Forcing it Through

Assigned Reading: The ‘Nuclear Option’?
(FROM: Politico)

After flipping, then flopping, then flipping again with regard to the public option, it’s apparent that the White House is worried about the Democratic Party leadership’s ability to garner votes for health care reform as they want it. So, they will likely move to pass the bill in reconciliation with a simple, 51-vote majority — and blame the Republicans for having to do so.

I don’t think it’s going to fly with the American people. The legislative process should be about compromise to get things done, as it’s ridiculous to think that either party knows what’s best for the American people, or has their fingers on the pulse of the populace.

For example, I DO think that we need to address shortcomings in our health care system. I’d like to see a standard emerge for record-keeping and for billing, the two run hand-in-hand and the latter especially would make things easier for the American people. With regard to the 15 million or so American citizens truly uninsured, the only way to provide quality coverage is through the free market, through the emergence of a catch-all, major-medical-only coverage option.

Listen, I’m not an expert on health care. I have doctors here for that. But I am an American, and I would appreciate it if my elected officials did not disregard the opinion of my countrymen and force through legislation for their own political gain.


I just heard White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs say that the president is still looking for a bipartisan approach, and that the news reports otherwise should be largely ignored. Interesting. It seems as though this administration is floating trial balloon after trial balloon and backtracking in the face of opposition.

First, remember, on Sunday it was the expendable nature of the public option. The White House, through Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, clearly stated that it was prepared to abandon the cornerstone of the Democrats’ health care reform, but when the outcry from the left became deafening, they backtracked. Now, the White House clearly has stated that it’s willing to go it alone with only Democrats, and has once again backtracked in the face of opposition — this time from the right.



  1. GEE, BUFFETT, YA THINK?? says:

    Buffett said a revived economy will not be able to generate enough revenues to bridge the gap between outlays and receipts, so changes in taxes and spending will be required.

  2. DO NOT PASS GO says:

    You can play monopoly and know that, BUFFETT. What a financial genius.


    This administration this week reminds me of the days I had to rock the car in the snows of Maine. Anybody else getting vertigo watching these guys?

  4. Gail B says:

    Maybe the liberal socialist Democrats should have thought twice about the pork/stimulus bill back in February. Although it didn't conquer 1/7 of the economy, it did kill four million (4,000,000) jobs to pave the way for an outcry for "free" healthcare.

    I heard Neal Boortz talking about the fact that Democrats are now looking at our IRA accounts, savings, pensions, etc., to spread THAT wealth.

    No one has plowed up my lawn yet. I think I'll hid my money under a rock! The banks don't seem safe anymore, with the government in charge.

  5. Anonymous says:

    As the wind blows, so Obama goes.

    All Obama cares about are polls and numbers and being loved and adored. He proposes multiple contradictory plans, sees who yells about what, then says "oh we were never planning to do that anyway, why are you so upset? something must be wrong with you".

  6. POLL DANCER says:

    But Ken adores him. After all, he was 'elected'.

  7. Rix says:

    It never ceases to amaze me why you folks are so blind to reason. I'll repeat it again, louder:


    To start with, there is a zero chance of impeachment no matter how low the rating is. All attempts to start the procedure will be spun as “racism”, Obama will enjoy unequivocal support from at least 35-40% of the population, regardless of what he does or doesn't, and were a significant scandal to occur, the MSM will handily sweep it under the rug. There also are quite a few scenarios in which Obama’s rating will never come into play.

    One, my favorite, is that Obama is – by design – supposed to be a one term president. His goals are:

    1) Rake as much money as possible, as quickly as possible, for the bankers who paid (and keep paying) for his continuous campaign-making.

    2) Ram socialist agenda through to boost Democratic electorate by the next election, including increase in federal employment and welfare, payoffs to minorities and unions and massive immigration amnesty.

    3) Damage the economy so much that the GOP, were they somehow to eek out a 2012 victory, would be unable to rectify the situation and could be conveniently blamed and summarily destroyed come next election cycle.

    Another option is for a national-scale catastrophe to occur, or to be artificially created with the helpful hand of the MSM propaganda machine. There are enough stories about FEMA camps and swine flu viruses circulating on the Internet to at least consider such possibility.

    My biggest worry, however, is that Obama may be assassinated towards the end of his term, in which case "the right wing conspiracy" will be conveniently blamed for it. I already described how it worked in Israel and how disastrous the consequences were.

    So stop looking so longingly at Rasmussen’s numbers. Think of it that way: the actual popularity of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union was likely in the single digits, and yet every election brought them a 99%-landslide electoral victory, secret ballot or no secret ballot.

Speak Your Mind