• Register
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • @NeoGAF
  • Like

Manmademan
Member
(01-23-2010, 07:02 PM)
Manmademan's Avatar

Originally Posted by empty vessel

Going through reconciliation means that what comes out of that will be a truer expression of what Democrats stand for, as they will only need 50 Senate votes instead of the 60 that constrained them before. If there is no public option, no drug negotiation, and/or no Medicare buy-in, it will be because the Democrats, as a party, oppose those measures. And, having opposed those measures, they will have failed to garner the support among the public that they will need during the next election.

This. Who knew that losing mass. could actually have had a positive outcome? :lol
MissPerfect
Banned
(01-23-2010, 07:16 PM)
Hey guys!!
Check out a short video i made of me at:

Let me know what you think!!
Watch it now!!
Last edited by Amir0x; 01-23-2010 at 07:29 PM.
Diablos
Member
(01-23-2010, 07:24 PM)
Diablos's Avatar

Originally Posted by MissPerfect

Hey guys!!
Check out a short video i made of me at:
xxxxxxxxx
Let me know what you think!!
Watch it now!!

Wow. Spam!
Manmademan
Member
(01-23-2010, 07:26 PM)
Manmademan's Avatar

Originally Posted by Diablos

Wow. Spam!

are you 100% sure it's spam? She might be legit
Diablos
Member
(01-23-2010, 07:27 PM)
Diablos's Avatar
The website is a screencap of an unplayed youtube video :lol
Manmademan
Member
(01-23-2010, 07:29 PM)
Manmademan's Avatar

Originally Posted by Diablos

The website is a screencap of an unplayed youtube video :lol

It looks like you can click on that arrow, but I wouldn't. :lol :lol

did you notice the website was something like "personalinjurylawers.etc.etc.etc" :lol
Particle Physicist
between a quark and a baryon
(01-23-2010, 07:30 PM)
The video doesn't work!!!!!!! I want my money back.

>(
Ember128
Member
(01-23-2010, 07:34 PM)
This didn't deserve it's own thread, and is somewhat old from when Glenn Beck was on Headline News, interviewing Ben Stein.

First thing Ben Stein says;

"Now can I have my cheeseburger?" :lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YjrDg6jULc
The Librarian
Founding member, Guardians Anonymous
(01-23-2010, 07:41 PM)
The Librarian's Avatar

Originally Posted by GhaleonEB

They're trying....


http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/arc..._01/022058.php

I'm assuming these changes will be included in the reconciliation bill?

And, yeah - fuck Nelson.
Gruco
Captain of Awesome
(01-23-2010, 07:50 PM)

Originally Posted by cntrational

Obama's 'Volcker Rule' shifts power away from Geithner

In particular...

Goolsbee said that Vice President Biden became a particular advocate for Volcker's approach.

If Bernstein's and Goolsbee's influence is rising with Volker's, and Geithner is getting pushed aside, that is phenomenal news for white house economic policy. Hopefully this reflects a genuine trend. Definitely something to watch at this point.

I fully support thread ending Monday. It's time.
Diablos
Member
(01-23-2010, 07:50 PM)
Diablos's Avatar

Originally Posted by SimpleDesign

Rahm Emanuel, Geithner Calling Senators To Shore Support For Bernanke

For shame, Rahm. For shame.
GhaleonEB
knows his net worth
(01-23-2010, 07:56 PM)
GhaleonEB's Avatar

Originally Posted by empty vessel

Going through reconciliation means that what comes out of that will be a truer expression of what Democrats stand for, as they will only need 50 Senate votes instead of the 60 that constrained them before. If there is no public option, no drug negotiation, and/or no Medicare buy-in, it will be because the Democrats, as a party, oppose those measures. And, having opposed those measures, they will have failed to garner the support among the public that they will need during the next election.

