Support NeoGAF

[Byakuya769]

What electoral winds?

The choice looks to be between being rrationaly voted out of office for being ineffectual, or irrationally voted out of office for "ramming through" legislation. At least the latter option actually attempts to accomplish something.

 

[Y2Kev]

Or they'll pass it in a massive deafness to the electoral winds, and ...get wiped out in November 1994 style.

If the Democrats do not pass health care reform, the base will stay home in November and no one will be safe.

 

[itsinmyveins]

You act as though statements get challenged in the media.

A bit OT I guess, but how much blame do you put on news networks in terms of not asking the right questions, not acting as journalist but rather as gossip networks and just plain being stupid regarding the shaping and representation of the publics view on healthcare reform?

 

[RiskyChris]

You recognize that being the "fucking President of the United States of America," doesn't mean that he's a dictator.

Nor does it mean Congress needs to bow to his will. If anything, "being the fucking President of the United States of America," will just further the hardcore extremely liberal possibly not born in the United States Communist narrative that's already been successful.



Yet despite this he's been successfully labeled as a hardcore extremely liberal Communist who is destroying this country.

I wonder what would have happened if he did take hard stances.

No shit it doesn't mean he's dictator. I am literally only asking him to pretend to care about any issue.

Better not take hard stances, the republicans would win then. Oh wait, they already have. Good fucking job, Bams.

 

[Trakdown]

"If the Democrats run for cover, if we become pale carbon copies of the opposition, we will lose -- and deserve to lose. The last thing this country needs is two Republican parties."

Ted Kennedy in 1980.

 

[Sirpopopop]

Good. Every fucking election the incumbents should be thrown out until they get a god damn clue and start doing what the people want instead of what their bribers want. The people don't want a HCR bill that is so full of pork shit that it stinks even in the most liberal state in the country.

Instead, we the American people want to ignore a problem, and believe that our current system is better than what was proposed despite the fact that non-partisan analysis shows that's not the case.

Oh, and we'll elect a guy who is all about doing what his bribers want. The man with a pickup truck who happens to own multiple homes.

 

[Vilix]

I'm going to blame YOU, the American people. You elect leaders, then after a year get frustrated that they can't do anything. So, in order to solve this problem you decide to create more gridlock, and kill off a bill that was nearly done. All because you believe this bill is going to create some sort of massive big COMMUNIST government, and bought into the narrative of the same folks who brought us such great hits like the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003.

:lol This is great. I mean, who would've thought to blame the same people who put him in power in the first place, and then realize he wasn't the famed "Majic Black Man" people thought he was? Or, could it have been that he himself, and the elected congress, was to blame because they squabbled amongst themselves for too long, and ended up with a piece of legislation that now no one really wants? Nah, that couldn't be it. Has to be me.

Sorry, peoples. I done fucked it up for everybody.

 

[RiskyChris]

Oh, and we'll elect a guy who is all about doing what his bribers want. The man with a pickup truck who happens to own multiple homes.

Obama owns a pickup truck?

 

[Tamanon]

A bit OT I guess, but how much blame do you put on news networks in terms of not asking the right questions, not acting as journalist but rather as gossip networks and just plain being stupid regarding the shaping and representation of the publics view on healthcare reform?

I'd put a good amount of blame on them. The theoretical purpose of a news network is to inform the populace, but when you convert to just a split-screen shit-spewing for anything even resembling politics, then you're doing the populace an injustice. Basically a democracy only thrives on an informed public, which means ours is pretty crippled.

Of course, that also puts blame on the viewers themselves, because the information is out there elsewhere, they just don't want to get it.

 

[Nert]

A bit OT I guess, but how much blame do you put on news networks in terms of not asking the right questions, not acting as journalist but rather as gossip networks and just plain being stupid regarding the shaping and representation of the publics view on healthcare reform?

When it comes to the for-profit operations, the different segments of the media market are simply responding to what their viewers/readers/listeners are demanding. It wont shock anyone to state that most consumers of media are not interested in watching C-Span, or the BBC, or PBS; instead, they want issues framed as brawls, pundits raising their voices, huge budgets spent on the wardrobes of anchors and the news sets, and complex legislation boiled down into overly simplistic terms.

