - john07801

    by voracious on Thu Feb 25, 2010 at 11:12:13 PM PST

    •  start over is code for over our dead bodies... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      ...the repubs seem to conveniently ignore the 45,000 Americans who die prematurely every single year, thus making the lack of health care more costly in human suffering than all of the wars the US has ever fought! But notice that they have all the health insurance they can stand!

      "Peace is the protector of genius. War is the mortal enemy of both peace and genius."

      by ImpeachKingBushII on Thu Feb 25, 2010 at 11:45:28 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  RAMMING SPEED!!! (5+ / 0-)

    DARTH SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
    LANDO REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!

    by LordMike on Thu Feb 25, 2010 at 11:13:39 PM PST

  •  "Ram it through" is a Republican phrase (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    happy camper

    Fuck them. The bastards can go to hell.

    The House passed a bill. The Senate passed a bill. Both bills passed.

    What we're talking about now is tweaking the Senate bill. Amending it. Changing and modifyting a few things here and there. And we're gonna do it via reconciliation.

    Let's say the Senate Republicans stop the amendments and we don't get reconciliation. The House can pass the Senate bill (and we'll fix it later).

    The Republicans have already lost.

    Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.

    by Dbug on Fri Feb 26, 2010 at 03:38:48 AM PST

    •  Republican Speak (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I turned off the tv last night when Campbell Brown, wearing her best snotty disgusted look, asked David Axelrod if the Democrats were just going to "ram" health care through without considering the will of the people (or something to that effect - when she said "ram" the rest of the sentence got lost in her biased delivery). I guess I'm over how they want to categorize health reform - as long as something gets done the process doesn't really matter to me anymore. That sounds terrible, but the longer the selling of the ram, shove, force characterization goes the more effective it will become.

      •  Republicans want to make (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        LordMike, HylasBrook

        this about the process, because they have nothing else. No ideas. No plan to, you know, help people.

        When Repugs held the majorities, there was no talk of bills being "rammed" through, or the will of the people, or any of this happy horseshit about bipartisanship. Not a word. No, they passed what they wanted however they could. They used reconciliation to pass the Bush tax cuts, which Bush did not campaign on.

        Now it's not OK to use it to pass the president's biggest agenda item which he talked about every day of his campaign?

        Massive Republican FAIL.

        The will of the people is that health care be reformed.

        "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

        by happy camper on Fri Feb 26, 2010 at 05:28:16 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  The Republican talking points, which they (0+ / 0-)

          endlessly repeated, reminds me of how charlatans behave on TV.  Orly Taitz is just the most recent example.  

          When their statements are challenged with facts, they start complaining that they are being persecuted, or that they are being attacked by the media.

          In other words, they talk about PROCESS instead of bringing up verifiable facts to support their case.

  •  Yes. The Chess match was real. (4+ / 0-)

    Long ago, the board was laid out.  The first moves were set, and played.  The way it looked way back was, in order to get anything actually passed was to give all the time needed to prove the Republicans were bought and paid for by the health care industry.  The way it looked was as if Team Obama needed to really go all the way to show "Joe the Plumber" that the Republicans were actually against him, and worked for the health care industry.   Republicans don't actually have any ideas or plans to help this country.  They can't. They have been bought.   I am not sure President Obama could have just walked into the White House and slammed health care reform into law, without going through all of the steps to get to this point where NOW this can be more of a slam dunk, than shooting for a three.  So, yes.  The multi level chess match has been played out, and the "summit" was CHECK MATE.  
    Another thought.  Once the bulk of health care reform is passed, it can be improved.  It can be modified.  If a crappy health care reform bill had been passed 10 years ago, today we would be dealing with how to improve it, not starting over.

    "Hey, with religion you can't get just a little pregnant"

    by EarTo44 on Fri Feb 26, 2010 at 03:41:41 AM PST

  •  Just reading your title (0+ / 0-)

    I feel so violated!  I think I'm going to have to lie down.

  •  "Ram It" is not a good meme (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    happy camper, HylasBrook

    Passing a bill through reconciliation is not about "ramming" a bill through Congress.  It's about passing a bill through a completely normal legislative process.  "Ram It" is the kind of phrase the Repugs would use to try to paint it as something inproper or uncalled for.

    •  Good point! The Republicans are as good as the (0+ / 0-)

      Daily show with coming up with catchy puns to lead into their routines.

      "The Louisiana Purchase" and the "Cornhusker" are good examples.  Wish Democrats had a few catchy phrases like that.

      On the other hand, Democrats are busy DOING something about health reform instead of making up labels to reduce complex ideas to a 2 word "jingle."

  •  Republican Plan "Death Care" (0+ / 0-)

    Republicans are in favor of "Death Care"
    The Democrats are in favor of "Health Care"

    "Hey, with religion you can't get just a little pregnant"

    by EarTo44 on Sat Feb 27, 2010 at 06:52:46 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site