Obama Confident Enough to Adopt Mocking Tone

Greg Sargent at the Plum Line says Obama wouldn't adopt this mocking tone of Republicans unless it was in the bag. He also thinks the Dems are releasing some vulnerable members, like Jim Matheson and Zack Space of Ohio, saying it's okay for them to vote "no" because they don't need them. They've got the votes.

Here's a rough schedule of tomorrow's vote timeline: [More..]

  • 2 p.m.: The House will debate for one hour the rules of debate for the reconciliation bill and the Senate bill.
  • 3 p.m.: The House will vote to end debate and vote on the rules of the debate.
  • 3:15 p.m.: The House will debate the reconciliation package for two hours.
  • 5:15 p.m.: The House will vote on the reconciliation package.
  • 5:30 p.m.: The House will debate for 15 minutes on a Republican substitute and then vote on the substitute.
  • 6 p.m.: The House will vote on the final reconciliation package.
  • 6:15 p.m.: If the reconciliation bill passes, the House will immediately vote on the Senate bill, without debate.
< Report: "Deem and Pass" Dead, Will Be Separate Vote on Senate Bill | U.S. Lets Afghan Farmers Have Their Poppy Fields >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    That's what I think (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 06:38:37 PM EST
    She's releasing a few of those "If you really need me" votes.

    Obama, I have to say, was very funny and stinging about the Republicans today.  Overall, it was quite a stirring and inspirational pep talk-- as long as you didn't really know the details of the bill.  Sigh.

    If so (none / 0) (#24)
    by Upstart Crow on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:06:37 PM EST
    how very small and unstatesmanlike of him.

    Victory is a time to be generous.


    Bullies and thugs (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Spamlet on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:16:38 PM EST
    do not deserve generosity.

    I was glad to see some real emotion and, yes, partisanship from Obama.

    I remain pissed off about how much he gave and negotiated away but can also recognize how good it must feel to him to vent and celebrate a bit, as he does in this video. Obama is no Roosevelt, unfortunately, but he's also not a flaming anti-American Strangelovean wingnut.


    You misunderstand (5.00 / 2) (#96)
    by Upstart Crow on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 09:39:31 PM EST
    I'm sorry, you misunderstood me.

    I was not suggesting graciousness because of any merits on the opposing team, or because anyone "deserved" it.

    I was suggesting it because it is less petty, and the more civil and wise way to govern.

    I was suggesting it as a recognition that he is now president of all the people -- not just the ones who support him. He is their president, even when he fights against them, and they him. He is president of both Democrats and Republicans.

    Many, many people oppose this legislation, on the right and left.  Mocking their concerns is not the way to "win."

    If he can't do it from generosity of spirit, then do it from self-interest, for himself and for his party come November.


    I understood perfectly, (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by Spamlet on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 10:24:52 PM EST
    and I even agree with your general point.

    I just disagree with its application to this case.

    The people who have been demagoguing this issue from the right, whether politicians or freelance fascists, are dangerous and un-American, in my opinion. I'm glad to see the president calling them out, if quite mildly by comparison with how the lunatic right routinely lies about, slurs, defames and demonizes political actors on the left, in the center, and even on the center right.

    Come on, it's not often that I can enjoy what Obama is doing these days. Please don't rain on my little parade.


    Which real emotion? Where? What? (none / 0) (#81)
    by bridget on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:54:06 PM EST
    Anger (none / 0) (#91)
    by Spamlet on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 08:38:26 PM EST
    Sorry, no (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by ruffian on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 08:53:21 PM EST
    Republicans have not been honorable participants in this process. That is what he is mocking - all of the 'friendly advice' they have been giving in the last couple of weeks.

    Depends on the victory (none / 0) (#30)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:11:33 PM EST
    Depends on the time.  I don't count this as one of those times.  This is exactly the Obama I want to see on the screen right now.  The people of our nation have been brought to our knees surviving the worst administration in history.  I'm done with crazy.  I will have crazy pointed to and called exactly what it is......

