Boehner at the Tea Party

28 responses so far

• 1 joemarier // Nov 6, 2009 at 8:25 am

  Because they’re not as wacky as the bill they’re about to vote on?

• 2 Churl // Nov 6, 2009 at 8:35 am

  Politician appears before a friendly crowd.

  Highly unusual.

• 3 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 9:01 am

  Joe Marier // Nov 6, 2009 at 8:25 am

  “Because they’re not as wacky as the bill they’re about to vote on?”

  …….On a day when Obama and the Democrats secured the backing of the AMA and AARP for their “wacky” bill the Republicans hold an official rally at which about 4000 people show up carrying the usual array of complete nutso banners including a large one with pictures of piles of bodies at a Nazi concentration camp which they compared with Obama’s healthcare reform proposals…….I don’t think you’d recognize wacky if it bit you in the backside.”

  Churl // Nov 6, 2009 at 8:35 am
  “Politician appears before a friendly crowd.”

  ………Friendly to Republican politicians but largely crazy…….that’s the base of the GOP…..must make you proud

• 4 joemarier // Nov 6, 2009 at 9:15 am

  If the bill gets passed, we’ll see if the effects are crazy or not. The Republicans may look prescient for opposing it to the extent that they are. Or it may be a phenomenal success, leading to the Republicans’ dissolution. If you think the latter, then what’s the point of the taunting? Just wait.

• 5 Oldskool // Nov 6, 2009 at 9:33 am

  Those whackos are the end result of a party whose philosophy is that guvmint is the problem. They’re not concerned with doing what’s good or smart for their family or neighbors, it’s about hoping for failure because they think it will help their party. Their “leaders” taught them those things so it makes sense they would show up for a little adulation.

• 6 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 9:33 am

  Joe Marier // Nov 6, 2009 at 9:15 am

  “If the bill gets passed, we’ll see if the effects are crazy or not. ”

  …….Actually I thought you started the taunting, but I’m completely content to wait on events because you see I think that for once the sainted Bill Kristol was right when he said back in the 90’s that if ever universal healthcare legislation is passed it is a) going to be enormously popular and b)irreversible……..and passage of the bill is not going to result in the dissolution of the Republican party….however it’s going to contribute to a period of eclipse they are heading into……ultimately they will adjust and in 20 years time will be claiming THEY passed universal healthcare

• 7 Jim_M // Nov 6, 2009 at 9:34 am

  The AMA? The AARP? That’s like Winchester and Remington getting an endorsement from the NRA. They’re among the largest liberal lobbyist in Washington. How any rational individual can sign off on socialized medicine in order to fix a crappy health insurance industry just stuns me. Why no debate? Why just the name calling? It reveals much.

• 8 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:03 am

  Jim_M // Nov 6, 2009 at 9:34 am

  “The AMA? The AARP?……. They’re among the largest liberal lobbyist in Washington”

  ……….The AMA represents about 60% of doctors and the AARP has about 40 million members

  ” How any rational individual can sign off on socialized medicine in order to fix a crappy health insurance industry just stuns me”

  ……….It isn’t remotely near socialized medicine which would involve the state employing the doctors and owning the hospitals as in Britain (the nearest equivalent we have is the VA, would you like to shut that down?)……in fact the insurance companies will remain the largest source of payments for care while delivery of care will remain almost entirely in private hands as at present…..the fact that you don’t understand these distinctions makes me wonder how much you know about the subject in reality.

  “Why no debate? ”

  ……..Debate has been going on since the 40’s and in a fairly intense form since the early 90’s, and in a super intense form for the last nine months……how long would you like?……300 years?

• 9 Socrates // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:04 am

  Politicians who associate themselves with the teabag people may get burn one day: use them at your own risk. these protesters are great in destroying things, but they can’t do anything constructive. Look at ny23: they destroyed the gop’s candidate and did not do anything constructive. good luck!

• 10 joemarier // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:12 am

  As a point of fact, “this bill is wacky” is not a taunt. Of course, David Frum wants us to claim that we passed universal healthcare in 0 years time, and I disagreed on that point.

  http://www.frumforum.com/universal-coverage-code-for-a-comprehensive-plan

  But yeah. If the government doesn’t fall over the next 20 years, President Schock will be proposing No Patient Left Behind…

• 11 Jim_M // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:50 am

  I don’t know the intricacies of the 1900 page train wreck. I suspect no one here does. Many comments I see here and similar sites reflect what people hope it is or might be. The whole concept sits poorly with me. What is this compulsion of some who turn to the State? It has to be insulation of some sorts. People who lack the initiative or intestinal fortitude to do for themselves. The same people who need the State to take from those who do and give to those who do not. Sounds wonderful…until the money drys up.

• 12 franco 2 // Nov 6, 2009 at 12:17 pm

  This is yet another statement from Frum which is insulting. I love how Frum is being shown day after day as being out of touch with the political realities. NY 23! Yes, YOU lost Frum and conservatives like me are gloating. And that you STILL don’t understand, makes it funny. You are the “wacky” one – stay in denial and keep attacking us you fool.

• 13 mymy // Nov 6, 2009 at 12:28 pm

  Way to grow your big tent Mr.Frum insult the most energized group in America

• 14 rbottoms // Nov 6, 2009 at 12:57 pm

  Yes, YOU lost Frum and conservatives like me are gloating.