The media doesn't have an "agenda" that supercedes the need to be profitable (or to at least break even). If the public as a whole wanted calmer, and more reasoned, political discourse, the networks would respond.

 

[Sirpopopop]

i'm not even asking for him to try to ram down any approach, i was asking him to get the fuck involved. By the time he jumped in to cheerlead it was already too late

From what I recall I was suggesting the rambo approach, and you said "yes," implying that this is what you wanted Obama to do.

So what are you doing here, flip-flopping?

As for cheerleading - it wasn't very effective early in the year. The only thing cheerleading accomplished was that it annoyed people trying to watch their favorite tv shows.

the populace is by and large stupid. they believe what they see and what the magic box tells them... when you have a one sided campaign against healthcare, the populace will by and large believe what they see on TV... this isnt new, and the dems should have understood this by now. Again... by the time anyone even wanted to try to "hit back" it was way too late

Well, the TV in question here wouldn't have allowed the Dems to form a favorable narrative that did them in here.

 

[Schattenjäger]

So if brown were to run for president in 2012 - he'd have the same amount of experience as Obama :lol

 

[Byakuya769]

:lol This is great. I mean, who would've thought to blame the same people who put him in power in the first place, and then realize he wasn't the famed "Majic Black Man" people thought he was? Or, could it have been that he himself, and the elected congress, was to blame because they squabbled amongst themselves for too long, and ended up with a piece of legislation that now no one really wants? Nah, that couldn't be it. Has to be me.

Sorry, peoples. I done fucked it up for everybody.

I don't go as far as to remove all culpability from those elected in office but honestly speaking, what have any of us really done to pressure our elected officials to be more progressive? I've seen tea parties get coverage and laughed at, and I've seen a shit storm of an August recess with people screaming for their America to be protected. Meanwhile, we sit here and discuss, track polls, play chicken-little, cheerlead, argue, and hurl insults on a forum. Most of these democrats have no reason to cater to us because we aren't vocal, and we're less likely to show up at the polls in the first place.

So yes, we are to blame as well.

So if brown were to run for president in 2012 - he'd have the same amount of experience as Obama :lol

You are one of the most (if not the most) vapid posters in this thread. You're only here to gloat that "your team won", and consistently duck out of any substantive discussion. I hope you're getting your jollies. I guess we can expect you to disappear again if things turn around, or someone starts posting graphs you don't understand.

 

[Sirpopopop]

Obama owns a pickup truck?

So, the people of Massachusetts elected Barack Obama in the special election to be their Senator and their President?

 

[RiskyChris]

So, the people of Massachusetts elected Barack Obama in the special election to be their Senator and their President?

Hey here's a hint, you pretty much described every elected member of the government.

 

[BigGreenMat]

I am disappointed in the Democrats. I don't see how this makes anyone unwilling to vote for democrats though? If you don't like how your representative or Senator waffled under pressure from Republicans or the bullshit media coverage just vote in your primary for someone else!! It doesn't have to be a republican. I know I personally can't vote for a single republican right now because the party has no ideas, no ethics, and seems to have no desire to do ANYTHING for the American people. It seems as if the entirety of the Republican Party right now is based on winning and if they lose making the Democrats job impossible in spite. How the hell did that become a political agenda and how the hell are people willing to put up with it?!?! So I don't want to hear any bullshit about not voting because you are upset with the Democrats. Vote in the primaries for the people you might want instead of waiting until the general election to vote on people you don't!

 

[Zamorro]

PoliGAF Thread of The Massachusetts Massacre of The Uninsured

PoliGAF Thread of Part 2: The Empire Strikes Back

PoliGAF Thread of PRESIDENT OBAMA Tossing His List in the Bin

PoliGAF Thread of PRESIDENT OBAMA Tending His Garden and Waiting for 2012

PoliGAF Thread of The ADHD Progressive's Gift of Gridlock

 

[Vilix]

I don't go as far as to remove all culpability from those elected in office but honestly speaking, what have any of us really done to pressure our elected officials to be more progressive? I've seen tea parties get coverage and laughed at, and I've seen a shit storm of an August recess with people screaming for their America to be protected. Meanwhile, we sit here and discuss, track polls, play chicken-little, cheerlead, argue, and hurl insults on a forum. Most of these democrats have no reason to cater to us because we aren't vocal, and we're less likely to show up at the polls in the first place.