    More to the point, victory hasn't (none / 0) (#39)
    by observed on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:17:51 PM EST
    been achieved yet! After the bill passes, I'm sure Obama will be more gracious.

    More to the point (5.00 / 2) (#50)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:24:29 PM EST
    If this passes he should not be more gracious with crazy.  He needs to finally be done with that crap.

    Yes, I was going to add, he will (none / 0) (#54)
    by observed on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:26:42 PM EST
    be gracious---unfortunately.
    I hope he really rubs it in.
    Those Republicans who are racist will not be able to contain themselves if Obama does an end zone dance.

    Me too (none / 0) (#94)
    by ruffian on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 08:57:09 PM EST
    In the words of Jack Nicholson, or at least his character they can

    Go sell crazy someplace else, we're all stocked up here.


    Ha! (none / 0) (#58)
    by MKS on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:28:33 PM EST
    This is what Sargent's blog says (link above):

    Two key House Dems, Jim Matheson of Utah and Zack Space of Ohio, just announced that they're voting No. Matheson, a former No who Dems had hoped to flip to Yes, said that he was "saddened" that the legislation "contains too many special deals" and "does not contain health care costs."

    But in a sign of which way this is headed, the news of their vote -- which had been hotly anticipated only 24 hours ago -- caused barely a ripple. And even Republicans say they're interpreting these No votes as a sign that the Dem leadership has the votes and is now in the process of releasing some Dems and allowing them to vote No.

    "The fact that Space and Matheson are peeling is a good sign they have the votes or are close to getting them," one GOP aide emails.

    Heh, I said exactly that two hours before Sargent said it.....


    So... Jobs? Maybe we can take a crack (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by tigercourse on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 06:54:45 PM EST
    at that now. The Health Care bill will pass, it won't end the world as the Republicans claim and certainly won't solve all of our Healthcare problems as Obama and the rest of the Dems are trying to argue. It's probably an electoral loser in 2010. But the Democrats can blunt those losses and do something unambiguously useful for the country if they start focussing on job creation.

    I don't know if it is an electorial loser (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:02:08 PM EST
    I think it may turn out to be a wash, the Republicans have nothing to offer the people and the people will be hurting worse in most every way in six months.

    Also, Republicans are sure to (none / 0) (#22)
    by observed on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:04:05 PM EST
    try some truly ridiculous scare tactics which will likely backfire...something like a big scary black hand on the screen with a voiceover about the hand of government reaching into your private life and preventing you from seeing your own doctor, etc.

    When many of the current scare tactics (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:08:06 PM EST
    prove to be wildly incorrect, they all run the risk of looking like flagrant racist lunatics.

    You're (none / 0) (#36)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:16:40 PM EST
    right but the Dems have been in control and have done nothing to really help the job situation so who wins? Probably the GOP because the dem base is pretty demoralized right now.

    How can the GOP base be doing much (none / 0) (#41)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:19:24 PM EST
    better though?  The tea baggers seem to be pretty damned crazy and not much else in most ways, but they are just as hungry as the rest of us in the end and the enactment of much that they fight for is what brought us all to this starvation.

    they are (none / 0) (#46)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:22:28 PM EST
    starving but in their minds Obama has had a year and hasn't improved things. Right? These teabagger maybe crazy but they vote and they are much more motivated than the dem base.

    They probably are more motivated at this (none / 0) (#77)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:42:32 PM EST

    Something I reflect on (none / 0) (#47)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:22:51 PM EST
    is that my whole neighborhood was blanketed in Bush 04 yard signs.  I was afraid to put up a Kerry sign, I was afraid we would be vandalized.  There were probably only three McCain signs in the neighborhood though, and one of them was vandalized and it wasn't me....I friggin swear :)  It was someone else in the neighborhood angry as hell I guess.

    yeah (none / 0) (#57)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:28:32 PM EST
    that was where they were in '08 but not where they are now. They've totally rebounded from the loss in '08 blaming McCain mostly for the loss. Anyway, look at 2004 and where the D party was and what happened in '06. So two years can make a huge difference.

