Nonetheless, I remain convinced Obama will win this fight. Not totally; not without political cost; but win it he shall. And the strategy is really very simple. The most popular elements of the bill will be kept in and the most contentious left out.
The fundamental issue of costs will be deferred. A bill that prevents insurance companies from denying coverage to people with pre-existing illnesses; that creates healthcare exchanges, where people can buy their own insurance policy subsidised by the government; that brings agreed price reductions by the drug companies in return for all these new, previously uninsured clients: this will pass and be popular. How could it not? The option of a government-run insurance plan to compete with private ones will be either dispensed with or held in reserve. If, after a few years, health costs keep soaring and the private companies have not mended their free-spending ways, it could be brought back.
Obama has a solid majority and can achieve all this with Democratic votes alone. So why is he in such trouble? Partly it is that this kind of reform rightly stirs scepticism, and Obama has allowed a hapless and divided Congress to take the lead, muddying the message. Partly it is that the hard right is becoming more and more extreme and its fears have eclipsed the hopes of Obama’s supporters. But the most critical part, in my view, is the public understanding that after two massive bank bailouts and a vast stimulus package, with two still-intractable wars, the US cannot afford even the modest 10-year trilliondollar package Obama is proposing. And Obama’s inability to cut spending while the economy is so fragile means he is constrained from offering fiscal reassurance.
Not a bad bit of analysis on his part Bill Jacobson takes a look at it and says:
Well, yeah, if Obama drops the public plan and mandates he can get some measure of health insurance reform because most people want health insurance reforms without junking the whole system. New national and regional markets for insurance helping create the conditions for individual insurance empowerment. That is a plan that can pass.
It’s called the Republican plan, and it is as available now to Obama as it was six months ago. All Obama has to do is just say yes.
What I find interesting is his use of the word at the start “euthanasia” rather than the word “death panel” in his introduction:
The summer has been crammed with YouTube clips and television news reports featuring the angrier members of the Republican right railing against Barack Obama’s plans to inflict euthanasia on their grandmothers, abort their children and put them in concentration camps.
It is a word used very carefully and in my opinion deliberately. Euthanasia has a specific meaning and people in England know it. If he had used the word “death panels” I suspect he knows that the people of England would recognize and understand what that means. Sarah Capewell sure would.
Guidance limiting care of the most premature babies provoked outrage when it was published three years ago.
Experts on medical ethics advised doctors not to resuscitate babies born before 23 weeks in the womb, stating that it was not in the child’s ‘best interests’.
The guidelines said: ‘If gestational age is certain and less than 23+0 (i.e at 22 weeks) it would be considered in the best interests of the baby, and standard practice, for resuscitation not to be carried out.’
Medical intervention would be given for a child born between 22 and 23 weeks only if the parents requested it and only after discussion about likely outcomes.
Well it’s not like hospital workers would refuse treatment to a live baby when his mother is begging for it, oh wait:
Sarah Capewell begged them to save her tiny son, who was born just 21 weeks and five days into her pregnancy – almost four months early.
They ignored her pleas and allegedly told her they were following national guidelines that babies born before 22 weeks should not be given medical treatment.
Miss Capewell, 23, said doctors refused to even see her son Jayden, who lived for almost two hours without any medical support.
She said he was breathing unaided, had a strong heartbeat and was even moving his arms and legs, but medics refused to admit him to a special care baby unit…
…She told how she begged one paediatrician, ‘You have got to help’, only for the man to respond: ‘No we don’t.’
I found this story in the Corner, my son and I are both a bit shocked over it, him more than me because he is 18 and still innocent enough to not understand how a doctor can look at this baby and decide to let him die without any effort. It would seem contrary to human nature, I think the opposite, it is very human to duck responsibility whenever possible.
I have a message for the “death panel deniers” who don’t want to read editorials that use those words. You may not believe that they will exist, but let me tell you Jayden Capewell damn well believes in them.
I’m going to go all Catholic on you for a sec; it’s not the soul of Jayden that needs prayers, it’s the doctors and staff that let him die, they’re the people who you need to pray for.
Update: it’s just below the headline on Drudge. This is going to make for a fun day on Rush and on the talk shows tonight.
Update 2: Now in the green room, it will progress from there to the main page and I predict to Rush before the day is done and then to Fox.
Update 3: Don Surber has more examples while Darren Hutchinson calls it a conspiracy theory and equates it with Birtherism. Tell that to the Capewell family.
