No respect!

[Big RR]

Did you Sue? I know I did (wrote letters to and called my congressman and senators)--for all the good it did. The single payer option was abandoned pretty early.

Personally, I see the AHA akin to when we went into Iraq--I hope it will turn out well, but doubt it will. and I sincerely hope it doesn't set the cause of national healthcare back a few more decades. I really hope i'm wrong, but I doubt it.

[Econoline]

...and congress is exempt...

That's the right-wing media's latest "zombie myth"

...and some others are exempt...

Here's the list:

Q. Are there any exceptions to the mandate?
A. Yes, the government has identified exemptions. Individuals who cannot afford coverage because the cost of premiums exceed 8 percent of their household income or those whose household incomes are below the minimum threshold for filing a tax return are exempt. People experiencing certain hardships, including those who would have been eligible for Medicaid under the health law's new rules but whose states chose not to expand their programs, also are exempt.

Other exempt groups include prisoners, Native Americans eligible for care through the Indian Health Care service, immigrants who are in the country illegally, people whose religion objects to having insurance coverage, members of a health care sharing ministry and individuals who experience a short coverage gap of less than three consecutive months.

...and my health care went up again (for whatever reason, but I'll blame some of the hike on the ACA)

Yes, that's right: *AGAIN* ...so, what are you blaming all the previous increases on?

[Sue U]

Did you Sue? I know I did (wrote letters to and called my congressman and senators)--for all the good it did. The single payer option was abandoned pretty early.

Yes, I called, wrote, emailed, called some more, emailed some more, told my friends to call and email. I had several telephone and in-person conversations with my Congressman about it. But his focus was on what he considered to be the pragmatic "what can be accomplished now and fixed later" rather than single-payer or even public option. And as a newly elected rep, he didn't have much decision-making power with respect to the policy choices being made by the House leadership.

[Big RR]

Well, my congressman was a republican who couldn't have cared less about what I wrote (about what I suspected--but he did thank me for my letters in several form letters), but I did my best. Personally, I think they gave up too easily on the public option, and failed to consider what was/is likely to happen with the system they set up under the AHA, but that's just me.

[Econoline]

Conservakaze

In the waning days of World War II, the once mighty forces of Imperial Japan were facing defeat in detail.

It was a situation nearly inconceivable only a few short years before.

The military commanders of Japan, xenophobic Bushido warriors who saw themselves as the spiritual descendants of the fabled Samurai, believed that they were favored by the ancient gods of their religion and as such felt morally superior and exceptional in every regard. So they confidently and deliberately started a war knowing they were outgunned and short on resources but certain of their victory. They began as a formidable force and they scored solid wins early on, but not in the later critical battles that would ultimately decide the conflict. After a series of rapid victories, Japan’s warriors suffered one bitter setback after another. It took a while and the fighting grew ever more fierce and brutal, but after Midway the ultimate end of the campaign was never really in doubt – and yet the most extreme elements in Japan’s military government continued to soldier on in a fervent state of denial, futilely praying that some miracle would reverse their fading fortunes.

Until finally, bloodied and ragged, even the extremists knew that they could not win.

In a sane and rational world they would have cut their losses and stopped fighting then (in a truly sane and rational world, they would have found a way to resolve their problems without going to war in the first place, but I digress). But, of course, we don’t live in a rational world and so the fighting raged on long after the end was no longer in doubt.

Knowing that they could not win, knowing what was at stake, knowing that millions of lives were hanging in the balance, the extremists choose instead to sacrifice entire populations.

Read the whole essay here.

[Crackpot]

Good essay

[rubato]

Single-payer never had a chance of getting passed and if it had it would have even greater Republican fury directed against it today. It was and is a dead issue even if it is the right solution in practical terms.

Republicans oppose the AHA and SS for the same reason, because they work as advertised and reduce human suffering. Their entire ideology is based on the idea that if only people suffered enough, were miserable enough, that the world would be a better place. Their complete understanding of the human condition is summed up in the idea that torturing people and making them afraid is an effective motivator.


yrs,
rubato

[Big RR]

Well rubato, I guess we'll just have to wait and see if the AHA works "as advertised" without some sort of public option (among other problems and deficiencies). I sincerely hope you're right.

