Lieberman says he'll filibuster compromise

[nhmagic]

What hyperbolic bullsh**t, azmagic. No one is taking over your life. Every other advanced country has universal health insurance coverage. Are Canadians' lives controlled by the government? Japanese? French? Next thing you know, toll roads and sales taxes will be one step away from totalitarianism! I was listening to Glenn Beck the other day and someone called into his show proposing a military coup. You could tell he was serious. This guy, a junior officer in the military. A military coup over health care coverage? Are you serious?

Expanded coverage empowers people, not restricts them. It means if you lose your job, you don't have to worry about health insurance. That benefits everyone, everyone with a chance to lose their jobs someday.

The whole dependency theory of politics is bullsh**t. Seniors get social security yet they voted no more Democratic than the nation as a whole in the last election. These days they are more Republican than ever. The Red States have been getting more money from the federal government for decades, yet they still vote Red.

Of course there are valid objections to this bill, just like there would be valid objections to *any* bill. But *some* Republicans have created hyperbole after hyperbole, they have convinced themselves that this extremely compromised proposal is now the end of the world. You guys are clinically insane. It is clinical insanity. It is emotional intensity so extreme that it has seriously clouded your judgement and thinking to a degree which you do not even realize. Get some perspective. You will make huge gains in elections next year. That is how it is. Power switches between center-left and center-right. We're not like Japan or Mexico where power seems to be with one party all the time. You guys will come back.

Your hate is not going to help the country. The fact of the matter is we have to discuss and debate our problems with a thinking brain. Not just emotions and slogans like "left" and "right" and ideology and partisanship. This country is facing major problems, including a health care system that is seriously broken and getting worse. Neither party can do it alone. No one faction of the population can do it alone. Neither the far right nor the far left is being helpful.

Every other “advanced” country is not the United States.  Our poor here isn’t all that poor, our middle class is fairly well off and our rich are mega rich.  Canadians and French lives are controlled by the government, via healthcare.  When you implement a national plan, that forces people onto an inferior government-run plan, the government has the ability to tax and control every single action you take.  If you drink a soda – you get taxed.  If you don’t wear a seatbelt, you get taxed.  If you don’t take daily aspirin, you get taxed.   In addition, by every single measure, government run plans are always inferior.  Our country has the best medical care in the entire world and the only reason statistics allow for other us to be ahead is because we smoke and overeat.  If we didn’t do those things we would be number one on the list.  Yet, what is going to make Americans stop doing that, well, by God, more government control, fat taxes, increased smoking taxes, bans on smoking in bars, soda bans, soda taxes.  

Toll roads should be going to support infrastructure rather than the state or private companies should be given incentives to update infrastructure.  The money derived should be allocated directly back into bridge support, road support, new water treatments, etc. rather than redistribution of wealth plans that penalize achievement.  BTW, if you forgot, we went and had a revolution over much less than healthcare reform.  It’s not surprising that someone would feel that way – even I at times feel that way.  Expanded coverage makes people dependent, not empowered.  They are never given incentive to make for themselves a better life.  As a conservative, I support helping the neediest, but plans to do that should always be temporary, and yet they never are.  Additionally, civilization has survived millions of years without national healthcare and its done pretty well.  In fact, our country has done better than all the rest without it since inception.

You certainly do a great job of pointing out the numero uno problem with the republican party.  They have sold their souls for a piece of the money pie, when they should be ending entitlement programs, like they promised and replace them with incentive programs.  The only reason republicans do well on welfare voters these days is because democrats manage the programs wildly with fluctuations that make people nervous.  Older voters don’t like to change habits.  The only reason to vote republican is because they don’t concoct ridiculous ideas (well except under Bush for some reason) like national healthcare, putting terrorists on trial in NY, soak the rich programs that do nothing to benefit the economy and serve rather as revenge, and programs based on the fraud of climate change.

Yes, we will make gigantic gains in the next election.  The reasons why are because people don’t want this bill and people can’t stand Obama anymore.  He is the most narcissistic, egomaniacal president we have ever had.  I mean, every time he speaks he has to have the acoustics make it sound as if he’s God.  He and Michelle get dressed up and walk around in Copenhagen as if they are king and queen, even looking out from rooftops to their inferiors below.  His supporters are obsessive young people who have absolutely no regard for the wisdom of age and experience and are solely motivated by what they want for themselves, because “its mine”.  They whine and complain about how things are so bad and go home to HD flat screen televisions, full meals, etc, whether poor or not.  This is what they have been taught in school by their professors and it is what they are taught from the moment they enter education.  It’s sickening.  Then they have the audacity to give aid and comfort to enemies abroad by denouncing our military men and women.  They have no stomach for the necessary and no empathy for the just.  

