You are currently browsing the daily archive for March 30, 2010.

A week ago, when the secret was let out I speculated that this will be a talking point spread to neutralize the GOP opposition

How do I know this was a talking point just waiting to get out? Because this weekend, one of the operatives in B0botland was  whining about pundits on TV saying

Very disappointed in Lawrence O’Donnell tonight…. he’s generally great….

But we’re basically passing the same law they have in Massachusetts… It’s not the onerous thing he describes.

I have been gleaning talking points from operatives deployed there throughout the elections and beyond.

Sure enough, Obama, who until now only told GOP the secret, is letting everyone know

But in an interview this morning on NBC, that’s exactly what Obama did. He said:

“When you actually look at the bill itself, it incorporates all sorts of Republican ideas. I mean a lot of commentators have said this is sort of similar to the bill that Mitt Romney, the Republican Governor and now presidential candidate, passed in Massachusetts.

A lot of the ideas in terms of the exchange, just being able to pool and improve the purchasing power of individuals in the insurance market, that originated from the Heritage Foundation…”

See, now that progressives have been reduced to babbling cheerleaders, their shock is irrelevant. Obama is only addressing – again – the GOP.

Hence the defensive article on Romney in Boston Globe this morning

“Overall, ours is a model that works,’’ Romney said in response to a question after a speech at Iowa State University. “We solved our problem at the state level. Like it or not, it was a state solution. Why is it that President Obama is stepping in and saying ‘one size fits all’ ’’?

Of course, I will say here what most are not: I can’t believe Democrats are happy to enact Heritage Foundation legislation! (OK, I do)

In B0botland, heads that don’t belong to operatives explode

Also, note I couldn’t find many CDS free entries, so for your information on Hillarycare – a post by Post partisan on that first

Unlike Obamacare, Hillarycare ‘93 and Hillaryplan 2.0-’08 were actual healthcare reform bills, not massive transfers of taxpayer wealth to the insurance and pharmaceutical industries.

Both had some form of a public option and thus real cost control. That’s why the industry colluded with corporate Democrats to kill the ‘93 bill.

Hillary and Bill could have taken the Obama route and compromised their health reform package down to a bailout complete with backroom deals for Big Insurance and Big Pharma. They chose not to.

The hinge of Hillaryplan 2.0-’08 was a mandate (that I thought should have had an opt-out with incentives and penalties) COMBINED with the option for the public to buy into the same government insurance plan held by members of Congress.

Obama stole the mandate and left out the crucial cost control component: the public option

Now, back to the B0bots:

Obama: My Plan Is Like Romneycare

Obama gets his ideas from the Heritage Foundation?

Oh. How nice.

Brilliant: My plan is a crusty old Republican idea we used to reject

24. we just passed nixon’s healthcare..

keep fuckin that chicken!

51. The Nixon plan was to the left of Obamacare. It had no individual mandate, only employer mandates.

The Clintoncare proposal, on the other hand, had both individual and employer mandates, as does Obamacare.

Claiming the plan is like Romneycare, with no mention of Clintoncare, is disingenuous.

39. You clearly didn’t get the memo

We LOVE this historic, radical and sweeping single payer, only not really, plan. It’s the most amazing thing since the New Deal. Well, maybe not quite since the New Deal, maybe since NAFTA. Anyway, we fucking love this health insurance bailout, er, I mean, Health Care Reform. Get with it dude, our plan is so much cooler than say, Canada’s.
27. And All THIS after the voters gave the “Democratic Party”

*The White House

*A veto-roof MAJORITY in the Senate


*(Most Importantly) A HUGE MANDATE for “CHANGE”

….and The Very BEST The Democrats can do is National Romney Care “incorporates all sorts of Republican ideas.”

Ahhh, Mr President….WE voted The Republicans OUT because we were SICK of “Republican Ideas.”

I can’t count how many times I’ve been attacked for pointing out how many “Republican Ideas” are in this HCR Bill.

AND, after throwing OUT good “Democratic Ideas”, and replacing them with “Republican Ideas”, Obama gained Absolutely NOTHING.

Well, next time, be careful what you wish for!.

remember during the campaign when your beloved candidate said he loved some Republican ideas? Hillary called him on it and you wanted the ABC debate moderators fired for asking.

I remember now – thanks to Riverdaughter’s blog what he loved so much from his Fox interview

Well, I think there are a whole host of areas where Republicans
in some cases may have a better idea.

WALLACE: Such as?

OBAMA: Well, on issues of regulation. I think that back in the ’60s
and ’70s a lot of the way we regulated industry was top-down command
and control, we’re going to tell businesses exactly how to do things.

And you know, I think that the Republican Party and people who thought
about the markets came up with the notion that, “You know what? If you
simply set some guidelines, some rules and incentives, for businesses
— let them figure out how they’re going to, for example, reduce
and a cap and trade system, for example is a smarter way
of doing it, controlling pollution, than dictating every single rule
that a company has to abide by, which creates a lot of bureaucracy and
red tape and oftentimes is less efficient

But you preferred, then and recently, to put your fingers in your ears and go la-la-la. And now, he pulled a fast one on you (not even that fast) and he doesn’t care what you think anymore any more than Bush did.

