Let's read the transcript:
BAIER: You have said at least four times in the past two weeks: "the United States Congress owes the American people a final up or down vote on health care." So do you support the use of this Slaughter rule? The deem and pass rule, so that Democrats avoid a straight up or down vote on the Senate bill?
OBAMA: Here's what I think is going to happen and what should happen. You now have a proposal from me that will be in legislation, that has the toughest insurance reforms in history, makes sure that people are able to get insurance even if they've got preexisting conditions, makes sure that we are reducing costs for families and small businesses, by allowing them to buy into a pool, the same kind of pool that members of Congress have.
So far, nothing but nonresponsive filler.
We know that this is going to reduce the deficit by over a trillion dollars. So you've got a good package, in terms of substance. I don't spend a lot of time worrying about what the procedural rules are in the House or the Senate.
I don't care how much time he spends on it or whether the time he spends is spent
worrying (or dithering or fretting or musing or calmly analyzing). The question is:
Does he support it? If he means to say
I have no position on the proposed procedural moves, then that's the answer. Say it!
(CROSS TALK)
OBAMA: What I can tell you is that the vote that's taken in the House will be a vote for health care reform. And if people vote yes, whatever form that takes, that is going to be a vote for health care reform. And I don't think we should pretend otherwise.
(CROSS TALK)
OBAMA: Bret, let me finish.
Let you finish obfuscating? This is all very
Anne Elk ("Well, you may well ask what is my theory... you may well ask what it is, this theory of mine, well, this theory, that I have, that is to say, which is mine,... is mine.") So there will be a vote, but what
kind of vote? Obama falls back on assertions that the bill will pass. Based on the current
whip count, it looks like it won't, but he boldly characterizes those who are predicting failure as the pretenders. (
He is
The Great Pretender.)
If they don't, if they vote against, then they're going to be voting against health care reform and they're going to be voting in favor of the status quo. So Washington gets very concerned about these procedural issues in Congress. This is always an issue that's — whether Republicans are in charge or Democrats in charge — when Republicans are in charge, Democrats constantly complain that the majority was not giving them an opportunity, et cetera.
Yeah. Et cetera, indeed. As if procedure is a frivolous sidetrack that only trivial or devious people care about. Barack Obama was a constitutional law professor. Much of constitutional law is about procedural rights and structural safeguards that check power.
Justice Felix Frankfurter famously wrote: "The history of American freedom is, in no small measure, the history of procedure."
Law professors are seriously engaging with the constitutionality of the "deem and pass," and our erstwhile law professor Barack Obama would imperiously wave procedure aside as a distraction not worthy of his time.
Let's concentrate on the end and pay no attention to the means. When the most powerful man in the world says that, we should feel revulsion and alarm.
BAIER: Let me insert this. We asked our viewers to e-mail in suggested questions. More than 18,000 people took time to e-mail us questions. These are regular people from all over the country. Lee Johnson, from Spring Valley, California: "If the bill is so good for all of us, why all the intimidation, arm twisting, seedy deals, and parliamentary trickery necessary to pass a bill, when you have an overwhelming majority in both houses and the presidency?"
Sandy Moody in Chesterfield, Missouri: "If the health care bill is so wonderful, why do you have to bribe Congress to pass it?"
OBAMA: Bret, I get 40,000 letters or e-mails a day.
Ha! He won't answer the people's questions, because there are just so darned many people, and the questions they ask are so annoying. And Bret got 18,000 emails but Obama got 40,000 pieces of mail a day, so Obama's
male mail is bigger than Bret's.
BAIER: I know.
OBAMA: I could read the exact same e-mail —
BAIER: These are people. It's not just Washington punditry.
Good short jab by Baier.
OBAMA: I've got the exact same e-mails, that I could show you, that talk about why haven't we done something to make sure that I, a small business person, am getting as good a deal as members of Congress are getting, and don't have my insurance rates jacked up 40 percent? Why is it that I, a mother with a child with a preexisting condition, still can't get insurance?
So the issue that I'm concerned about is whether not we're fixing a broken system.
BAIER: OK, back to the original question.
Yes, the question is the procedural device (and why you need it if the bill is as good as you say).
OBAMA: The key is to make sure that we vote — we have a vote on whether or not we're going to maintain the status quo, or whether we're going to reform the system.