“The question so many Democrats are asking themselves is this: Is it better to duck and cover through Election Day, or is it better to listen but ignore their concerns?” said NRCC spokesman Tory Mazzola.
It’s an interesting thought. If the thinks President Obama is vulnerable in 2012 then politically he might not bother figuring that he will need to be free to run, if he is thinking 2016 then it is a good move .
I wasn’t enamored the Romney as governor he didn’t seem to stand for anything but he would be in a position to be the THE voice in Washington to combat Obama.
The big problem is Romneycare. It is awful and if he was in the senate the President would try to craft something like it to get his support and we would be frankly screwed.
There is absolutely no question that he would win in Massachusetts particularly after Deval Patrick in on beacon hill. He would beat any Kennedy in the state.
If Obamacare was not the issue of the day I would like the idea, but I think Romney in the senate would assure its passage WITH republican votes.
Well it looks like the democratic party is going to use the death of Senator Kennedy to force the health care bill through:
You’ve heard of ‘win one for the Gipper’? There is going to be an atmosphere of ‘win one for Teddy,'” Ralph G. Neas, the CEO of the liberal National Coalition on Health Care, told ABC News.
Democrats are hoping that Kennedy’s influence in death may be even stronger than it was when he was alive as they push for President Obama’s top domestic priority. Democratic officials hope that invoking Kennedy’s passion for the issue will counter slippage in support for heatlh care reform.
Ironically it is a tactic that Kennedy would have totally supported as he was a political animal.
However Ted Kennedy was not popular with a large section of the populace who is already angry about the healthcare boondoggle. I strongly suspect that Kennedy would get under 50% of the votes if he had run at any time in the blue dog districts.
Anyone who thinks that blue dog house members are going to protect their seats by voting in memory of Ted Kennedy is insane…so naturally the New York Times and Washington Post will likely think so.
But the actual congressmen are not that stupid, they know their districts and can count. In 14-15 months Kennedy will still be dead, but the voters who oppose Obamacare will still be alive and voting.
…and it took less than 24 hours for Nancy Pelosi to try to demagogue his death into votes:
“Ted Kennedy’s dream of quality health care for all Americans will be made real this year because of his leadership and his inspiration.
Watch for democrats to use his death to try to push “healthcare”. Update:Yupmore of it. Prediction: That is going to fall VERY flat.
Slightly breaking news: I talked to a member of the State Legislature this week, he said that due to the heat over the flip flop concerning his seat, the legislature would likely delay changing the rules of succession slightly but that Ted would get what he wants. Now that he has actually died there is no question that they will pass this through as his last political request.
I think that Joe Kennedy or another one of the clan will be put in at that time, I can’t see them risking an election as the environment has never been better for a Republican.
I offer my condolences to his family. I won’t hit him today, but Pat Whittome of Ulster has a long memory (and he’s not talking about what you think).
And one thing, I hope Jeff Jacoby never asks me to resign. I don’t like the results.
When a republican congresswoman didn’t buckle under on his insistence that there are no “death panels” in the healthcare bill. The whole group around the table almost didn’t know what to say.
They seem to be obsessed with the fact that the words “Death Panels and “Euthanasia” are not listed in the bill. After all Sarah Palin said it, it MUST be false. If I may be so bold to suggest to these experienced pols and reporters there is precedent for something being misnamed to wit:
Sir Humphrey: East Yemen isn’t that a democracy?
Dick from the Foreign Office: It’s full name is the People’s Democratic Republic of East Yemen.
Sir Humphrey: Oh I see so it’s a Communist Dictatorship.
The actual clip comes at about 2:53 in this bit:
I think Yes Prime Minister should be required watching for anyone who follows politics.
Let’s look back at some early posts I did over the first three months of the blog. I’m going to be busy today so it’s a quick filler post thing:
Back in December the Jammie Wearing Fool predicted that the birth of Bristol Palin’s son would be the death Knell of the Trig Truther Movement, at the time I said this:
You have to think of people who follow conspiratorial type stuff as people following a religion. Excuses will be followed by clarifications but in the end the belief will not be dropped, remember William Miller and the 2nd coming.
The only thing that will be missing is the tax-exempt status. (Believe me the collection plate WILL exist).