    How have they rebounded? (none / 0) (#63)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:31:59 PM EST
    I'm not seeing it but I may have a certain blindness because I couldn't believe that Glenn Beck came right after Oprah in most favored personality.

    yes. (none / 0) (#72)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:40:12 PM EST
    You can laugh at how crazy the teabaggers are but they have motivated people much like Cindy did for the anti-war movement.

    Just signed one (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by waldenpond on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:13:11 PM EST
    He just signed a jobs bill.  It wasn't large and was for the most tax cuts but it received no attention.

    The 'right' approach is tax cuts and that will not solve our jobs problem.  I don't know how Obama's center-right approach is going to be up to the challenge.  We'll see.

    It seems many in power are willing to accept higher unemployment for a long duration.


    Yes, stupidly they think (none / 0) (#37)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:17:10 PM EST
    the high unemployment for a longer duration is something they don't really need to be concerned with.  I think they are going to begin to discover though that that confidence is misguided.

    Because this administration has no jobs (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by BTAL on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:16:35 PM EST

    In fact, it could be argued that they don't really give a rats butt regarding jobs/economy.

    It is a one time shot at the agenda - shoot the moon and go for broke.  Let someone else clean up the mess.


    That's really funny. You think (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by observed on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:20:00 PM EST
    Obama was elected to take a one-time shot at Bob Dole's agenda?
    HA HA HA.

    Hint, come into the 21st century (none / 0) (#59)
    by BTAL on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:30:13 PM EST
    Obama set his own bar, agenda and expectations.

    Sucks when you can't even jump as high as you promised you could.


    It's (none / 0) (#17)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 06:57:35 PM EST
    too late for jobs. The stimulus was mishandled over a year ago and nothing they will pass now will have time to take effect.

    Finance regulation overhaul? (none / 0) (#19)
    by observed on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 06:59:57 PM EST
    I'm still not seeing the votes (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by andgarden on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:25:18 PM EST
    I assume they'll have them, but I don't think overconfidence is warranted.

    Whew. Someone wise (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by Cream City on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:40:45 PM EST
    with some caution.  Then I feel better about just saying to my spouse, watching his NCAA tourney, that I have yet to see a team celebrate victory before the buzzer.  It seems quite unwise to me to crow now, with so many hours to go for the last stops to be pulled out to put on the pressure.

    I have read too many accounts of too many bills in our history that pivoted on a single vote at the last minute, and not all of those bills were won.

    I'd give it a 98% certainty.  

    These are the Republicans.  They get the goods, they know the game.


    Pelosi is a very good headcounter (none / 0) (#78)
    by andgarden on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:42:52 PM EST
    but this is a very tough needle to thread.

    You have names to watch, mr. (none / 0) (#56)
    by observed on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:27:51 PM EST
    wonkity wonk?

    I'm just watching individual shifts (none / 0) (#62)
    by andgarden on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:31:38 PM EST
    With Space switching to no, I don't know where the comfortable margin is coming from.

    I don't see how they can be so (none / 0) (#68)
    by observed on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:33:56 PM EST
    confident, with 3 votes tomorrow.
    We will see.

    Capuano is a yes (none / 0) (#75)
    by waldenpond on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:41:21 PM EST
    Of course he is (none / 0) (#76)
    by andgarden on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:42:07 PM EST
    Agree (none / 0) (#65)
    by BTAL on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:32:28 PM EST
    this is an All In moment for Pelosi and Obama.

    I'll stand by my comment that it will be a 1-2 vote difference regardless which way it goes.


    Well, the only interesting piece (none / 0) (#73)
    by andgarden on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:40:29 PM EST
    of information will be whether they have to hold the vote open (and whether they're able to kill the motion to recommit).

    If they have a firm 216, then confidence is warranted. Probably they have about 218, and will "catch and release."


    hmmmmmm? (none / 0) (#67)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:33:47 PM EST
    You tend to be pretty good at reading those sorts of tea leaves.  If this is a bluff and it fails, it'll be pretty devastating.

    No savant here (none / 0) (#79)
    by BTAL on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:44:18 PM EST
    just a long and educating military career that taught me how to smell which way the BS was floating in the wind.

    I can only smell that half the time (none / 0) (#85)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 08:01:07 PM EST
    Hopefully those anti-biotics will help (none / 0) (#86)
    by BTAL on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 08:10:05 PM EST
    If I may be so bold to ask online, I assume you are at Ft Rucker in AL?

    Yes, the worst allergy suffering place (5.00 / 2) (#89)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 08:24:38 PM EST
    in the whole U.S. I think :)  My spouse is deployed right now...on his way home though.  He phoned tonight and said he wasn't where he used to be, I take that to mean that he isn't in Afghanistan anymore.  As you probably know everyone gets in trouble for giving away any specific status in phone conversations.  Probably some where in Europe, he has to be debriefed for a couple of days I was told.  I got a receipt for his airline ticket and he should be on U.S. soil on the 22nd, more processing at Bragg and then home on the 25th.

    That is wonderful news, Tracy. (5.00 / 2) (#90)
    by Cream City on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 08:38:05 PM EST
    I've spent a lot of time with vets this week -- one who served in Afghanistan, suddenly called up amid college, a young father, so I get to be part of getting his life back on track.  Another, a young military wife and mother, who also is getting back to college after several callups for her spouse.  And there will be more next week, and every week, whose quiet acceptance of the chaos that came into their young families' lives just puts me in awe.

    Then I spent a day with several Viet vets who came to a class on the Vietnam War -- every one of them disabled in such awful ways, visibly and/or with PTSD, but all are volunteering with homeless vets.  So I was in awe again at their strength as survivors in so many ways.  (Note: they cited the stats, and sources, that at least a third and probably more of the homeless in this country are veterans.  We all must do more. . . .)

    So I am happy to hear of another soldier on his way home to his family.  You made my day. :-)


    He had an opportunity to work (none / 0) (#92)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 08:51:56 PM EST
    with the branch he went with on a more permanent basis if he wanted it.  I asked him last week if that was where we were headed because he was thinking about it at first.  Not anymore though, those who are very dedicated and working the rotating in and out every six months don't have much for families or their families are pretty crazy.  He said they got their full money's worth out of him but he won't go again unless he comes up for a regular deployment again.  That should be about three years and hopefully he will be retiring then.  He of course wants to stay in and make W5, and then after that he wants the W5 retirement and you need to be at that rank for three years to get the retirement.  It is as high as he can go though and W5s were very rare once upon a time, not as rare now.  I bought the last Army Times because the cover says that they have refunded the spouse college tuition program, but it has more restrictions.  One of the young enlisted wives who I have befriended recently lost her tuition grant, so I nabbed it to read up but haven't read it since I have been ill.

    Zack Space was not released (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by observed on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:55:38 PM EST
    Maybe (none / 0) (#1)
    by jbindc on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 06:36:50 PM EST
    But from other reports around the web, the Republicans are looking pretty confident and at ease too.

    So who's the better actor?

    And I disagree with Sargent (none / 0) (#3)
    by jbindc on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 06:37:38 PM EST
    When Obama typically starts mocking, that's when he's on the defensive.

    Good point. He was very mocking (none / 0) (#7)
    by observed on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 06:42:09 PM EST
    after he got spanked in a couple of debates in the primaries.