[oldr_n_wsr]

Yes, that's right: *AGAIN* ...so, what are you blaming all the previous increases on?

On the cost of health care. I (and the American people) were promised cheaper (or at least the same price) health care under ACA. Neither is true.

And I stand corrected on the "exemptions". Although if it is being delayed for big business, how come the rest isn't being delayed? And why the delay for big business? Most (All?) of them already provide some type of health care for their employees. You would think they had the ACA mandates covered. Or do they need the delay to comply with the red tape of the government?

Did you call your Senators and Congressional representative in 2008, 2009 and 2010 to tell them say you wanted a single-payer system?

I never wanted a single payer system. And yes I did contact Tim Bishop and Schumer and Gilliabrand. Form letter responses.

Or at least a public option?

As I said before, they should have just expanded medicaid/care to cover the masses that had no or very little coverage rather than make this "Affordable" (it's getting more unaffordable by the day) Care Act.

[rubato]

Well rubato, I guess we'll just have to wait and see if the AHA works "as advertised" without some sort of public option (among other problems and deficiencies). I sincerely hope you're right.

It is currently working as advertised in Massachusetts. Any large-scale change will require a lot of learning and adjustments to make it work.

yrs,
rubato

[Gob]

Your system is wacko bird....

Senator Ted Cruz is deliberately casting himself as a conservative firebrand, a Texan Tea Party purist to whom "compromise" is a dirty word.

Some Republicans despair of both his tactics and his ego.

But he won't care - he has embraced John McCain's description of him as a "wacko bird". Reading Dr Seuss' Green Eggs and Ham from the floor of the Senate can only elevate him from Daffy Duck to Roadrunner in the esteem of his public admirers.

Many Americans think their politicians spout childish nonsense, but rarely have they actually revelled in doing so.

Just about all Republicans loathe President Obama's healthcare reform law and for some of them any attempt to destroy it is to be applauded.

Ted Cruz has earned himself a lot of team points from the Tea Party, but fewer from his peers in Congress.

Some Republicans think what he is doing is either pointless or dangerous. Pointless because this is not a classic filibuster - it stands no chance of actually killing the bill.

Beyond that, it is odd, because the bill he is delaying couples paying the government's bills to defunding Obamacare. That linkage is a core conservative tactic, which Mr Cruz himself agrees with.

While Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is expected to take out the latter when it goes to a final vote, it was the Republican-controlled House of Representatives that put it there in the first place.

But some Republicans worry that approach itself is wrong - if the government did come grinding to a halt they might get the blame for real economic harm and a blow to America's image abroad.

It raises questions not just about individuals and parties but the fitness of the whole system. It is perhaps little wonder that in one recent survey just 7% of Americans thought Congress was doing a good job.

As Dr Seuss once wrote: "From there to here, from here to there, funny things are everywhere!"

[rubato]

why? we've allowed stupid people to self-aggregate as "the stupid party" and call themselves Republicans.

Watch Ted Cruz miss the point of "Green Eggs and Ham":


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/2 ... f=politics



yrs,
rubato

[Long Run]

Your system is wacko bird....

This is one way to make theater. Substantively, the "stand" will have little or no impact, and the mass populace will forget about it; but, those on the far right will remember and will be more likely to support whatever his next actual move will be.

[Sue U]

Cruz's next move? Hahahahahahahahahahahaha:

Surprise! Obamacare foe Cruz votes with Democrats on spending plan
By Tom Cohen. Josh Levs and Alan Silverleib, CNN
updated 10:26 PM EDT, Wed September 25, 2013

Cruz ends 21-hr speech, votes with Dems

Washington (CNN) -- He spent more than 21 straight hours railing against any government funding for Obamacare. Then Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas joined the other 99 senators from both parties in voting Wednesday to move ahead on a spending plan expected to do just that.