Speaking of a collection plate back in January I did a post on the New Quarter Sovereign coin offered by the British Royal mint and said this:
The glory of the British Empire is long past but if you want a chance to get something to remember it by the quarter sovereign is a solid and inexpensive choice. The mint is getting £47.95 each for them at the current exchange rate that works out to around $63 each for a gold coin in it’s first year of issue.
I grabbed 3 since that’s all I can afford, If I had a job I’d grab 10.
In case you forgot the design:
Not only has gold gone up and the Royal Mint raised its price to £65 but the exchange rathttp://datechguy.wordpress.com/wp-admin/post-new.phpe is now favoring the pound so I hope you jumped on the coin when you had a chance. It’s still worth getting as a first year issue gold coin.
I posted quite a bit about Israel going into Gaza. I mentioned this about the cease fire:
It is now up to the Palestinians are they going to stop the rockets or are they going to go through all of this again. That is when we will know if the war is actually over or not. It also remains to be seen if Israel is going to be willing to go back in during an Obama administration.
Well looking at the blog The Muqata which live blogged the war along with Israellycool looking under the category “Qassam Rockets” there is not an entry newer than Jan 18th that mentions a launch. The section under “Gaza” doesn’t either.
It looks like the war is over, but once the Palestinians are done killing each other I’m sure they’ll manage to try again.
Also in January I decided I arrived because of an increase in Spam. I’ve actually had a drop in spam lately but I’ve had an increase in comments so I guess a few more people are reading me, if you are thanks.
Considering the political landscape this post is Ironic, I hit Marc Ambinder over suggesting it was a bad idea for Republicans to vote against the stimulus bill due to the 70% Obama approval. I said this:
This is the same advice that might have been given to republicans in the first two years of the Clinton administration. Not taking it gave them control of the house for the first time in 40 years.
Anyone who thinks a vulnerable republican congressman who goes along with this plan will survive a primary challenge is silly. Remember our democrat friends were the same ones who told us McCain was the man to win with.
Bold prediction time: Anyone who thinks Obama will have approval ratings in the 60’s in two years is dead wrong. They will not be above 50%. It would not surprise me to see his ratings in the low 40’s.
That one is looking pretty good (I even used the battered wife example later in the post that Glenn uses today) and the Bold prediction is not looking so bold these days. One note, the first two sentences were in a block quote, I either missed the link or I accidentally put it in the block. I can’t find the quote elsewhere online so it might be mine but I should be more careful.
Another post that looks like it could have gone up this week is this one:
The question then is why? Why make the big deal, and why the big fuss over republican votes when the democrats have the power and the votes? Easy.
They want cover, they want power but not responsibility. They want someone to blame. They remember 1994 and the Clinton Tax increase. They also know that this country is still a 51-49 country and that the blue dogs in the house are not going to keep their seats if they go too far left.
Mark my words when things get worse (they will) the congress will get worried. In 2010 with the recovery hasn’t taken place (much too soon) Democrats in congress will be trying to deflect blame and ask for patience.
Several “linked” posts have particular relevance today. I promoted something from comments:
his president has already made it clear that he is above the press by his actions. It is as if he is royalty and bestowing his favors on his faithful subjects. I can’t believe that the members of the press are going to be willing to take this treatment for long. Oh they will keep their mouth’s shut for a while. Their resentment will be whispered and building, but it will take only one prominent reporter on the left to say it aloud and it will come pouring out. I actually have an opinion as to which two reporters/opinion journalists will do it. But I’m keeping that to myself for now.
It will be hard for the press to re-direct their anger to conservatives when we have so little power.
I hate to admit it but I totally forgot who those reporters were, but we have seen some of this from the base and from reporters, but it is the next line that mattered:
The whitehouse will use the Blame Bush stratagem to deflect this when it comes but I think it will come.
The democrats are all talk and smoke on this subject. They will try to go though some motions to mollify their guys but there is no way at all they will pursue this. It is a high risk move at a time or crisis with the only upside being among fanatics.
My explanation is here, my money quotes:
You can take this to the bank: Any successful attack on American soil during an Obama administration is going to be wholly owned by not only that administration but the Democratic party…
…Any kind of trials will be drawn out affairs and would likely be still going on during a successful attack. How much worse will it be for those who failed to protect the country if those who succeeded in protecting the nation are on trial during their failure?