Agree. At the very least there's no reason not to add back in the options that were on the table in the Senate but blocked by a small handful of Senators: Medicare Buy-in and the opt-out public option. They probably could (and should) beef both of those up, but there's unquestionably an opportunity here. I suspect Pelosi is leveraging the anger in the House to push the bill further than the previous negotiations (with a 60-vote threshold in the Senate) would have. She's be a fool not to, and she's no fool.

I'm concerned that so many of the regulatory gaps between the Senate and House bills can't go through reconciliation, but there will be opportunities down the road for those.
The Librarian
Founding member, Guardians Anonymous
(01-23-2010, 08:07 PM)
The Librarian's Avatar

Originally Posted by empty vessel

Going through reconciliation means that what comes out of that will be a truer expression of what Democrats stand for, as they will only need 50 Senate votes instead of the 60 that constrained them before. If there is no public option, no drug negotiation, and/or no Medicare buy-in, it will be because the Democrats, as a party, oppose those measures. And, having opposed those measures, they will have failed to garner the support among the public that they will need during the next election.

Agreed.
Gruco
Captain of Awesome
(01-23-2010, 08:31 PM)
Is it confirmed that the public option could go through reconciliation? I remember there being some debate on that.
The Librarian
Founding member, Guardians Anonymous
(01-23-2010, 08:31 PM)
The Librarian's Avatar

Originally Posted by Gruco

Is it confirmed that the public option could go through reconciliation? I remember there being some debate on that.

There are 51 votes in the Senate for a public option... at least an opt-out one.
GhaleonEB
knows his net worth
(01-23-2010, 08:35 PM)
GhaleonEB's Avatar

Originally Posted by Dax01

There are 51 votes in the Senate for a public option... at least an opt-out one.

The question is whether it would be eligible due to the Byrd Rule (only items with direct impact on the federal budget may go through the process). IIRC, the Dem leadership did some exploration on what could go though and concluded the public option could (CBO says the opt-out public option would save the federal government $25b over 10 years). Though ultimately it's largely up to Conrad, no strong supporter of one. But if Reid etc. lean on him, it could go through.
cartoon_soldier
Member
(01-23-2010, 08:37 PM)
cartoon_soldier's Avatar
Davig Plouffe is Back!!

WH has hired him to oversee political strategy for 2010 elections.

About Fucking Time.

Mr. Obama has asked his former campaign manager, David Plouffe, to oversee House, Senate and governor’s races to stave off a hemorrhage of seats in the fall. The president ordered a review of the Democratic political operation — from the White House to party committees — after last week’s Republican victory in the Massachusetts Senate race, aides said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/24/us...wt&twt=nytimes

RustyNails
with arms wide open / under the sunlight / welcome to this place / i'll show you everythaaaang
(01-23-2010, 08:39 PM)
RustyNails's Avatar

Originally Posted by Diablos

For shame, Rahm. For shame.

What an idiot. Doesn't he realize from MA loss that people are absolutely fed up with the way things are? Rahm is driving Obama's presidency to the ground. I'm so pissed at white house right now for supporting Bernanke. Yeah, he did an ok job AFTER the crash. But what was he doing when all the red flags were going off BEFORE the crash? Fire the guy. I hope he fails the nomination.
The Librarian
Founding member, Guardians Anonymous
(01-23-2010, 08:41 PM)
The Librarian's Avatar

Originally Posted by GhaleonEB

The question is whether it would be eligible due to the Byrd Rule (only items with direct impact on the federal budget may go through the process). IIRC, the Dem leadership did some exploration on what could go though and concluded the public option could (CBO says the opt-out public option would save the federal government $25b over 10 years). Though ultimately it's largely up to Conrad, no strong supporter of one. But if Reid etc. lean on him, it could go through.

What role does Conrad have in all of this? I've forgotten. Sorry.

Originally Posted by cartoon_soldier

Davig Plouffe is Back!!

WH has hired him to oversee political strategy for 2010 elections.

About Fucking Time.

That should really help the Dems this year. Plouffe ran a great campaign for Obama.
GhaleonEB
knows his net worth
(01-23-2010, 08:42 PM)
GhaleonEB's Avatar

Originally Posted by Dax01

What role does Conrad have in all of this? I've forgotten. Sorry.