    Maybe the Democrats are bluffing, hoping to roll a couple of maybe votes. Andgarden says Pelosi would postpone the vote if the bill won't pass.
    I think another possibility is that there's no way to know if some Congressmen would roll until you turn the pressure up to maximum.
    Is this a high stakes roll of the dice?
    I don't think a vote could have been postponed much longer. If there's no vote soon, people will conclude that negotiations have failed and the bill is dead.


    He has defensive, edgy mocking (none / 0) (#8)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 06:44:17 PM EST
    and laugh-out-loud mocking.  This was the latter.

    I detect more than a hint of Stephen (none / 0) (#11)
    by observed on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 06:47:22 PM EST
    Colbert in his words and tone there.

    I think it's a little of both. The vote (none / 0) (#12)
    by observed on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 06:52:19 PM EST
    can't be postponed, and they are confident.

    GOPers would not (none / 0) (#5)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 06:42:00 PM EST
    be issuing draconian public threats of legislative retaliation to individual Dems. who vote for the bill if they had any hope it wasn't going to pass.  They stink of desperation, frankly.

    Don't count your chickens n/t (none / 0) (#2)
    by BTAL on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 06:37:06 PM EST

    It's looks like a coup (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 06:44:38 PM EST
    WaPo reports the same. They didn't even need the Stupak crew.

    It will be a 1-2 vote difference (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by BTAL on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 06:54:53 PM EST
    regardless of which way it goes.

    The speech this afternoon was a combination of:

    •  Rah-rah
    •  Win one for the Gipper
    •  I feel your pain, but you still have to toe the line.

    His comment of "I've faced tough votes also" had to gag many dems in the audience.  Present, is not a tough vote.

    IMHO, he did not sway any vote this afternoon.  There is little if any magic left in the hat.


    I'm so happy they didn't need the (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:00:09 PM EST
    Stupak crew.

    I'm just sick of the whole thing (5.00 / 4) (#33)
    by Inspector Gadget on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:16:22 PM EST
    People are not dying in this country because they don't have insurance, they are dying because they don't have medical care. In truth, people who have insurance are still dying because the insurance companies are deciding they can't have care.

    No one has been able to show me how that is going to change with this bill.


    There is more hope for the poor (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:27:50 PM EST
    With a lot of the new community clinics that are now funded and will be opened.  I think for the struggling middle class though.....we are in deeper doo doo now unless the administration gets serious about regulating.

    It won't (none / 0) (#43)
    by jbindc on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:19:42 PM EST
    I've felt dispair like this (none / 0) (#49)
    by Inspector Gadget on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:24:06 PM EST
    twice before during the past 2 years.

    I suppose it's quite natural when Americans have to hold their noses and vote for the lesser of two lousies, that the lousy who takes the seat is going to produce what they see as "better than nothing" legislation.


    I think he has the Stupak group (none / 0) (#61)
    by MKS on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:31:22 PM EST
    They caved....That is why they are confident and released Space and Matheson....or so I would guess

    Don't get too happy (none / 0) (#66)
    by cawaltz on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:32:34 PM EST
    From what I hear at FDL there's gonna be an executive order to placate the Stupak crew. Oh and the pro choice caucus already signed off on it.

    http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2010/03/20/degette-agrees-to-executive-order-language-on-behalf-of- pro-choice-community/


    Executive action (none / 0) (#99)
    by star on Sun Mar 21, 2010 at 11:32:09 AM EST
    to please Stupak seems to be in the making.. That is worse IMO

    Why a coup? (5.00 / 2) (#28)
    by jbindc on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:09:08 PM EST
    With control of both houses and the WH - it shouldn't even be this close.

    This isn't a coup.


    Re: Why a coup (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by BTAL on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:14:25 PM EST
    You say coup, others say coupe

    You say corps, others say corpse

    I agree, with significant majorities in each chamber, this should be a slam dunk.


    It would be a slam dunk (5.00 / 3) (#38)
    by Inspector Gadget on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:17:25 PM EST
    if it was a good bill.