Why not a straight vote — a normal vote — a transparent vote — a vote people can understand? Why make it seem that you are pulling a fast one? And right now, in this interview, you seem to be pulling a fast one about pulling a fast one.
BAIER: So you support the deem and pass rule?
OBAMA: I am not —
BAIER: You're saying that's that vote.
OBAMA: What I'm saying is whatever they end up voting on — and I hope it's going to be sometime this week — that it is going to be a vote for or against my health care proposal. That's what matters. That's what ultimately people are going to judge this on.
And so Bret Baier never gets an answer to that question. Barack Obama — who acted like he didn't want to waste his time on the deem and pass — wasted our time evading the questions about the deem and pass. His aim is to put us to sleep. We may be asking questions about the procedure now, but eventually we'll let it go and
ultimately we will look at the substance what we got and decide whether we like it. So quiet down and wait, the most powerful man in the world tells us. He knows what's good for us. Don't look while he prepares the medicine that will make you very very happy.
Posts
239 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 239 of 239Fortunately for Obama, Sarah Palin will be the GOP nominee for 2012 and he can just keep silent while she blunders about.
Alex said..."The Republicans spent like crazy during the Bush years, so that means we need to go whole hog on socialism. Wonderful reasoning there."
What does that even mean??
Jeremy is too stupid to argue with.
Dave LeBlanc - You mean, when was actually given an opportunity answer?
He did a good job when provided the time to fully respond.
The "talking over" ploy via Fox is just the same ol', same ol' method used on a daily basis by Hannity, O'Reilly and of course, Beck.
Alex said..."Oh and once again Jeremy ascribes horrible motives to Republicans if they oppose single-payer."
I don't understand what you're talking about.
Do YOU?
"whole hog on socialism."
You are saying a bill that relies on private insurers is socialism. That does not make a lick of sense.
"I don't think that word means what you think it means."
It's worse than that- it's avoiding the fact that people lack personal responsibility and common sense.
Yep. Some waste their youthful talent deriding America and the American system. But when they got sick or somebody they know gets sick they always come running asking for a handout.
Hippy Ethic.
Well, I must go and atone for providing more traffic to this sucky blog.
Dave - "I can see why Obama has been reluctant to have a press conference."
Obama is reluctant to have press conferences? What in the world are you basing that inane comment on?
Rasmussen had a poll recently that said he was having too many press conferences...and as for, Bush; he went months without talking to the press...Obama
I was wondering when the left wing lunatic fringe trolls would show up. Looks like Jeremy and Alpha got their marching orders and collected their bogus talking points around 2:30 central daylight time.
Last Sunday's Post had a lengthy op-ed by an anti-abortion activist who expressed her dismay that Republicans were -- in her view -- not doing enough to stop abortions. I have some seriously bad news for her. Starting in 2010 and for every election thereafter Republican are going to have to (1) pledge to repeal Obamacare if it passes between now and November, (2) sign the "no earmarks" pledge, and (3) get the deficit back down. Or they ain't getting out of the primary, I don't care how long they've been in office. For me, I've had it with Republican office-holders who think they can make a couple token speeches about repealing Roe v. Wade (it isn't going to happen, folks), then go spend tax dollars like drunken Democrats. Make that drunken Deemocrts.
Republicans going forward are going to be fiscal conservatives (real ones, not like yesterday's moby) or they're going to have to learn how to work for a living. It'll be good for them, and a lot of Deemocrats too.
El Pollo Dolto - "But when they got sick or somebody they know gets sick they always come running asking for a handout."
You're hanging around the wrong people, Mr. Chicken.
And I have no idea what you base that on?
Alex said..."Jeremy is too stupid to argue with."
Great argument.
When you have nothing of relevance to add...hide out.
You are saying a bill that relies on private insurers is socialism. That does not make a lick of sense.
For a change you are quite right, Alpha. The political system where governments work through corporations that they keep under their thumb is called "fascism."
You could look it up.
Beautiful chart, but who created it?
Your tax dollars at work. It comes from "Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Office of the Actuary, National Health Statistics Group."
@Jeremy, you worthless POS, what Alex was trying to say is that pointing to the excessive deficits of the Bush years does not justify multi-trillion dollar deficits thereafter.