The rare 100-0 vote on a procedural step means the spending measure that would avoid a partial government shutdown next week now can be amended by Senate Democrats to restore funding for President Barack Obama's signature health care reforms, which had been eliminated last week by House Republicans.

Cruz led a group of tea party conservatives in trying to block Senate consideration of the spending legislation because Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid made clear his caucus would remove the provision that defunded Obamacare.

However, Cruz came under strong criticism from fellow Republicans for that strategy, which called for GOP senators to filibuster the House measure that -- in its original form -- would defund programs under the Affordable Care Act passed in 2010 and upheld by the Supreme Court last year.

The confusion of Cruz's strategy was apparent Wednesday when he voted with Democrats for the Senate to take up the measure less than two hours after his marathon speech against it that began Tuesday afternoon and continued overnight and through the morning.

An aide to Cruz told CNN Chief Congressional Correspondent Dana Bash that the senator always intended to allow formal consideration of the House measure, adding that Cruz would vote against it once Senate Democrats restored the Obamacare funding.

However, nothing in Cruz's words or actions preceding the vote indicated that was his intention. Instead, he had urged his colleagues to unite against the spending plan, saying voting for it was tantamount to supporting Obamacare.

"Any senator who votes (to move forward with debate on the House measure) is voting to give Harry Reid the authority to fund Obamacare," Cruz told Bash on Monday.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/25/politics/ ... ndex.html?

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!!!!!!

Also, Rep. Peter King (R-Provisional IRA) calls Ted Cruz "a fraud" and says "he'll no longer have any influence in the Republican party. ... This guy is bad for the party."

Maybe, but he's great for comedy!!!!!

[Big RR]

You just can't make these things up.

[Econoline]

[Econoline]

http://hecatedemeter.wordpress.com/2013 ... hat-to-do/

An Old Witch Tells the President What to Do

I’m not a girl given to bragging, but I didn’t do too poorly in law school and I’ve managed to make a rather nice living swimming with the big sharks in the grown-up pool, taking on “billions-with-a-b” cases. I pulled A’s in a lot of law school classes, but the class in which I did my absolute best was Negotiations 101.

Of course, unlike our President, I didn’t go to Harvard Law School and I was only assistant editor, not editor, of Law Review. I’ve never taught ConLaw and I’ve never held elective office. But I have had cause to wonder, more than once, if Mr. Obama may not have been busy doing something else on the day they taught Negotiating 101 at HLS.

For most of his presidency, he’s shown a disappointing tendency to engage in a practice that lawyers call “negotiating against” himself. He stakes out a position — generally one that’s already far to the right of what his followers want — and then, without obtaining any concessions in return, simply volunteers to move closer to the Rapeublican position. More than once. Sometimes, even after he’s won, he’ll change a program to make it more palatable to the other side. (There may, in our history, have been Congresses with which this policy would have worked. But Mr. Obama came to town with a Congress radicalized by conservative ideas, animated by a deep racial hatred of the President, and convinced that compromise of any sort is a sign of weakness. With this Congress, Mr. Obama’s negotiating strategies have been disastrous. They simply believe, generally with good reason, that, eventually, he’ll cave to them.)

Of course, Mr. Obama will go down in history as our first African American President and that’s quite an accomplishment. Thanks to his willingness to run, G/Son has essentially grown up knowing only an African American President and his generation will likely accept as given that race plays no role in who may lead our country.

But, sadly, other than a health-care law that seriously disappoints his base (which would have preferred a clean, single-payer program), and having caught Osama bin Laden (whom George Bush never found), Mr. Obama can claim few important achievements beyond his election. (If Syria’s chemical weapons can be destroyed without war, that will be an achievement, although perhaps more due to Mr. Putin than Mr. Obama.)

So it’s been interesting to me to watch Mr. Obama finally begin to develop a spine (which, Goddess knows, may still turn to jelly at any moment) over the Rapeublicans’ most recent, desperate attempt to defund Mr. Obama’s health-care initiative.