So yes, we are to blame as well.

Tell ya what. I'll go to the hardware store and grab some pitchforks. You go get some torches. We'll go over to DC and fix some wagons, but good!

 

[Father_Brain]

First of all, not everyone believes in opening up the coffers. Your going to run into opposition regardless, when you open up the piggy bank. Secondly, your proving my point, because Specter (R at the time), Collins (R), and Snowe voted for ARRA. Watering the bill down may have happened, but some Reps came aboard. Like I've said in previous posts, they will come around if you allow them to work with you. Plus even though I think it is hugely beneficial, the bill has proven largely unpopular, so maybe it was a little foresight to not want the stink of the bill on their hands.

Furthermore on your gang of 6 I'll give you a quote from your very own article proving what I am saying: "Mr. Enzi, who sits on both the Finance Committee and the health committee, has a long record on health issues but found Democrats on the health panel unwilling to compromise." It's pretty easy to jump ship when your not rowing.

On your first set of assertions: ARRA, true, has not been widely popular. However, there's substantial agreement from many economists not only that it has saved jobs, but that a larger stimulus would have been more effective at doing so. Instead, the bill was eviscerated from the House version to get those Republican votes. You don't have to agree with me that the House version was superior, but you're arguing from the position that it's always a good thing to drastically alter a bill solely to garner a few votes from the opposing party. In the real world, there are actually substantive policy consequences to doing so. And guess what? We have two parties precisely because Democrats and Republicans fundamentally disagree on a great many issues, and have limits to how far each is willing to compromise. You seem to be living in some kind of fantasyland of bipartisan comity where both parties are capable of agreeing on everything, but that isn't reality, and partisan disagreement is not inherently a bad thing, despite what hacks like David Broder will tell you.

And the Gang of 6? That's a pretty ludicrous way to take that Enzi quote out of context. Baucus spent three whole months delaying health care reform in pursuit of a compromise that Grassley, Enzi and Collins could support. How did they handle these sensitive negotiations? Well, Enzi issued a public statement on behalf of the GOP, in which he essentially repeated Sarah Palin's "death panels" lie, and said this to one of his constituents about his Gang of 6 involvement:

It was Enzi's duty to his constituents to terminate negotiations, the man said to loud applause.
This time, Enzi responded. "If I hadn't been involved in this process as long as I have and to the depth as I have, you would already have national health care," he said.
"Someone has to be at the table asking questions," Enzi said, showing a flash of passion.
He later quoted a favorite saying: "If you're not at the table, you're on the menu."
"It's not where I get them to compromise, it's what I get them to leave out," Enzi said.

Enzi also strongly suggested to an anti-reform group that he was committed to killing whatever came out of the Gang of Six talks. As for Grassley, he sent out a fundraising letter in which he vowed to "defeat 'Obama-Care,'" while he was still at the negotiating table. Do these sound like people who were negotiating in good faith with Democrats?

Also, please take the time to learn the distinction between "you're" and "your." That post hurt my brain a bit.

 

[Sirpopopop]

:lol This is great. I mean, who would've thought to blame the same people who put him in power in the first place, and then realize he wasn't the famed "Majic Black Man" people thought he was? Or, could it have been that he himself, and the elected congress, was to blame because they squabbled amongst themselves for too long, and ended up with a piece of legislation that now no one really wants? Nah, that couldn't be it. Has to be me.

Sorry, peoples. I done fucked it up for everybody.

Yes, because instead of taking something that represents an improvement over what we have, and a bill that would help a lot of people get affordable health insurance, if not UHC, we'll instead get nothing. Maybe, we can at least get insurance companies denying coverage due to pre-existing conditions out of the way, but certainly nothing on the "affordable health care" front.

We'll get our quick health care reform when the system is officially broke, but unfortunately, this is something that we should have dealt with fifteen years ago.

 

[Byakuya769]

Tell ya what. I'll go to the hardware store and grab some pitchforks. You go get some torches. We'll go over to DC and fix some wagons, but good!

Creative way of saying "You're right, Byakuya!"

 

[gcubed]

So if brown were to run for president in 2012 - he'd have the same amount of experience as Obama :lol

no one bit on your first one...