Does that clarify it for you?
C3--have enjoyed your comments and if I recall correctly you said you were a physician--I have spent my career in public health, epidemiology and emergency response.
May I as your specialty?
House Democrats believe they are on track to vote Sunday on a $940 billion health care bill that will expand Democratic voter ranks by millions.
Royal Chicken-if they had the votes they would voted yesterday
Shame Baier couldn't just say on "conservative family values" Fox Network:
Look, you are sounding like a black Jimmy Carter or obfusticating worse than Bill Clinton explaining a blow job. How about just shutting up for 30 seconds, thinking what you want to say, then giving me, Congress, and the thousands of people writing you WTF??? letters a straight honest answer??
Alpha and Jeremy are busy collecting a new set of talking points. Expect them to rejoin the thread in 3 .. 2 .. 1
AL;
Jeremy, I love how conservatives think that the skyrocketing costs of health care have no effect on jobs.
Meanwhile, they say taxes cause job losses.
This makes sense to the conservative mind somehow.
Interesting point, each is an example of someone getting something from someone else but paid for by a third party.
I'm not sure about the relationship between "skyrocketing healthcare costs" and jobs but I'm very confident about the relationship between those costs and an employers ability to offer health care. For a nice summary/reference see here. (Once again your tax dollars at work.)
Not trying to define cause and effect but it is interesting that the percentage of folks covered by employer-based insurance continued on a downward trend as the economy and jobs increased (in the early '00's).
@Cedarford, well put, sir, very well put.
As an aside, can you imagine how much grief the US could have been spared if only Bill Clinton had said "I did not copulate with that woman"? No grounds for impeachment.
C4: you give Mr Obama too much credit by comparing him to Mr Carter--Mr Obama is much more like Huey Long except less articulate. Huey didnt rely on teleprompters.
Roger;
May I as your specialty?
Board certified FP. My last few years in clinical medicine I did hospitalist work. I'm full-time administration now.
Also have an MPH with an emphasis on Health administration and Policy
Well here's an interesting tidbit from Paul Caron's "TaxProf Blog" by way of Glenn Reynolds. (We can't get away from you law professors, can we?)
Clever how the not-quite 4% tax on investment income doesn't kick in until 2013 -- the retirees and widows won't see the tax hit until after the 2012 election. Hmm.
It has not escaped my notice that AARP has not protested this assault on retirement income.
C3--thanks so much. we do have considerable overlap on our public health side. I gravitated toward emergency response and have developed a curriculum in public health emergency response for the U of Memphis' MPH program--hope to put it on line for a national audience next year.
Roger;
I gravitated toward emergency response and have developed a curriculum in public health emergency response for the U of Memphis' MPH program--hope to put it on line for a national audience next year.
Good luck with that.
"Were you also scared that Bush scorned the Constitution as just a "god-damned piece of paper?""
I don't believe the story that he said that. He sure didn't say it openly. I am interpreting remarks here that Obama is making openly. If Bush said something similar I would look at what it was. Bush may have gone too far in his effort to protect us. In this post, my fear is about Obama's disregard for the processes of government that protect us.
i know I'm in dead horse territory but I couldn't resist this quote:
"You've got to have a villain, Beating up on hospitals is not a good thing because people generally like their hospital. Beating up on doctors is not a good thing because people usually like their doctor. But no one likes their insurance company. What really drives it is the cost trend of health care, which is composed in part of utilization and in part of prices."
And what right wing nut, in-the-pocket-or-the-insurance-companies fanatic said that?............
Uwe Reinhardt, health economist at Princeton University, and architect of ClintonCare
I'll shut up now.
"Ann, frankly, I do not understand this controversy. Essentially, the House will be voting on two bills at the same time --the Senate bill and the amendments to it--instead of seriatim. Is that the gist of "deem and pass?" If so, this seems like a tempest in a teapot. "
Well, why didn't Obama say something like that? What was he evading?
What was he evading?
He was probably so overwhelmed with grief about all the death and destruction that had occurred in Hawaii when the earthquake happened, that he just wasn't thinking straight.
The man is turning out to be just as dumb as Biden.
"So when, exactly, did you realize you'd voted wrong in 2008?"