He's the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, which oversees the budget reconciliation bill. If he doesn't like something, he can refuse to bring it to order.
PhoenixDark
Banned
(01-23-2010, 08:47 PM)
PhoenixDark's Avatar

Originally Posted by empty vessel

Going through reconciliation means that what comes out of that will be a truer expression of what Democrats stand for, as they will only need 50 Senate votes instead of the 60 that constrained them before. If there is no public option, no drug negotiation, and/or no Medicare buy-in, it will be because the Democrats, as a party, oppose those measures. And, having opposed those measures, they will have failed to garner the support among the public that they will need during the next election.

Can drug negotiations be done through reconciliation though?

Agreed on everything else. A medicare buy-in would be ideal. People understand it, and it could go into effect faster than a public option iirc. I'd love to see republicans campaign on repealing health care that increases medicare to a 50 or even 55 year old limit
GhaleonEB
knows his net worth
(01-23-2010, 08:50 PM)
GhaleonEB's Avatar

Originally Posted by PhoenixDark

Can drug negotiations be done through reconciliation though?

Absolutely. It's even more clear-cut than the public option.
Gruco
Captain of Awesome
(01-23-2010, 09:00 PM)
Can you imagine if Brown's victory actually leads to Medicare buy-in, drug negotiation and the opt-out :lol
PhoenixDark
Banned
(01-23-2010, 09:01 PM)
PhoenixDark's Avatar
Wow. So they could implement drug negotiations, expand medicaid, and lower medicare limit to 55yo...if they wanted to. If that's not the type of bill one could campaign on with full confidence, totally changing the current negative narrative on the bill, I don't know what is.
Last edited by PhoenixDark; 01-23-2010 at 09:13 PM.
cartoon_soldier
Member
(01-23-2010, 09:04 PM)
cartoon_soldier's Avatar

Originally Posted by Gruco

Can you imagine if Brown's victory actually leads to Medicare buy-in, drug negotiation and the opt-out :lol

In a different national climate, Brown would probably not be a big liablity for Democrats. He is to the left of Snowe.
GhaleonEB
knows his net worth
(01-23-2010, 09:06 PM)
GhaleonEB's Avatar

Originally Posted by PhoenixDark

Wow. So they could implement drug negotiations, expand medicaid, and lower medicare limit to 55yo...if they wanted to. If that's not the type of bill one could campaign on with full confidence, totally changing the current negative narrative on the bill, I know know what is.

We'll see. I'm not going to get too excited just yet, but this was always the possibility with passing the bill - it's easy to add stuff over time via reconciliation once the main structure is passed. It's just now (maybe) happening sooner.

Right now, I'm expecting the contours of the ideas to be close to what was initially agreed to. Beyond that, bonus.
thefro
Member
(01-23-2010, 09:13 PM)

Originally Posted by cartoon_soldier

In a different national climate, Brown would probably not be a big liablity for Democrats. He is to the left of Snowe.

I wouldn't say he is, but if he wants any chance of getting reelected he'd better end up being to the left of Snowe.
Manmademan
Member
(01-23-2010, 09:14 PM)
Manmademan's Avatar

Originally Posted by Gruco

Can you imagine if Brown's victory actually leads to Medicare buy-in, drug negotiation and the opt-out :lol

That's kind of what I was getting at earlier. The loss in the senate race could mean the dems stop screwing around and compromising a bill to get to 60 votes, and actually pass a strong bill. If this is spun right, they could be in a stronger position going into the 2010 elections than in Coakley had won.

Originally Posted by thefro

I wouldn't say he is, but if he wants any chance of getting reelected he'd better end up being to the left of Snowe.