    My point exactly (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by jbindc on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:19:28 PM EST
    Republican votes (5.00 / 3) (#64)
    by waldenpond on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:32:05 PM EST
    For it to be a slam dunk there would need to be Republican votes.  In a rational (non-Republican) world the conserva-dems would have dropped off and the mod-repubs would've jumped on.  That was not going to happen under tea-bagger rule.  A Dem majority doesn't mean much when it has Ben Nelson.

    Well apparently there is a significant (5.00 / 2) (#95)
    by ruffian on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 09:01:55 PM EST
    difference of opinion among Dems in Congress about what constitutes a good bill.  If I've learned anything in the last year, it is that. No slam dunk available here.

    And anything I would call a good bill would definitely not be a slam dunk in this Congress.


    The Stupak crew (none / 0) (#29)
    by CoralGables on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:10:46 PM EST
    was shrinking like a wool sweater in the dryer. He needed to stand his ground because he was so outspoken. The rest never painted themselves into the Stupak corner.

    Maybe, just maybe (none / 0) (#6)
    by KeysDan on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 06:42:03 PM EST
    if the president took on that "mocking tone" a year ago, and scotched the bipartisan efforts to snag Senator Snowe, he would have had time to wrestle a decent bill to the ground with his own Democratic "friends".  

    But he got the bill he wanted. We (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by observed on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 06:44:53 PM EST
    have to live with that. On domestic policy, he's a right wing President, fairly close to Reagan.
    On foreign policy, he's poised to have a big success in arms reduction talks with Russia. That's very important.
    My opinion all along is that he doesn't care in the slightest about domestic policy. His approach to HCR has been to pass a bill as far right as possible, because that would help him electorally, in 2012.

    The passage of this bill has been made such a big deal that at this point I think Republicans are not going to do well in November, if the bill passes. The converse is obvious.


    But it seems to me that it has (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by KeysDan on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 06:55:17 PM EST
    devolved into an any bill will do.  Particularly easy when there seemed to be a scanty framework of essentials to be achieved.  Agree on the arms reduction with Russia, but I, for one, am not in the "near flawless" foreign policy camp (cf. Afghanistan policy).  

    Any bill which kept the corporate (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by observed on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 06:57:59 PM EST
    donations flowing would do.

    Well (none / 0) (#16)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 06:55:35 PM EST
    since they haven't moved the voting then I would assume they have the votes. Now the GOP is moving onto a repeal movement and are going to run on that in Nov. Too bad the bill is crappy enough to give them something to run on.

    The crappiness of the bill (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Spamlet on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:08:58 PM EST
    is that it's too conservative--too "middle of the road," in the president's own words. That's why progressives oppose it.

    But the GOP's got nothing now, and after tomorrow they'll have less than nothing, since their only agenda is to see Obama fail.

    Well, Obama didn't fail on this. He got just what he wanted--a crappy failure of a bill.

    The only upside of this fiasco is the abjection of the nutbag Rethugs. At least I can revel in that, if not in this crappy bill.


    Actually (5.00 / 2) (#44)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:19:44 PM EST
    the bill gives them something to run on. They can talk about the unpopular parts fo the bill which there are plenty and since the majority of americans are largely going to see NO benefit from this bill for four years if ever then probably enough people will buy whatever the GOP is selling.

    I suspect one of the reasons (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by observed on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:23:46 PM EST
    some details about the mandate are fuzzy, and will be determined by states later, is to take away some Republican shots at the bill.
    It would be SOOOO much easier to defend the bill, politically speaking, if there were a public option. Now, Republicans can say that Democrats are forcing people to buy crappy insurance with high deductibles and high co-pays.

    Oh well.

    I would rather see the bill fail, but if it passes, I hope it's not a benefit to Republicans.


    We'll see (none / 0) (#53)
    by Spamlet on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:26:20 PM EST
    My own sense is that passage of the bill is more an electoral plus than a minus for the Democrats. I just haven't seen these corporate Democrats' electoral fortunes as sufficient reason to pass this crappy bailout of the insurance companies.