And you’ll go vote for the Heritage Foundation proponents because somehow, you hate the other guys more. Same way you voted this guy in because…BROS BEFORE HOS.

I wonder, who is he REALLY laughing at in this photo?


The latest development in this circus: The Heritage Foundation defends itself

While he doesn’t exactly refute that the health exchanges are based on the conservative think tank’s market-based ideas, Feulner contends that they go too far in regulations and federal standards.

After that, they all went to a party with insurance CEOs and gave each other high fives.

B0bots are now confuzzled

9. it incorporates all sorts of Republican ideas

We Dems just made them better you twit!
Ohhh…sometimes the truth hurts!

“True exchanges are simply a market mechanism to enable families to choose their health insurance”


We would rather you bend over and just take it, while we and our crooked corporate croonies take all your money.

1. The Heritage foundation is a fucking RW propaganda organization………….

…………..Everyone that has posted so far has forgotten one simple thing while praising the bill. You are defending a “republican” bill, for christ sake. It’s like any one of us getting involved in a tea party, what do you think they would say to you and how would you be treated? Answer: Just like the Heritage foundations statement. We can say the sky is blue and it’s not raining and ALL the RW would fucking disagree with us using bullshit “technicalities” and shouting longer and louder than us. Fuck all these people.

Some even find an “in” to claim racism:

“he ought to learn before he speaks”

I guess President Obama is just too darn ‘uppity’.

although a few still get it

12. They polished turds up nice and shiny, they did

But most of them will love their GOP bill now, because Heritage disowned it.

The reason The Heritage Foundaton couldn’t come up with a convincing difference is, what Robert Reich was quoted as saying

Obama’s health bill is a very conservative piece of legislation, building on a Republican (a private market approach) rather than a New Deal foundation. The New Deal foundation would have offered Medicare to all Americans or, at the very least, featured a public insurance option.”


Today in karma has the much cheered and unprecedented Romneycare serving its backhand to those who worked so hard to make it possible!

Youth may pay a lot more for health premiums

Some of them found out and now wonder if indeed they were the ones they’ve been waiting for
Young people who supported Barack Obama in 2008 may come to resent how health care reform will affect them, Gibbs and others say. Recent polls show support among young voters eroding since they helped elect Obama president.

In B0botland they are trying to make sense of all this
Operatives try Newspeak

92. Wow…..y’all so smart!

Here’s how the article could have read….

Youth may NOT pay more for health premiums

Costs expected to maybe or maybe NOT rise by 17 percent once insurance is required,
we don’t fucking know, but we get paid to pull shit out of our ass
and act like they are facts.
By CARLA K. makes shit up cause I get paid JOHNSON

updated right now!
CHICAGO – Under the health care overhaul, young adults who buy their own insurance could, but perhaps not, carry a heavier burden of the medical costs of older Americans …

…but get called on it

95. Winston Smith, is that you?

Meanwhile the much touted immediate benefit – children get not refused on preexisting condition is also not applying for all children

Coverage Now for Sick Children? Check Fine Print

.Insurers agree that if they provide insurance for a child, they must cover pre-existing conditions. But, they say, the law does not require them to write insurance for the child and it does not guarantee the “availability of coverage” for all until 2014.

Oops! But not to worry! Nancy issued a clarification

Pelosi spokesman Nadeam Elshami emails:

The intent of Congress to end discrimination against children was crystal clear, and as the House chairs said last week, the fact that insurance companies would even try to deny children coverage exemplifies why the health reform legislation was so vital. Secretary Sebelius isn’t going to let insurance companies discriminate against children, and no one in the industry should think otherwise.

Ah, all righty then. This reminds me of Obama telling after the fact that he intended to vote yes instead of no as what he just did.

In fact, B0bots are OK with this too

Nancy Pelosi: The intent of Congress to end discrimination against children was crystal clear

but some do note

15. If Pelosi is talking about intent, then it means that there is a loophole in the law

otherwise she wouldn’t be using “intent of Congress” as a defence.

.If Pelosi is talking about intent, then it means that there is a loophole in the law

otherwise she wouldn’t be using “intent of Congress” as a defence

Since the writing of this, AP shilling for Obama tells us the insurers lobbyist fixed it all up – Obama is THAT good

After nearly a year battling President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats over the health care overhaul, the insurance industry says it won’t block the administration’s efforts to fix a potentially embarrassing glitch in the new law.

In a letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, the industry’s top lobbyist said Monday insurers will accept new regulations to dispel uncertainty over a much-publicized guarantee that children with medical problems can get coverage starting this year

And if the lobbyist says it, it must be so.
Still. All the awesomeness of Obama can’t riddle this one

The law does nothing to stop insurers from charging higher rates for children with pre-existing illnesses until 2014 when insurers can no longer use health status in setting premiums.

PR this, AP!

I have this post ready for more than 3 hours. Too bad Worldpress was on its monthly breakdown

Everyone seems relieved to change the subject a bit, gruesome as it may be. The Express offers us a close up

while WaPo talks about fear

The Boston Globe has a funny bit about Romney trying to brag about the differences between his Romneycare and Obama’s

while in New York, they are trying to put the Moscow fear into us

.and NY Post

Not Your Sweetie