Brown only won because Democrat apathy was at an all time high. a LOT of people stayed home. Against a competent opponent he may very well get crushed no matter what he does, and something tells me that what he's going to do is play obstructionist. I think there's a very good chance the 'pubs are going to prop him up as a VP candidate in 2012 instead.
Last edited by Manmademan; 01-23-2010 at 09:17 PM.
Y2Kev
TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
(01-23-2010, 09:20 PM)
Y2Kev's Avatar
You guys have entirely too much faith in the Democrats.
Manmademan
Member
(01-23-2010, 09:21 PM)
Manmademan's Avatar

Originally Posted by Y2Kev

You guys have entirely too much faith in the Democrats.

and why do you say that.
The Librarian
Founding member, Guardians Anonymous
(01-23-2010, 09:23 PM)
The Librarian's Avatar

Originally Posted by GhaleonEB

He's the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, which oversees the budget reconciliation bill. If he doesn't like something, he can refuse to bring it to order.

Here's hoping we know definitively what's going to be happening by the end of next week.
PhoenixDark
Banned
(01-23-2010, 09:25 PM)
PhoenixDark's Avatar

Originally Posted by Y2Kev

You guys have entirely too much faith in the Democrats.

Honestly I don't expect much, except a bill passes. But I just find it interesting that they have all the cards now. It's just a question of whether they play them. If they went all out they'd make Brown's win an afterthought
Diablos
Member
(01-23-2010, 09:25 PM)
Diablos's Avatar

Originally Posted by GhaleonEB

He's the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, which oversees the budget reconciliation bill. If he doesn't like something, he can refuse to bring it to order.

And how did this jackass get the position in the first place? Argh, why wouldn't the party push for someone with a spine to advocate the President's policies?
ToxicAdam
Banned
(01-23-2010, 09:30 PM)
ToxicAdam's Avatar

Originally Posted by Jason's Ultimatum

Ewwwww. TA and I are rubbing butts with each on that list!


Hot.
Diablos
Member
(01-23-2010, 09:34 PM)
Diablos's Avatar
Not sure if this has been posted yet, but:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMlPE1lV_5Y

We should all send this to the White House and Harry Reid.
RiskyChris
Banned
(01-23-2010, 09:35 PM)

Originally Posted by Manmademan

and why do you say that.

Because anything more than no faith is too much.
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
(01-23-2010, 09:35 PM)
Suikoguy's Avatar

Originally Posted by PhoenixDark

Can drug negotiations be done through reconciliation though?

Agreed on everything else. A medicare buy-in would be ideal. People understand it, and it could go into effect faster than a public option iirc. I'd love to see republicans campaign on repealing health care that increases medicare to a 50 or even 55 year old limit

This This This.

People overwhelming LIKE medicare.
GhaleonEB
knows his net worth
(01-23-2010, 09:37 PM)
GhaleonEB's Avatar

Originally Posted by Diablos

And how did this jackass get the position in the first place? Argh, why wouldn't the party push for someone with a spine to advocate the President's policies?

Seniority system; the Senate Democratic caucus is more like a country club than a meritocracy.
Diablos
Member
(01-23-2010, 09:41 PM)
Diablos's Avatar

Originally Posted by GhaleonEB

Seniority system; the Senate Democratic caucus is more like a country club than a meritocracy.

Democrats, especially after they lose the House or Senate someday, need to fundamentally change the way their caucus operates.
IanZ
Member
(01-23-2010, 09:43 PM)
What's the deal with Yahoo Buzz?

All the comments read like some of the worst Glenn Beck Teabagger BS

Shouldn't there be some kind of moderation? Jeez.
RiskyChris
Banned
(01-23-2010, 09:49 PM)

Originally Posted by Suikoguy

This This This.

People overwhelming LIKE medicare.

If Obama got on TV and explained what was wrong with health care and how to fix it, I'm sure the Democrats would be able to pass anything they wanted to incredible public support.

Haha that will never ever happen though.
Dooraven
Member
(01-23-2010, 10:16 PM)
Dooraven's Avatar
Apologize if already posted (checked the last 5 pages because searching is disabled). But it looks like the conservatives are going to primary McCain.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...marqueeflipper

I'd much rather have McCain rather than Haywood but a bloody primary may push moderates to the Dems. Very unlikely though.
RustyNails
with arms wide open / under the sunlight / welcome to this place / i'll show you everythaaaang
(01-23-2010, 10:19 PM)
RustyNails's Avatar
Who wants to bet Joe Wilson will throw another YOU LIE at Obama at SOTU?