    As I see it, Obama has actually co-opted the Republicans with this bill, to the detriment of actual health care for most Americans. And Obama's bully pulpit, coupled with the media's trumpeting of his "historic" legislation, will outshout whatever the gelded Republicans can throw at the Democrats.

    But we'll see.


    well (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:34:09 PM EST
    I think that there won't be enough time for the "historic" stuff and patting himself on the back to last until November. Just like everything else he's done the shine soon wears off because it all gets back to the fact that we have double digit unemployment.

    I don't think there's much to run on (none / 0) (#60)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:30:17 PM EST
    outside of how the completely nuts GOP didn't care if you were dropped or cancelled or capped.  It's pretty hard to say you did something really great when this is how little greatness you demanded.

    No (none / 0) (#70)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:36:06 PM EST
    there's plenty to run on. In fact the GOP here in Ga is attacking the thing from the left about how people are going to be forced to buy crappy insurance. They aren't going to run on the right about it.

    I thought you were talking about the (none / 0) (#71)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:40:06 PM EST
    Dems having something to run on.  Sure the GOP has that to run on, and because of that that is where our hope springs from that insurance regulating reform will take place.  How can the GOP fight it when they are going to run on the lack of it?

    They (none / 0) (#80)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:47:05 PM EST
    are going to say that the regulation is going to make things worse. Of course, we have no idea whether that is true or not but it never stopped them before.

    out for them.  They can try, but I don't see it happening.  They offer no actual healthcare solutions.

    Fine and Good (none / 0) (#23)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:06:21 PM EST
    And from this girl the heat is still on them to regulate a system that provides and works.  This is not the last we will be hearing about insurance company rippoffs, and now the people have more leverage because some things were actually changed....we will demand more things changed.  Our lives and and our economic situations are not going to improve anytime soon.  I hope every pol in D.C. realizes that a time of reckoning is at hand.

    Whip Count as of 7:27 pm (none / 0) (#26)
    by jbindc on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:08:07 PM EST
    It will boil down to the sequence of the votes (none / 0) (#40)
    by BTAL on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:18:46 PM EST
    Vote on the reconciliation bill first, cover is provided for voting on the Senate bill.

    Vote on the Senate bill first and there will be some massive anal puckering factor happening.

    The point of order will be that the Senate bill must be voted on first - for those that want to play by the rules.


    so the first vote will determine which of the (none / 0) (#51)
    by observed on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 07:25:12 PM EST
    other two votes occurs first?  I think I need popcorn.

    See #83 below as to the (none / 0) (#84)
    by BTAL on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 08:00:11 PM EST
    significance of the sequence of events.

    There are more knocking dem knees in DC than carter has little liver pills.


    Whip Count as of 11:37 pm (none / 0) (#98)
    by jbindc on Sun Mar 21, 2010 at 07:17:26 AM EST
    37 firm no.  They cannot lose another vote - 38 no kills the bill.

    How Obamacare Kills Real Health Care Reform (none / 0) (#87)
    by bridget on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 08:17:14 PM EST

    Treacherous Waters
    How Obamacare Kills Real Health Care Reform


    "It's difficult to understand a subject when those explaining it are motivated not by truth, but profit. In the case of health care, both Democrats and Republicans have huge financial incentives to obscure, mislead, or lie. Instead of common sense and honesty directing the debate, bags of money facilitate the conversation, funneled in from the health care industry via lobbyists into Congressmen's pockets. This is the real reason that Obama's "health care summit" was full of free-market jargon, staged debate and fake rage.

    The majority of working people in this country are completely alienated from this nonsense, and are growing progressively hostile to the lies of both parties and their respective media mouthpieces. ....."

    read on

    sorry, here is the link for the Cooke article (none / 0) (#88)
    by bridget on Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 08:20:09 PM EST