myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Windsurfing Videos Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Barney being Frank
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 15, 16, 17  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
coboardhead



Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 1945

PostPosted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 9:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Swchandler

I believe you hit the nail on the head regarding the politics of the ACA. Even the Republican budget hawks are willing to distort the CBO reports on health care to discredit the law by applying total costs of health care increases to the law rather than the difference in costs as a result of the law. This is disingenuous.

A recent argument made has been that the CBO is, significantly, revising the estimates upward. This, also, is a distortion.

http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43104

Quote:
Some of the commentary on those reports has suggested that CBO and JCT have changed their estimates of the effects of the ACA to a significant degree. That’s not our perspective.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
feuser



Joined: 29 Oct 2002
Posts: 1395

PostPosted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 1:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

swchandler wrote:
... I believe that this evolution occurred because there was a strong desire on the part of the Obama Administration and the Democrats to find bi-partisan support from the Republicans. Yet predictably, the Republicans didn't want any part of it. ....?


Coboard - i would go oone step further. The dialectic process of governance and opposition was happpening INSIDE the democratic party from 2008 until 2010. Republicans simply became non-particiants, yet the ACA looks like a thoroughly bi-partisan compromise in any historical comparison. This should show anyone with a little perspective how far both parties have moved to the right and how preposterous the constant name-calling (Marxist, Wecome to Cuba (or Canada!)) really is.

_________________
florian - ny22

http://www.windsurfing.kasail.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coboardhead



Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 1945

PostPosted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 1:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

feuser wrote:
swchandler wrote:
... I believe that this evolution occurred because there was a strong desire on the part of the Obama Administration and the Democrats to find bi-partisan support from the Republicans. Yet predictably, the Republicans didn't want any part of it. ....?


Coboard - i would go oone step further. The dialectic process of governance and opposition was happpening INSIDE the democratic party from 2008 until 2010. Republicans simply became non-particiants, yet the ACA looks like a thoroughly bi-partisan compromise in any historical comparison. This should show anyone with a little perspective how far both parties have moved to the right and how preposterous the constant name-calling (Marxist, Wecome to Cuba (or Canada!)) really is.


Feuser,

I completely agree about that the parties are both moving to the right. Maybe this is why I am now considered a "leftie" by some. It's not my philosophy moving left...It is that the "bell curve" is moving to the right. Wink

The ACA would have made the likes of Nixon, Ford and Dole pretty happy...back in the day.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 2655

PostPosted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 10:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Someone who was actually there, and can speak with authority on the topic, disagrees that it's all the Republicans fault..........

I’ll be real frank here,” Webb said at a breakfast organized by Bloomberg News. “I think that the manner in which the health-care reform issue was put in front of the Congress, the way that the issue was dealt with by the White House, cost Obama a lot of credibility as a leader.

If you were going to do something of this magnitude, you have to do it with some clarity, with a clear set of objectives from the White House,” added Webb, who opted not to run for a second term this year. “...It should have been done with better direction from the White House.

He faulted Obama for playing too passive a role in shaping the legislation. Taking a lesson from Bill Clinton’s failed 1994 health-care overhaul effort--which was faulted for its micromanagement of the details of the bill--Obama opted to spell out a broad set of goals, and let Congress work out the details.

What happened in the end, Webb said, “was five different congressional committees voted out their version of health-care reform, and so you had 7,000 pages of contradictory information. Everybody got confused. ... From that point forward, Obama’s had a difficult time selling himself as a decisive leader.”

Webb also said that if Obama had opted for a smaller measure, he would have stood a chance of winning the support of a significant number of Republicans on Capitol Hill."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/post/jim-webb-health-care-law-represents-a-leadership-failure-for-obama/2012/04/18/gIQAIbKpQT_blog.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5225

PostPosted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 11:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Obama did something different than Clinton, which allowed Congress to operate as it usually does. Then, with contradictory approaches subject to conference committee, and no Republican votes to be had for anything, he got something passed. Mrgybe, parotting the other Obama haters, defines success as failure. Leadership is getting things done, even if they aren't perfect--and seeing the path to completion.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 5820

PostPosted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 11:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Webb was concerned that more that a dozen GOP amendents weren't being considered?

Of course, it's all Obama's fault for not stepping in and running Congress, particularly reining in those radical Democrats. One wonders whether the Republican's would have been more cooperative with Obama standing at the bully pulpit.

I think most know that Senator Webb has been a closet Republican during his tenure. He seemingly had a hard time getting along with his own party. In reality, I have to think that he didn't have the leadership qualities to convince and sell his fellow Democrats on how practical the Republicans were being. I guess he was one of those borderline "blue dog" Democrats.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 14190

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

coboardhead wrote:
the parties are both moving to the right.


I agree the Biblethumpers and Ron Paul loons are dragging the Right further Right, but when so many Democratic congressmen are rejecting Obama -- formerly and officially (voting record) the leftmost extremist in the entire Senate -- as too far to the right (e.g., didn't close Gitmo, minor concessions on Ocare, drones, partial surge support), anyone who thinks that party is shifting rightward has to be viewing the picture from record-setting far left territory.