Plumbob
Member
(01-23-2010, 11:59 PM)
Plumbob's Avatar

Originally Posted by RustyNails

Who wants to bet Joe Wilson will throw another YOU LIE at Obama at SOTU?

um, why would he do that? He apologized the first time.
Diablos
Member
(01-24-2010, 12:18 AM)
Diablos's Avatar

Originally Posted by Manmademan

I think there's a very good chance the 'pubs are going to prop him up as a VP candidate in 2012 instead.

Part of me thinks he has a shot at VP or maybe even Pres, but then again, if he's to the left of Snowe...

Not to mention, he's pro-choice, accepts evolution, and at times can be an advocate for bigger banks/government, among other things.

1. He supports legal abortion: "This decision should ultimately be made by the woman in consultation with her doctor," he says.

2. He's against a national law prohibiting gay marriage: "States should be free to make their own laws in this area," he says.

3. He supports government investment in green programs: "I support reasonable and appropriate development of alternative energy sources such as wind, solar, nuclear, geothermal and improved hydroelectric facilities."

4. He's politically correct on Israel: "I support a two-state solution that reaffirms Israel's right to exist and provides the Palestinians with a place of their own where both sides can live in peace and security."

5. And he doesn't even want to bomb Iran! He's backing Obama's cautious incrementalism! "I support the bipartisan Iran sanctions bill..."

http://www.esquire.com/the-side/rich...te-race-011910
GhaleonEB
knows his net worth
(01-24-2010, 12:34 AM)
GhaleonEB's Avatar

Originally Posted by Plumbob

um, why would he do that? He apologized the first time.

No, not really.
Aaron Strife
Honk if you love cookies.
(01-24-2010, 12:51 AM)
Aaron Strife's Avatar

Originally Posted by Diablos

Part of me thinks he has a shot at VP or maybe even Pres, but then again, if he's to the left of Snowe...

Obviously this will be when he switches parties, revealing that he only ran as a republican in the senate because he knew he couldn't beat Martha Coakley in the Dem primaries but knew he could take advantage of her lack of personality in the general election.

Hell I'll be surprised if a year or so from now when the "WOW! A Republican senator from Massachusetts! WOW!" shock fizzles out that Rush Limbaugh doesn't start demanding he switch parties like he says with McCain and Powell.
Plumbob
Member
(01-24-2010, 01:00 AM)
Plumbob's Avatar

Originally Posted by GhaleonEB

No, not really.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_281541.html

"Not long after the speech ended, Wilson issued an apology. "This evening I let my emotions get the best of me when listening to the President's remarks regarding the coverage of illegal immigrants in the health care bill," he said. "While I disagree with the President's statement, my comments were inappropriate and regrettable. I extend sincere apologies to the President for this lack of civility." Wilson also called the White House to apologize."

He might still be an idiot during the SOTU, but I doubt he will shout again.
GhaleonEB
knows his net worth
(01-24-2010, 01:25 AM)
GhaleonEB's Avatar

Originally Posted by Plumbob

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_281541.html

"Not long after the speech ended, Wilson issued an apology. "This evening I let my emotions get the best of me when listening to the President's remarks regarding the coverage of illegal immigrants in the health care bill," he said. "While I disagree with the President's statement, my comments were inappropriate and regrettable. I extend sincere apologies to the President for this lack of civility." Wilson also called the White House to apologize."

He might still be an idiot during the SOTU, but I doubt he will shout again.

Sort of.

"While I disagree with the President's statement..."

The catch. Wilson was the liar, there's nothing to disagree about. So true, he apologized for yelling, but not for lying his ass off, which I think a full apology would include. So I've always thought of it as an half apology, sort of like when people say, "I'm sorry if you were offended."

Thread Tools