First, let’s be clear. This law was passed legally and was upheld by our currently-conservative Supreme Court. The Rapeublicans made getting rid of the law the centerpiece of their 2012 election campaign and they lost — badly. So the “will of the people” has been pretty well expressed. (Even polls that show some dissatisfaction with the law often fail to distinguish between those who hate the idea of everyone getting health insurance and those who hate the idea of insurance companies getting a big bite out of the pie.) Second, let’s also be clear, the Rapeublicans are willing to attempt the desperate and unpopular gambit of shutting down the government to eliminate the health care law because they know that once millions of Americans can get insurance, once people with “pre-existing” conditions can’t be denied insurance, once parents can keep their college-age children on their insurance, once insurance companies have to spend at least 80% of what they take in on actual services, well then, it’s all over but the shouting. Americans will never agree to surrender those benefits. Nor should they. Every other developed country in the world manages to provide health care for its citizens and there’s no reason why the richest country on Earth shouldn’t do so, as well.

So, I’m an old woman who didn’t go to HLS and wouldn’t presume to imagine that I could lead the United States. But I’ll still, as someone who’s actually been in the field, practiced law, and successfully negotiated good outcomes for my clients, presume to give Mr. Obama some advice.

If I were sitting today where you sit, Mr. Obama, almost at the confluence of the Anacostia River, the Washington Chanel, and the Potomac River, here’s what I’d do:

I’d announce that, now that the government’s been closed for two days, I’m unwilling to sign anything but a clean bill to fund the government, except that now I also want the Rapeublicans to approve all of my judicial nominees who have been languishing in Congress lo these many years.

Tomorrow morning, I’d eat breakfast, put on my nice suit, walk out into the Rose Garden (it’s gorgeous in DC this week) and announce that now that I’ve slept on it, I won’t sign anything except a clean bill with approval of all of my judicial nominees and statehood for DC. I’d wave to the reporters, go play golf (include a woman this time, Mr. President), review their homework with my daughters, and get a massage.

On Friday, after I had lunch at the Palm with my wife (have the crabmeat cocktail and the steak salad, rare), I’d walk up to Dupont Circle and say that I’d been discussing it with Ms. Obama and, now, I’m unwilling to sign anything except a clean bill with approval of all of my judicial appointees, statehood for DC, and a new bill of Elizabeth Warren’s choosing.

I’d take the weekend off, go to Camp David, let the girls and the dogs run around and enjoy Indian Summer in Maryland, have dinner with some crazy, wild-eyed liberals, and make sure the press knew who they were and what we ate (include arugula and craft beer on the menu).

On Monday, I’d wait.

On Tuesday, I’d give a speech and announce that, having thought about it over the weekend, in the calm of Camp David, I also need a new program of really strong controls on financial markets.

You get the picture.

Right now, the only people upping the ante are the Rapeublicans. In order to “meet in the middle” and appear “reasonable” Mr. Obama has to move towards their position. That’s no way to negotiate.

Rapeublicans who are watching the polls go even further down on the notion of shutting down the government (they’ve already crossed that Rubicon — another river reference — so what the heck), need some additional motivation to move towards Mr. Obama. And they need to see that continuing to hold out will cost them even more.

Maybe, in the end, Mr. Obama shows what a reasonable guy he is by compromising on a new bill of Elizabeth Warren’s choosing and half of his judicial appointees. That’s how negotiations work.

Rant off.

Mr. President, What Have You Got to Lose?

[Guinevere]

OMG, she is FABULOUS and totally right on!

[Econoline]

Drunk-Dial Congress!

Whether you are a furloughed worker, being forced to work for free, or just fed up at Capitol Hill.
CALL & YELL AT A RANDOM MEMBER OF CONGRESS

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


(There are even some drink recipes included.)

The only problem with this is it doesn't give you the option to call & yell at just random REPUBLICAN congresscritturs...or maybe at just John Boner, Eric Can'tor or Ted Cruz?