Yes, many D congressmen are rebelling against Obama's far left extremism lately as it's becoming so clear just how extreme he is, but the pillars of the party -- e.g., Pelosi, Reid, Dean, Wasserman-Shitz, Schumer -- continue to hang off the leftmost edge of the planet by their fingernails, screaming "racist, misogynist, pants on fire" with every breath. "Senior citizens love junk mail because it's their only link to the outside world" all by itself reveals Harry Reid's level of insanity AND his total lack of regard for the public's intelligence.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
feuser



Joined: 29 Oct 2002
Posts: 1395

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 9:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mrgybe wrote:
Someone who was actually there, and can speak with authority on the topic, disagrees that it's all the Republicans fault..........

I’ll be real frank here,” Webb said at a breakfast organized by Bloomberg News. “I think that the manner in which the health-care reform issue was put in front of the Congress, the way that the issue was dealt with by the White House, cost Obama a lot of credibility as a leader.

If you were going to do something of this magnitude, you have to do it with some clarity, with a clear set of objectives from the White House,” added Webb, who opted not to run for a second term this year. “...It should have been done with better direction from the White House.

He faulted Obama for playing too passive a role in shaping the legislation. Taking a lesson from Bill Clinton’s failed 1994 health-care overhaul effort--which was faulted for its micromanagement of the details of the bill--Obama opted to spell out a broad set of goals, and let Congress work out the details.

What happened in the end, Webb said, “was five different congressional committees voted out their version of health-care reform, and so you had 7,000 pages of contradictory information. Everybody got confused. ... From that point forward, Obama’s had a difficult time selling himself as a decisive leader.”

Webb also said that if Obama had opted for a smaller measure, he would have stood a chance of winning the support of a significant number of Republicans on Capitol Hill."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/post/jim-webb-health-care-law-represents-a-leadership-failure-for-obama/2012/04/18/gIQAIbKpQT_blog.html


This is a puzzling piece. Not only is it exceedingly hard to distinguish between what Webb actually said and what is the author's opinion - they are also very contradictory.

Webb voted for the law, but also for more than a dozen GOP-offered amendments to it.

How did Webb vote for more than a dozen GOP offered amendments, if they weren't being considered?


He faulted Obama for playing too passive a role in shaping the legislation. Taking a lesson from Bill Clinton’s failed 1994 health-care overhaul effort--which was faulted for its micromanagement of the details of the bill--Obama opted to spell out a broad set of goals, and let Congress work out the details.


It seem to me, the author is saying that Webb is faulting Obama for not making the same mistake the Clinton administration did by drafting the bill themselves.

The closing statement - that Obama would have drawn more support for a smaller measure - is absurd. It is impossible to prove a negative, however the Republican congressional voting record in 2009 does not agree with Webb's theory at all.

_________________
florian - ny22

http://www.windsurfing.kasail.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 2655

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 10:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

feuser wrote:
How did Webb vote for more than a dozen GOP offered amendments, if they weren't being considered?

Amendments to proposed legislation are routinely offered and voted upon before the final vote on the legislation. That was the case here.

feuser wrote:
It seem to me, the author is saying that Webb is faulting Obama for not making the same mistake the Clinton administration did by drafting the bill themselves.

There is a happy medium between micromanagement and almost total non-involvment. The chaotic process and outcome supports his position that ACA was botched. I agree with him. This was the President's number one priority. Yet he was content to give a two minute outline of his vision and then hand it off to a Congress that he consistently characterized as dysfunctional before he was elected.

feuser wrote:
The closing statement - that Obama would have drawn more support for a smaller measure - is absurd. It is impossible to prove a negative, however the Republican congressional voting record in 2009 does not agree with Webb's theory at all.

Speculation certainly........but no more so than the rationale for many of this administration's actions.........that things would have been much worse had those actions not been taken.

Jim Webb is a straight shooter. He clearly despises the sycophantic posturing that is politics. He is a much decorated Marine who has served this country well, and certainly much better than those who characterize him as an "Obama hater" or "closet Republican"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 14190

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 11:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Polls show that 70% of physicians want the ACA repealed.

Hannity [correction: Huckabee] asked 162 doctors their opinion of the ACA. 162 of them said in various ways they will not accept it ... will not take Medicare patients, will not practice under it, will retire, etc. ... because it doesn't even cover their costs and because it takes medical decisions out of their hands.

Medical professor and practicing internist Dr. Marc Siegel concurred, based on his wide exposure to physicians. He says the ACA, by forcing the entire population into one system at the same time it will drive doctors out of medicine at unprecedented rates, will completely overwhelm U.S. health care.


Last edited by isobars on Sun Apr 22, 2012 7:39 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 15, 16, 17  Next
Page 3 of 17

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group