It was my opinion at the time that the President would offer the pardons as he cares not what the press think. From what I’ve seen about the way the press and the news has been treating not only the incoming president but the outgoing crew even in his last days, I think the smirk is going to win. He is savvy enough to know what this would do to the Democrats they will be forced to either engage their far left base or take the risk I said above. These people won’t do it and it they did it would destroy them. It will be his final victory against them.
All the risks still exist, I think this is sheer panic to change the subject. He has fallen into the final trap laid by George W. Bush.
It was interesting reading those old posts, I’ll do it again when I hit the 1000 post mark or my year anniversary.
UPDATE: I looked at the wrong column, it was 900 comments. Pass me my idiot mittens.
What is going on in healthcare illustrates the real difference between the Democratic and Republican Caucus.
The Republican Caucus is more homogeneous. There may be individual members with particular opinions or agendas but as a rule it is easier to hold together. They are united by a common set of basic values. That doesn’t mean they won’t violate them easily (as has been amply demonstrated) but the A smaller majority of republicans are can act is a single direction because they generally look in a single direction.
The Democratic Caucus is actually a conglomeration of many different groups, based on race, sexual preference, and others, quite a few of the anti-anti’s other groups from environmentalists, feminists, to pacifists, to socialists et /al.
The problem here is that some of these groups are by nature diametrically opposite of one other, For example the democrats for reasons I still can’t explain tend to get 90% of the black vote, but that same community is highly religious and mostly protestant. To expect that they were going to support Gay Marriage in California was very funny, but of course the left KNEW this but didn’t dare attack a member of the grand coalition so instead the Mormons and little old ladies with crosses werethetarget.
As the Hispanic (do the descendants of the former Spanish colonies of South America actually call themselves “Hispanic” or is that another term made up by us?) community increases democrats hope to gain votes, but these are also VERY Catholic people, a lot of them are better Catholics then what we have here now. They also come from a society that still celebrates the Macho. (have you every actually WATCHED Spanish language TV? Feminists would be marching in the streets over it if that was the fare on ABC, NBC, CBS et/al. It’s spike TV on steroids!)
Given this situation it is no wonder that democrats can’t get a bill out on their own. The various caucus have different beliefs, different agendas and most importantly different voting bases.
The actual fact is that the people in the safest districts are the biggest advocates of health care “reform” so they have the least to lose except in a primary. The problem is the leadership knows that a primary challenge in those districts will likely not hurt democratic prospects there.
They DO know that in the blue dog districts those seats ARE at risk, particularly in 2010 since the easiest time to unseat an incumbent is in their first bid for re-election.
Do you think the leadership is going to risk their Chairmanships in the house over this? I think not.
Sarah Palin is almost single-handedly bringing down Obamacare using only Facebook.
Let that sink in for a moment. The woman the Loony Left demonizes as Anita Bryant 2.0 and Tina Fey lampoons as some sort of space cadet, the woman the Lefties in Chicago constantly make the butt of their jokes or use as a straw (wo)man for whatever they need a villain for, posts remarks on Facebook that fuel Americans’ anger and resentment over the way Democrats are rushing through healthcare reform so recklessly.
The woman these Lefties claim is so, so stupid sure seems mighty smart to us.
Here’s her latest posting on Facebook…it is spot-on, perfect. If anyone doesn’t believe this woman is running for president, we just don’t know what to tell you
The problem with living in an echo chamber is you can’t hear anything else. As Palin supporters we need to take that to heart. Just because we are on her side that doesn’t mean we are immune to this.
True she re-writes history both on social security and medicare but on the campaign:
Obama won the election because his campaign had a great ground game and they had him, a super communicator who made the media swoon.
Poppycock the media didn’t swoon because of Obama’s skill as a communicator. They swooned because they projected onto him a compilation of all their liberal “virtues” and didn’t bother to vett him at all. They saw what they wanted to see.
Despite this Clift finally figures out this isn’t enough:
All the White House has to counter the opposition is Obama, and he’s not enough. The magic has waned. People don’t line up for miles to see him the way they did in the campaign. And judging by the anxiety showing up in the polls, voters don’t trust Obama enough on health-care reform to set aside their historic distrust of government.
Clift doesn’t recognize that his stuff is smoke and mirrors but sees that whatever it is, it’s not enough. This isn’t the word of someone at worship, it’s the word of someone who realizes the game is up and has to change. One last tidbit:
“When it comes to taking a punch, I don’t know whether you’re Muhammad Ali or Floyd Patterson,” Axelrod wrote to Obama in a November 2006 memo