Forums | MacLife

I don't think they'll be able to rein it in.  Formerly trusted talking heads will be relegated to some kind of RINO status.

Sarah Palin and know-nothings will destroy the Republican party.

Democrats will still be afraid of conservatives for another 20 years (in that they won't pass moderate bills without worrying about losing re-election / fund-loraising chances)

MysticCow wrote:

irrelevant and off topic remarks

They want to repeat the Clinton years.

Well, he'll certainly be unpopular if he manages to unleash prosperity... or something.

WAKARUSA, Ind.— President Barack Obama brought his latest prescription for recovery to this economically ravaged region of northern Indiana, promising Wednesday to “unleash prosperity for everybody, not just some.”

Obama told a gathering of community that the federal government would distribute $2.4 billion in 48 taxpayer grants to create next-generation electric cars and recreational vehicles. The grants will be divided among 25 states.

Afterward, the president talked with Chuck Todd, NBC News’ political director and chief White House correspondent, who asked Obama questions submitted by msnbc.com readers. He said the grants would foster a clean environment, encourage new investments in science and boost education efforts — what he called “the pillars for communities like Elkhart to rebuild itself.”

ShnickyShnack wrote:

what's it going to be like a year from now? Or two?

Hillary will be President by then, because they will have off'd both Obama and Biden.

bedstuy wrote:

ShnickyShnack wrote:

what's it going to be like a year from now? Or two?

Hillary will be President by then, because they will have off'd both Obama and Biden.

Pelosi and Byrd before HRC.

Nah, security would be so tight by then a fly wouldn't get past the perimeter.
Let's all just hope nobody tries.

But Byrd, like the South, shall rise again!

JakeTheTall wrote:

My favorite American blogger on the town hall disruptions (vs SocSec town halls in 2005) :

That was even true during the first month or two, when Republicans actually tried having open town halls. Congressmen were very upset by the reception they received, but not, at least according to any of the report I can find, because opponents were disruptive — crowds booed lines they didn’t like, but that was about it.

After that, the events were open only to demonstrated loyalists; you may recall the people arrested at a Bush Social Security event in Denver for the crime of … not being Bush supporters.

(my bolding)

It's exactly the same thing, right?

I just saw a couple of rather damning videos.

First was pre-election Obama specifically stating that he wanted single payer system but that it would have to be done in steps.

Second was the guy largely responsible for the bill stating that they would have to ease into single payer to not upset to many people (aka social engineering ...)

So - all this talk about nothing changing for those who like their current plans is clearly a bunch of lying bull smurf.
Obama is a liar and I'm not only regretting having voted for him, I'm smurfing embarrassed that I did.

These are why things like the townhouse protests are not only going to continue, but are going to grow.
Obama is a one term president. He's making statements and promises he has absolutely no intention of keeping.

No - what I described is NOT single payer.
It's a coop - paid for by the employer or the member unless you are unemployed or poor.

The coop isn't the health provider, the coop gives large corp buying power to united individuals.
The HMOs remain fully intact and are NOT replaced by nationalized HMO. The coop pays the HMO and the HMO pays the medical bills, much like IBM pays the HMO and the HMO pays the medical bills.

Also note that my model specifically allows companies to skip the coop all together and negotiate directly with the HMO.
Not single payer. It keeps the free market intact.

ShnickyShnack wrote:

Ah, sorry ... I assumed the co-op would be receiving government funding.

It probably would in many states.
Just like medicare does now.
The funding would be to subsidize poor states that do not have the tax revenue to carry the burden of unemployed, precondition, and poor.

That's not single payer - that's federal welfare.