 

[GhaleonEB]

Headline of the Day

Village Voice: "Scott Brown Wins Mass. Race, Giving GOP 41-59 Majority in the Senate"

Via TPM. Pretty much.

 

[Particle Physicist]

The more I read about brown, the more I like him - 30 years national guard experience ... Paratrooper, JAG - Big athlete .. All around patriot - never mind his wife is a milf
can def see him as a vp candidate if he does a good job

He also drives a truck!!!!!!

 

[Schattenjäger]

I don't go as far as to remove all culpability from those elected in office but honestly speaking, what have any of us really done to pressure our elected officials to be more progressive? I've seen tea parties get coverage and laughed at, and I've seen a shit storm of an August recess with people screaming for their America to be protected. Meanwhile, we sit here and discuss, track polls, play chicken-little, cheerlead, argue, and hurl insults on a forum. Most of these democrats have no reason to cater to us because we aren't vocal, and we're less likely to show up at the polls in the first place.

So yes, we are to blame as well.



You are one of the most (if not the most) vapid posters in this thread. You're only here to gloat that "your team won", and consistently duck out of any substantive discussion. I hope you're getting your jollies. I guess we can expect you to disappear again if things turn around, or someone starts posting graphs you don't understand.

Duck out?? Try again- I've responded to all arguments.
Sorry I don't follow the herd mentality here - what I said was the truth.
He might really be a candidate now.

And no it's not gloating - just happy that the dems might actually get the message now rather than ignoring it.

 

[Zenith]

Do you people enjoy overreacting by a huge, embarrassing margin?

Weren't you just telling people repeatedly about how they were overreacting to the polls and that Coakley could still win it, even when all the counts kept going to Brown?

Talk about denial.

 

[Father_Brain]

So if brown were to run for president in 2012 - he'd have the same amount of experience as Obama :lol

I still haven't seen you respond to my post a few pages back in which I called bullshit on your ridiculous assertion that Democrats haven't made any compromises on health care reform. I wonder why.

 

[mernst23]

The real question is, what would this past year have been like if Coleman pulled it out or Ted Stevens's corruption wasn't outed?

 

[Schattenjäger]

no one bit on your first one...

not really - I just added to my original point - didn't feel like editing

 

[Sirpopopop]

Hey here's a hint, you pretty much described every elected member of the government.

I understand where you are coming from, and I empathize with this position, being from New Jersey, where the only sure thing you know about your local politicians is that they are on the take.

However, I can't quite see a man who wants to tax the banks to get our money back as someone who is squarely about doing what our bribers want.

No shit it doesn't mean he's dictator. I am literally only asking him to pretend to care about any issue.

Better not take hard stances, the republicans would win then. Oh wait, they already have. Good fucking job, Bams.

I would say he's certainly cared a lot about the issues. See: stricter rules from the EPA, removing Bush's draconian stem cell blocks, trying to rebuild our relationships with other foreign countries, and attempting to do something at the failure of a summit known as Copenhagen.

Now, if you were expecting a true progressive. His record as a Senator never indicated as such, so I don't see how you can be disappointed that you are getting what his record said you were getting.

I do have my issues with Obama regarding his weak stance on civil rights (see: Rendition, but not Guatanamo since that's a NIMBY issue), but I'll take him over the alternatives any day.

In any case, I apologize for being cross with you earlier. That wasn't cool.

To Nert: I don't think anyone views this health care legislation as ideal, or even something to like. However, given what the CBO has said regarding costs, it's a bitter pill that seems to be worth swallowing.

 

[Schattenjäger]

I still haven't seen you respond to my post a few pages back in which I called bullshit on your ridiculous assertion that Democrats haven't made any compromises on health care reform. I wonder why.

I answered that - go back and reread

changing the bill to get one vote on board at a time is not real compromise -

 

[JoeBoy101]

Since apparently I'm just here to stir shit up, I'm here for the noon feeding:

Democrats Won’t Rush to Pass Senate Bill

After a meeting of House Democratic leaders even as Mr. Brown’s win was being declared, top lawmakers said they were weighing their options but the prospect of finishing off the debate with House passage of the Senate plan appeared to significantly diminish.

