Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Since it is now clear that NO GOP will support any kind of HCR Can Obama drop the nonpartisan BS

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 02:39 PM
Original message
Since it is now clear that NO GOP will support any kind of HCR Can Obama drop the nonpartisan BS
Edited on Wed Sep-16-09 02:40 PM by saracat
and give us a "real" HCR Bill with a Public Option available for ALL that covers everyone? Even women's reproductive issues? Is there any reason to still have as awful a bill as the Baucus Bill? Why must we kiss the butt of the insurance companies?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
The Magistrate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 02:41 PM
Original message
Hear Hear, Ma'am!
At this point, everything which even resembles a concession to Republican views should be dropped from the package.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 02:41 PM
Response to Original message
1. Nah, move froward while asking for their help and make sure to make their opposition about him and
...nothing else.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:08 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. Yeah, PO is playing it right whether
anyone gets it or not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DebbieCDC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 02:54 PM
Response to Original message
2. He can drop the BS
But he won't
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tularetom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:00 PM
Response to Original message
3. Ed Schultz is raving about this very point as I type this response.
You're right - what has he got to lose at this point. The only thing on the table on the senate side at this point is the godawful Baucus bill which nobody really wants. No repubs will support even this watered down piece of shit so why doesn't Obama twist some arms and get the kind of bill he told us he really wanted.

I don't get it but I think the asshole he selected as chief of staff has a lot to do with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. I agree but he was his choice , after all.The buck stops at the President's desk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. That's right ..the President Owns this and PO
has already stated this multiple times..so your whining about "the buck stops at the president's desk" is moot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. I am referring to Emmanuel and as for the PO, it depends what kind.
if it isn't extended to cover everyone , it isn't worth anything and isn't a real PO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. I know what you were saying and if you paid attention
Edited on Wed Sep-16-09 04:40 PM by Cha
instead of ragging on the President all the friggin time.. you would know this.

Hillary got over the primary.

Edit~ to say.."isn't a real PO"?! Seriously? You can't come up with anything better that "real" shit?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. Sigh. I am not the one who has issues getting over the primary.
I am a voter and a Democratic Activist with a genuine interest in HCR.I would not find the Bachus Bill or any variant of it or the PO benefiting only a few acceptable no matter who was President.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phleshdef Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
4. Baucus's bill is just 1 bill out of 5 bills. I love how people act like its the only one out there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 08:57 PM
Response to Reply #4
16. people act that way because Obama said he wanted a
bipartisan bill and the Finance Committee bill was the one aimed at bipartisanship...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DevonRex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:05 PM
Response to Original message
5. This will all work out according to Harry Reid's wishes. After all,
very early on he did say basically that Obama is not the boss of him (Reid). There are 4 more bills to go through.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arkansas Granny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:25 PM
Response to Original message
8. I'm with you. It's clear to me that the Republicans aren't going to support
any kind of HCR that is introduced by Democrats so why continue to play around with this and just get a good one together and pass it without them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:32 PM
Response to Original message
9. Obama can keep looking like he WANTS bipartisan support 'til the end. It only makes the Repubs.
look like obstructionists and like Obama did all he could to work with them. Meanwhile, the public option has a great chance of getting passed along with many OTHER things in the OTHER 4 bills. The people see Obama as wanting to reach across the aisle while they see the Repubs. as the obstructionists they are. Obama is not naive. He wouldn't be president NOW if he were.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clio the Leo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 08:43 PM
Response to Reply #9
15. As usual, Jenmito gets it! ;-) NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 09:01 PM
Response to Reply #15
19. Thanks, Clio!
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guy Whitey Corngood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:33 PM
Response to Original message
10. Maybe when you shower Senators and Representatives with tons of cash
Edited on Wed Sep-16-09 03:33 PM by Guy Whitey Corngood
you can ask for what you want. In the mean time you're supposed to sit back and enjoy your crumbs.

:mad:




.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ieoeja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:53 PM
Response to Original message
13. 1. I agree with you, but (2) I don't think you know what he means by that word.

When Obama says bipartisan, I think he means acceptable to the rank-and-file Republican.

Yes, he would like the GOP elected officials to represent that rank-and-file. But if he can come up with a bill that makes the average Republican happy, even if it does not get any GOP elected officials to vote for it, then he will have achieved bipartisanship with the American public if not in Congress.

That said, every poll I've seen on the subject shows the average Republican on the street favoring a strong public option. So go the bipartisan route and give us that.

Heck, if a large enough percentage of them favor single payer, he could go that route and still claim bipartisanship.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
branders seine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 08:59 PM
Response to Original message
18. If he was going to "get" that, (or if it mattered to him),
he would have dropped that in late January.

He clearly is using his quest for "bipartisanship" for political purposes unrelated to the issue at hand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Sep 15th 2014, 10:08 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC