| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
feuser
Joined: 29 Oct 2002
Posts: 1508
|
 Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:05 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| mrgybe wrote: | | 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. |
So they were considered, but didn't make the final vote.
| mrgybe wrote: | | 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. |
I would characterize Obama's position very in much between micromanagement and total non-involvement. Of course, if you don't agree with the outcome, you'd hardly call it a "happy" medium.
| mrgybe wrote: | | 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" |
I know very little about Webb. He might be a straight shooter, but this article certainly doesn't prove it to me. It merely shows that Webb is trying to put as much daylight as possible between a President, who is very unpopular among his constituents, and his own positions. I would guess that he is planning to restart his political career on the other side of the aisle.
_________________
florian - ny22
http://www.windsurfing.kasail.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
feuser
Joined: 29 Oct 2002
Posts: 1508
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| isobars wrote: | Polls show that 70% of physicians want the ACA repealed.
Hannity 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. |
http://mysanmateochiropractor.blogspot.com/2012/04/doctors-poll-results-on-affordable-care.html
While Isobars and Hannity are running their own fantasy polls, it appears that the number of Doctors who support ACA (47%) is equal to the number of those who are neutral or opposed to it.
_________________
florian - ny22
http://www.windsurfing.kasail.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mrgybe
Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 5180
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| feuser wrote: | | So they were considered, but didn't make the final vote. |
Proposed amendments are put up for a vote, and if they pass they are included in the final legislation. Webb voted for amendments which did not pass.
| feuser wrote: | | I would characterize Obama's position very in much between micromanagement and total non-involvement. Of course, if you don't agree with the outcome, you'd hardly call it a "happy" medium. |
I don't know of anyone who thinks that the process wasn't incredibly ugly (Louisiana purchase, Cornhusker kickback etc)........and, certainly, there seems to be large scale discontent with the outcome from both sides of the aisle, and maybe in the Supreme Court.
| feuser wrote: | | I know very little about Webb. He might be a straight shooter, but this article certainly doesn't prove it to me. It merely shows that Webb is trying to put as much daylight as possible between a President, who is very unpopular among his constituents, and his own positions. I would guess that he is planning to restart his political career on the other side of the aisle. |
It's possible, but I doubt it. I think he finds the political process too frustrating and cringes at the backslapping and baby kissing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
swchandler
Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 10588
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 1:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
mrgybe, after reading your comments about Senator Webb, I took the time to learn more about him. From what I learned, over the years he has appeared to sit on the fence between the two parties. He hold two positions under the Reagan Administration, and surprisingly, he supported George Allen for the Senate in 2000. It's interesting to note that he chose to run against Allen in 2006, and just barely pulled off the win. If it wasn't for Allen's serious mistake during the campaign, it's very likely that Allen would have won. Allen now plans to run for Webb vacated seat in 2012. One can wonder now who Webb will endorse in the election.
Overall, I think it's safe to say that the constituents of Virginia tend to be politically conservative in nature. So, I feel that my characterization of Webb as a "blue dog" Democrat isn't really off the mark. Although you might bristle a bit at my "closet Republican" comment, it wasn't meant to be an insult, but instead an observation of where I think he stands. Certainly, his comments offered in Tumulty's article, parallel accusations and characterizations frequently coming out of the Republican party.
For a guy that regularly casts President Obama in a negative spotlight, you seem to be easily unsettled when someone like myself has an opinion about someone you admire and support. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mrgybe
Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 5180
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 6:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rest easy...........nothing you say unsettles me. You might wish to consider deconstructing Webb's opinions rather than attempting to deconstruct his integrity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
isobars
Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 20935
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 6:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That's not in the liberal playbook.
That's not an insult; it's an observation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
swchandler
Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 10588
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 7:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I'm attempting to deconstruct Webb's integrity? Seems to me like you might be drifting on too much of the bad stuff that isobars smokes. Pretty soon you'll be calling me a Marxist. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17747
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 11:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This whole thread by mrgybe on the health care bill is just so wrong. Having decided to buy into the right wing's mantra that Obama can't lead, he keeps trying to stuff everything into that box. I can't tell if he is truly ignorant about the legislative process, or sacrifices any knowledge he might have in trying to bend the arc to "Obama can't lead." But the story goes other places.