Noting that the election in Massachusetts turned on a variety of different factors like the economy and local issues, Representative Chris Van Hollen, Democrat of Maryland and a top party campaign strategist, said resistance to the emerging health legislation also figured in the anti-Democratic equation.

“Health care was also part of the debate, and the people of Massachusetts were right to be upset about provisions in the Senate bill like the Nebraska purchase and other special deals,” Mr. Van Hollen said, referring to elements included in the bill to win the votes of Democratic senators and round up 60 votes.

For the health care bill:

 

[Schattenjäger]

He also drives a truck!!!!!!

Aren't the dems more blue collar?

 

[gcubed]

Since apparently I'm just here to stir shit up, I'm here for the noon feeding:

Democrats Won’t Rush to Pass Senate Bill



For the health care bill:

yeah we got all that last night... since when have you been accused of stirring shit up, its refreshing to see you in the thread again, getting run by's from drake's while funny at first, start to annoy... and that was basically all that was left for any kind of other voice

 

[xelios]

Aren't the dems more blue collar?

Yeah, I welded for a while as a teen.

 

[itsinmyveins]

I'd put a good amount of blame on them. The theoretical purpose of a news network is to inform the populace, but when you convert to just a split-screen shit-spewing for anything even resembling politics, then you're doing the populace an injustice. Basically a democracy only thrives on an informed public, which means ours is pretty crippled.

Of course, that also puts blame on the viewers themselves, because the information is out there elsewhere, they just don't want to get it.

Yeah, I pretty much agree with that.

When it comes to the for-profit operations, the different segments of the media market are simply responding to what their viewers/readers/listeners are demanding. It wont shock anyone to state that most consumers of media are not interested in watching C-Span, or the BBC, or PBS; instead, they want issues framed as brawls, pundits raising their voices, huge budgets spent on the wardrobes of anchors and the news sets, and complex legislation boiled down into overly simplistic terms.

The media doesn't have an "agenda" that supercedes the need to be profitable (or to at least break even). If the public as a whole wanted calmer, and more reasoned, political discourse, the networks would respond.

Yes, they're responding to viewers responding to their shows. Now, that doesn't rarely mean hyperbole, ridiculous statements and prepetuating such things rather than actually answering them since alarming reports followed by sirens are always gonna draw more attention than a calm and rational debate. That's simply how it is.

And with such reductive and deceptive means of trying to frame the political climate they're, I'd argue, shaping it too and feeding into the whole polarization of opinions voiced by supporters, no matter if they're democrats or republican.

 

[Particle Physicist]

Aren't the dems more blue collar?

He's so awesome and dreamy. Has a big cock too. You can see it online!

and he drives a truck!!!

 

[ToxicAdam]

I fail to see where I was wrong,

I misunderstood your point. Quoting yourself threw me off.

 

[Sirpopopop]

Might as well put it here:

My problem with the Democrats isn't due to Pelosi and Reid the politicians. It also isn't due to anything at all to do with the present regime.

My problem with the Dems revolves around whoever thought it was a brilliant idea to create a party whose entire philosophy can be summed up with the following phrase:

"If you aren't a fringe right winger, come on down, we'll accept you in our party."

It's not bloody likely that you'll create a functioning majority, composed of a base that's a hodge podge of clashing philosophies.

I misunderstood your point. Quoting yourself threw me off.

Fair enough!

 

[slit]

Yes, because instead of taking something that represents an improvement over what we have, and a bill that would help a lot of people get affordable health insurance, if not UHC, we'll instead get nothing. Maybe, we can at least get insurance companies denying coverage due to pre-existing conditions out of the way, but certainly nothing on the "affordable health care" front.

We'll get our quick health care reform when the system is officially broke, but unfortunately, this is something that we should have dealt with fifteen years ago.

I agree with this, unfortunately there is going to be a lot of suffering before real reform happens. 85% of Americans have health care insurance and most don't care about the 15% who don't. It's a classic case of "I've got mine, the hell with you" syndrome. A higher percentage of the middle class will have to become uninsured or paupers because of their health care cost before anything substantial will get done.

 

[gkryhewy]

Aren't the dems more blue collar?

You're such a troll.

Dems are more blue collar in the sense that they advocate (some) policies that would actually benefit lower/middle class working people, as opposed to wealthy people.