You know, if democrats were actually concerned with reforming the healthcare system in a way that benefits all – they would have put all of the republican proposals into the bill, most importantly tort reform, and interstate competition, yet they were not for one second willing to budge because doing tort reform would impact their campaign paychecks and interstate competition would weaken the power of the public option to suck everyone into the system.  In addition, why do you think we are facing problems, and it’s such a simple answer that no politician and especially no liberal wants to accept – we’re out of money and on the verge of collapse if we do not immediately end entitlement spending until our debt is paid in full and our coffers replenished.  Hell, Moodys is considering moving us from a AAA rating to a AA credit rating, something that hasn’t occurred in Moodys history.

I don’t hate, I see, and I see people who want power daily.  They breathe it in daily and it consumes their being.  It didn’t start with Obama, but Obama wants it more desperately than any other president who has taken power.  We’re tired of it, and we’re tired of liberal occupiers (left or right) destroying our country.  We want our country back.

[Vepres]

Sure, a majority support a "public option", but that means a different thing to different people. When you get into details, a majority always disapproves.

Additionally, if you say "government option", or "universal healthcare", or "government sponsored healthcare", the number of those in favor drops dramatically.

[Beet]

Every other “advanced” country is not the United States.  Our poor here isn’t all that poor, our middle class is fairly well off and our rich are mega rich.  Canadians and French lives are controlled by the government, via healthcare.  When you implement a national plan, that forces people onto an inferior government-run plan, the government has the ability to tax and control every single action you take.  If you drink a soda – you get taxed.  If you don’t wear a seatbelt, you get taxed.  If you don’t take daily aspirin, you get taxed.   In addition, by every single measure, government run plans are always inferior.  Our country has the best medical care in the entire world and the only reason statistics allow for other us to be ahead is because we smoke and overeat.  If we didn’t do those things we would be number one on the list.  Yet, what is going to make Americans stop doing that, well, by God, more government control, fat taxes, increased smoking taxes, bans on smoking in bars, soda bans, soda taxes.

Americans smoke a lot less than in other countries. And part of the reason Americans smoke less is because of taxes and other government restrictions that have forced people to be healthier-- mostly for people to never take up smoking at all. These people in other countries are very satisfied with their health care systems. If their plans are so inferior, then why is Americans' satisfaction with our health care system lower than the UK's satisfaction? Why are we having this debate and not them? Why do we spend so much more for a result that is no better?

The government already has the ability to tax almost every single action you take, but it doesn't. It doesn't tax people for taking aspirin. Nor does it tax you for not wearing a seatbelt, but you will get a fine because it's illegal, as you will get a fine for speeding. So according to you, a fine for speeding is wrong because what? Because it allows government to 'control your lives'? Because government operations of police and ticketing systems are inferior and we should grant private companies the right to go around fining people instead? Or there should be no law against speeding?

By that logic, why not just throw out all the laws passed in the past 100 years? Medicare, Social Security, food and drug licensing, restaurant and building codes, child labor, all of these laws control your life. They're all unAmerican and totalitarian and far left.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Ahem, when the government builds roads they are telling you where to drive. Can I build a house where that road travels through? No. That's government control. And by your logic, since government operations are inherently inferior, government should never build roads. Roads penalize achievement because they allow parasites who had no hand in building them to enjoy them. It penalizes people who would have built a road through their own blood and sweat, or private enterprises that saved up money, and bought land, and built a road.  Government should never even exist. We should just have anarchy.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So because as a conservative, the government might do something you disagree with, you would support a revolution and a coup d'etat. Very conservative. Very well then, you can have your revolution. Burn the Constitution, burn the flag, destroy the capital. Destroy the United States. And have your country without health care reform. But then in that country, I will find something I disagree with, and I will get many people who agree with me, and we will have a revolution against you! No worry though, after our revolution, you are free to have yet another counter revolution as soon as you find a minor point of disagreement. I'm sure it'll be something of more significance than the minor points of disagreement 1776 were about. In fact, why don't we just make it a tradition to have a revolution every 3 months. Politics is worthless anyways. It's much better just to settle disputes out of the barrel of a gun. That's where power grows from, anyway.

Yes and I am sure someone with a crap-ass health insurance subsidy will be completely content and never strive for anything ever again. Lord knows humans are not ambitious, greedy, or unsatisfied. As soon as they get a small health insurance subsidy they will become completely satisfied with life, the universe, and spend all day lying on the couch doing nothing, just thinking about that beautiful health insurance.