Mrgybe makes much of this comment by Webb: | Quote: | | 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 |
Now legislation proceeds from idea to specific language through a drafting and hearing process. It is not unique to Obama or this bill. The idea that the bills that came out of different committees were contradictory and confusing is nonsense. They certainly had different approaches, and legislative staff summarize those for their bosses. But rather than be confusing, the differences illuminate the unresolved differences and different legislators favored resolution of those issues. We know much about the mandate as a way to pay for the bill, but that is only one of a handful of unresolved issues that had to be resolved at the end of the session.
The primary work of the legislative hearing process is 1) developing and vetting actual language, rather than general concepts; 2) researching those who favor or oppose a particular approach, and resolving objections if possible, and 3) smoking out the position of the major players. Like any organization, Congress relies on the work and expertise of their committees--they set them up for that purpose. Part of the work is to find the hard votes, yea and nay, and the soft votes, and why. Mrgybe is simply wrong in insisting that Obama could have achieved a bill without allowing Congressional leaders to work the bills in their normal fashion. Indeed, that was the mistake the Clinton's made, and Obama learned from that mistake.
At the end of virtually all legislation I've seen over the past 30 years, leaders in the House and the Senate appoint a conference committee to hammer out the differences between the House and Senate bills. (Most, but not every bill, has some difference as it comes out of the two bodies. Those that don't come out of both bodies, of course, go nowhere). In conference committee, some things stay in the bill, some things don't, and the appointees have the skill to bring the votes into line and get rid of language that will kill the bill. Of course there are examples like the rewrite of the financial regulation bill where the chair of the committee and his staff rewrites the whole thing and the economy collapses--but that is another thread. This process was no different with the ACA, simply higher stakes and more powerful Congressional leaders involved.
What is different here is not Obama's lack of leadership, but his naivete. Having been elected by a larger margin than Reagan, and with a substantial but not overwhelming coattail, Obama expected to be able to reach across the aisle and solicit the votes of at least 3 or 4 moderate Republicans. Despite mrgybe's protestations, Obama would have changed the bill to get those votes and make the bill fillibuster proof. But any legislator needs to have some understanding of the power he has with his vote and his influence. No votes were to be had; instead the Republican strategy was to stall until after mid-term, and use the unpopular mandate provision to try to defeat him in 2012. The one thing we have to say about Republicans is that they are disciplined if not smart. So Obama was forced to pass the bill with only Democratic votes, and to use the resolution process to do so. He had to make deals with the insurance and pharmaceutical industries that I find distasteful, but there was no other path to a bill. He outmaneuvered the Republicans on tactics, and kept the blue dog Democrats such as Webb in line. Something that Clinton, with his intellect, wasn't able to do.
I know the legislative process, and a few legislators, pretty well. I've drafted language that was adopted, and language that fell out of bills. I doubt that mrgybe is as ignorant about the process, or what a masterstroke the ACA was, as he sounds. But if the talking point is that Obama can't lead, you have to feed the narrative, no matter how difficult.
But then what can you expect from someone who thinks that electing amateurs to a minority in Congress is going to get better legislative results? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mat-ty
Joined: 07 Jul 2007
Posts: 7850
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2012 11:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Actually its not just the republicans who are saying obama can not lead. 60% of the country think we are heading in the wrong direction, ouch!
Three dems have been in the news latley dissing the great divider, double ouch. As his numbers go down more will join in and seperate themselfs from the great mistake know as obama. Sorry Mac but your going to have to suck it up. Next time try nominating a person who loves America , not some incompetent, radical ahole, who has never ran a thing but his mouth, and with a chip on his shoulder the size of Chicago.
http://newmediajournal.us/indx.php/item/3283 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
boggsman1
Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 9120
Location: at a computer
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2012 11:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Hey matty , keep the hate in Boston, and save it for Bobby V and the 4-10 Sox. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Search
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Register