The ability for REPs to use social issues and nonspecific fear as a wedge to get those same lower/middle class working people to vote against their own best interests is not exactly a new trend.

 

[PhoenixDark]

If democrats drop health care as Barney Frank and others are suggesting, I'm not voting in November. If they at least try and it goes down in flames (maybe they change the bill a bit and see how long republicans filibuster), I'd vote. But right now it sounds like they're going to run to the hills to focus on "the economy" as if health care has nothing to do with it. And if that happens they don't deserve a single vote.

 

[gcubed]

i'll tell you what, day 1 of the Brown era has been shit on my 401k. Thanks Fox!!

 

[JoeBoy101]

yeah we got all that last night... since when have you been accused of stirring shit up, its refreshing to see you in the thread again, getting run by's from drake's while funny at first, start to annoy... and that was basically all that was left for any kind of other voice

Well, as said, I find the whole healthcare reform topic rather boring. That's a reflection of my own pettiness on the matter, because I recognize the importance of the topic and the effect legislation would have. For some reason it just bores me, which given polls, puts me in the minority for sure.

Don't really know what strategies the Democrats have left to pass this sucker. They all pretty much suck. The House is pushing back hard on the Senate bill. The Senate will never likely pass the bill again, even under the previous Senate version. Reconcilation, though sexy sounding, does not seem politically feasible or even realistic given how this vote will change congressional moods.

With the metaphorical gun to my head, if I were Obama, I'd get the congressional leadership together (all of them), and lock them in a room with me for up to a week (have the Secret Service guard the doors) non-stop until a reform bill can be hashed out everyone can agree with. It won't be sexy, but it could certainly help expand coverage and reduce costs, whilst spreading some of the risk to republicans and could get passed quickly.

And that, therein, lies the rub. Everybody in DC wants this off the table (either dead or passed, depending on your affiliations) yesteryear so they can focus alot of attention, press releases, and effort to the economy/jobs/re-election campaign. The only way something gets passed now is if it happens in the next, say 30 days (arbitrary). Democrats simply do not have the time to go back to the drawing board.

 

[Father_Brain]

I answered that - go back and reread

changing the bill to get one vote on board at a time is not real compromise -

No, you never responded to my post. But since your definition of "compromise" is apparently "giving the GOP minority everything they want and getting nothing in return," there's really no point in continuing to argue this point with you.

 

[RustyNails]

If only Democrats had passed the bill by the end of last year as it was originally intended (revised from earlier Thanksgiving deadline), there wouldn't be so much ruckus now. Instead they give in to the demands of their opponents and spend weeks on deliberations, no thanks to Bill Nelson and Joe Lieberman. And those 2-3 months of courting Olympia Snow. What a goddamned waste that was. Earlier I thought that something good can come out of the MA loss, that the incumbent democrats will fight more proactively and more fiercely for their seats in November. But this blame game is not looking good. We will just have to wait and see. If the democrats forsake the bill and start playing political musical chair, then they truly deserve to be wiped out come november. I just want the congress to pass whatever the hell is the bill now, so we can get on to immigration and finance reform.

 

[ClovingWestbrook]

Panther, looks like I may unfortunately win the avatar bet afterall.

 

[Byakuya769]

i'll tell you what, day 1 of the Brown era has been shit on my 401k. Thanks Fox!!

Here's a fair and balanced reaction - O's Noez!! The market is reacting to the likely failure of the health care bill!! Why won't the market make up its mind?

::rolls eyes::

 

[ToxicAdam]

"If you aren't a fringe right winger, come on down, we'll accept you in our party."

It's not bloody likely that you'll create a functioning majority, composed of a base that's a hodge podge of clashing philosophies.

I don't really agree with this assertion. 30 percent of America (give or take) identify themselves as a Republican. So, 1/3 of America is a fringe?

Another 30 percent of America (give or take) identifies themselves as Democrat. Yet, you admittedly say they are a fractured group or a hodge podge of seperate ideologies. Yet they are NOT a fringe?


There are many different factions in the Republican party also. But, for 40 years (!!) they were the minority group in this country. It's forced them to often set aside difference for the betterment of the party as a whole.

 

[JoeBoy101]

And as a quick aside, Brown for VP, Pres, or anything other than Senate in 2012 is an unequivocal bad idea. Let the guy get some experience.