[Beet]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Right, older voters are all socialists too. They only for for the GOP because it's the socialist party that is more committed to protecting existing socialism. The GOP is nothing but a bastion of entitlement programs. But the people don't want that. They are rejecting entitlement programs. That's why both parties support them.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I agree completely! Excellent description of the youth! They literally make the acid go up in my stomach. And of course Obama never does anything but hunger for power. There is not a good bone in his body. His entire life from his birth has been wrapped in his own sense that he is King and everyone else is inferior to him. That, and a left wing conspiracy to replace America with communism. He has been plotting this takeover for 25 years, and it is only his arrogance and lack of compassion for the little ones that has gotten him as far as he has.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And why the hell do you think that is? We're out of money because conservatives convinced the American people to build an economy supposedly on freedom but really on debt. It was conservative ideas, conservative policies, conservative mentalities that created and grew and nourished Wall Street. In the last 90 years we have only had two periods of unified Republican control-- Republican control that was supposed decisively by conservative, and believers in small government, just like you. So don't try and hide from it now. And each of these two periods was followed by going into a Depression. If you think we're out of money now just see what would have happened had we gone into a Depression. Moody's ratings wouldn't matter any more because Moody's would be bankrupt. Consumer spending would drop 50% and government spending could drop 30% and we still would be poorer than we are now.

Don't come back and lecture us about being out of money. The public national debt was built up by Ronald Reagan and the Bushes-- and conservatives were their base. If you deny it now, it's a lie, pure and simple. But the real problem was the ponzi scheme in the private economy that was built up by the Reagan ideology of Wall Street. That was also supported by conservatives. In fact, conservatives were the root and the base of support for the Wall Street ideology. To deny that is a lie as well.

I think tort reform is a good idea, and more competition across state lines could be a good idea too. But I can't discuss it with someone like you who acts like even the smallest tax is somehow a complete denial of freedom. It sounds like we have a lot bigger disagreements than tort reform and cross state insurance competition.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's because Obama is holding the Ring, my friend. You need to call Frodo to get it from him poste haste.

[Punditty]

Time to start a recall campaign against Lieberman, perhaps? Or is that allowed?

[anvi]

Now's not the time to get too emotional. To be fair, the leftists were pretty hard against Lieberman back in 2006. Now he's showing them who's boss. Ok, we get it. Don't mess with Lieberman. He's the man. The question is, now that he's got the attention he wanted, can he still be worked with?

Otherwise, the Democrats will have to try to work with Olympia Snowe.

I would much, much, much rather have the Democrats work with Olympia Snowe.  At least, when she raises concerns and objections, they are ones she believes in after engaging herself in careful study and consideration. And, because she is a rational and commendable Senator, she is open to rational persuasion.   Lieberman is a shamelss, insurance-company whoring, flip-flopping piece of sub-anphibian sh**t.

You know, if Joe Lieberman wants to be an insurance company executive, if Kent Conrad wants to be be on a hospital board and if Ben Nelson wants to be a pro-choice advocate, I wish they would resign their seats as United States senators and go do those things.  They would make much better, and much more honest livings that way.

If the leaders of the Democratic party even had one remaining testicle, they would look at these puny wads from Conneticut, North Dakota and Nebraska and say: "this has been our number one issue all year, it's been something we have been trying to accomplish since the '40's, and you're getting on board with it, or you're either out of your committee seats or you're not getting one dime of DNC money for your reelection campaigns.  If you're going to vote with Republicans on our most important issues, then be honest men and join their party."  I would rather see the Democratic party fighting the good fight against honest opponents and losing a few than caving to dishonest allies and passing a bill that fails everyone.  They would get a lot more goodwill for that on election days.

And I would rather see the Democratic party sitting down and trying to honestly figure out issues with Senator Snowe than watch them cave to the likes of Joe Lieberman.

[Franzl]

Time to start a recall campaign against Lieberman, perhaps? Or is that allowed?

No. lol.

[Landslide Lyndon]

In 2007, Bob Novak accused Mitch McConell of dereliction of duty because he failed to gather enough Republican votes for the McCain-Kennedy bill for immigration reform.

I think a similar accusation leveled against Obama for his role in the health care debate is more than appropiate under the current circumstances.

[President Mitt]

Sure, a majority support a "public option", but that means a different thing to different people. When you get into details, a majority always disapproves.

Additionally, if you say "government option", or "universal healthcare", or "government sponsored healthcare", the number of those in favor drops dramatically.

What else could it possibly mean?

[Rowan]

Sure, a majority support a "public option", but that means a different thing to different people. When you get into details, a majority always disapproves.

Additionally, if you say "government option", or "universal healthcare", or "government sponsored healthcare", the number of those in favor drops dramatically.

What else could it possibly mean?

If you ask 100 people what a "public option" is, you'll get 100 different answers.