I still think McCain would have been worse. I think we needed a cycle of Democrats to get them to stop denying the responsibility for the wars and security. And I think McCain would have gone along with Congress on health care and so forth. It would not have gone well.
Let's see here after 230 comments....
Hmmmm.... no pulse
No audible breath sounds.....
Pupils? fixed
Yup, its dead
Obama is great. He's the decider, but I'm afraid he's been misunderestimated. I voted for him because I was hoping my "wings [would]take dream." When my mother passed away due to an entirely preventable infection, untreated because (unknown to me) she had lost health coverage, I took the conservative attitude and deemed that the old bitch would have died anyway. My hope? When you all suffer a catastrophic loss, you remain consistent and treat a family death as a good sacrifice to preserve a particular ideology.
Here's the thing: I don't think anyone should be bankrupted because they got sick, or were cursed with some nasty ass chronic illness. Should there be some mechanism to protect people from this? Absolutely. But that's where it goes off the rails because it goes from protecting someone from serious illness or accident to covering an abortion, an annual physical, boob scan, or every visit to Dr. So&So and thats where I draw the line.
Well said. And it's been a while since anyone talked about the "health insurance should be like car insurance" idea, but I think that should be pursued more than it has been. If you think about it, it doesn't make any more sense to have insurance pay for your annual checkup than it does for a set of tires or a battery.
(And I realize that the reason some people haven't pursued this idea is because it doesn't give more power to the government, which is really what this is all about in the first place. There may be some rare exceptions, but the vast majority of the pols who say they actually care about people's well-being are lying out of every orifice in their bodies.)
What makes you even believe that health care bills of this sort would have come up with McCain as president. Granted we needed to have a Democrat and Republican swithc holding the office. The problem is having this particular Democrat in that office. He has been a total disaster and that is not something that can be denied. Without the Congress having someone like Zero who would let the Congress define the bill with no input from the White House, do you really think this disaster of a bill would have resulted and that the Congress would have decided to pull the shenanigans they have pulled to get this far down the road to passing this monstrosity? I really can't believe that one for a minute. You can say that you think McCain would have been worse but I really can't believe that one. How???
Thanks Ann. And who did you vote for again? Couldn't see this coming could you?
So you think half the country doesn't pay taxes, work or contribute to the economy?
Is that what you're saying?
No what I am saying is roughly half of the eligible taxpayers don't pay Federal income tax. Actually I take that back, its what the IRS is saying. I'm just repeating it.
See Jeremy, this why you are a troll. You didn't comment on my alternative suggestion for providing coverage for the uninsured or those with pre-existing conditions. You just argue for the sake of it and insert strawmen into debates. You don't offer counter positions as much as you just throw feces on the wall and think you're some kind of legitimate counterpoint to anyone here.
You're not even a decent troll, you're just a tool and a pretty lame one at that. I provided a logical, reasoned and concise argument and you just sputter back. My rule is back in force, you are hereby and heretofore banished, never to bother me again. Begone with you spawn of Satan! In the name of God go!
I think it is safe to say that almost 100 percent of americans pay taxes in some form--the discussion about "paying taxes" needs a bit more definition if it is to meaningful.
Of course Roger but what I am driving at is in what meaningful form are taxes being paid? For states with sales tax, even the poor are paying taxes in direct relation to their level of consumption. Property taxes are built into rent so they are paying a portion there as well but then again these are local level taxes, not Federal which is the lion’s share of where our earnings go.
My beef is with the Federal budget and the fact that a very disproportionate share of the Federal income tax burden rests on a roughly half the country while the other half gets the same benefits (if not more) without contributing to it. In this respect I am very much in favor of a 20-25% reduction in Federal income tax with the difference made up in a VAT or national sales tax. I have personal issues being taxed on my productivity rather than my consumption. Many will say that insurance etc is unaffordable yet even many (not all but many) poor find the money for cell phones, satellite tvs etc. (I see this every morning on my ride to work every day through the ‘poor’ sections of town.
With regard to a whole new national health care program, dumping the whole burden of funding it on 5% of the taxpayer population is flat out unfair. That’s why I suggest a VAT or broad based tax on gasoline (hell practically everyone drives) that way everyone is contributing to the program while receiving the benefits. My philosophy has always been that I don’t mind paying my fair share, I just mind paying someone else’s too.
Post a Comment