  Gloating over increasing Nancy Pelosi’s numbers in the House? That makes sense, in a non kind of way, but I’m all for more of the same in 2010.

• 15 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 1:15 pm

  Jim_M // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:50 am

  “I don’t know the intricacies of the 1900 page train wreck.”

  ……..The reason it’s 1900 pages is because the current system is a train wreck……a vast patchwork quilt of private, public, for profit, and not for profit entities spread across 50 states with different regulatory systems……that’s why we’re paying twice as much for our healthcare system than any other industrialized country…….if they’d have been going to a single payer system no doubt it could have been covered in a 100 page bill but somehow I don’t think you’d have been too happy about that either

• 16 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 1:19 pm

  rbottoms // Nov 6, 2009 at 12:57 pm

  “Gloating over increasing Nancy Pelosi’s numbers in the House? That makes sense, in a non kind of way, but I’m all for more of the same in 2010.”

  ……..Remember…….they create their own reality

• 17 joemarier // Nov 6, 2009 at 1:28 pm

  Unless of course, there’s 100 pages in the bill that will lead (eventually) to your beloved single payer system, and the other 1800 pages are in there to hide that fact.

  Actually, I don’t buy that, because there are no single payer systems anywhere any more. Unless the courts shut down the private clinics in Canada. Say, ottobvbs, do you think they should shut down the private clinics in Canada?

• 18 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 1:57 pm

  Joe Marier // Nov 6, 2009 at 1:28 pm

  “because there are no single payer systems anywhere any more.”

  ………in strict terms you might be right but in reality there are many…..sure private insurance markets exists alongside government single payer systems, as in Britain for example, but they are a small part of their total market and I have no problem with their existence in Britain, Canada or anywhere else. However, since you have an extreme aversion to socialized medicine that can hardly be reconciled with a belief in a continuance of the VA which is actually more socialized than the British NHS……perhaps you could explain how your value judgement system copes with this without blowing a circuit…….the irony of all this is that just over 50% of US healthcare expenditures are already single payer throught the VA, Medicare, Medicaid etc…….as to how the paying side of a reformed US healthcare system as distinct from the delivery side ultimately pans out I’ve no idea but single payer would undoubtedly be the most efficient or maybe a quasi single payer like the French system.

• 19 SpartacusIsNotDead // Nov 6, 2009 at 3:16 pm

  Jim_M wrote: “[The AMA and AARP are] among the largest liberal lobbyist in Washington. . . Why no debate? Why just the name calling? It reveals much.”

  Are you suggesting that accusing the AMA and AARP of being the largest liberal lobbying groups is not name-calling, but is actual debate?

• 20 joemarier // Nov 6, 2009 at 3:52 pm

  Otto, I’m a military brat, so I’m not allergic to anything (it’s a bit of a wait to see the military allergist, I think). Here’s one way socialized medicine lowers costs!

  http://tinyurl.com/yhws8o6

  You think you’ll make that drive every time one of your four kids gets a sniffle? For a 9:00 appointment? But that’s how it was until a Republican congress opened it up a bit…

  Anyway, if this does pass, I will practice saying “The NHS is safe with us,” and point to the Tricare reforms as an example. All I can do for now.

• 21 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 4:17 pm

  Joe Marier // Nov 6, 2009 at 3:52 pm

  …..maybe not allergic but dodging the contradiction perhaps……VA good……socialized medicine bad……I’m not sure I get the allusion to driving apart from you linking me to a google map!….it’s probably going to pass and within a few years it will be part of the wallpaper…..you must have seen those Reagan ads prophesying the commissars were coming when LBJ passed Medicare……now the same people (or their spiritual heirs) are running ads every night telling me the govt is going to gut medicare over pics of the depression, Normandy etc etc. …….as I said in 20 years time the Republicans will be claiming they led the fight to pass universal care for every American over pictures of Palin and Gingrich in wheel chairs.

• 22 joemarier // Nov 6, 2009 at 4:48 pm

  Before military medicine was Tricare, the closest service point from where I lived was Bethesda Naval Hospital, which was an hour away or longer, depending on the horrendous traffic. It was an inconvenience, to say the least. It also controlled costs, because people saw the doctor less! Tricare opened up the system a little bit.

  In any case, what I’m saying is not that Tricare or Medicare or VA or corporate-style plans are bad. Not at all! What I’m saying is they’re wacky, or crazy. The pieces don’t fit together. There are weird effects, weird incentives. It’s crazy — wacky — to make a military mom drive an hour in DC traffic to get to a doctors appointment, when there are plenty of doctors a few minutes a way who’ll do the work for the same price plus a nominal co-pay. Hour-long drives are not a rational way to keep costs down. And it took a Republican congress to stop that nonsense.

• 23 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 5:10 pm

  Joe Marier // Nov 6, 2009 at 4:48 pm

  ” There are weird effects, weird incentives. It’s crazy — wacky — to make a military mom drive an hour in DC traffic to get to a doctors appointment, when there are plenty of doctors a few minutes a way who’ll do the work for the same price plus a nominal co-pay. Hour-long drives are not a rational way to keep costs down.”

  …………although I did a spell in the military it was an awful long time ago (drafted) and I’ve never used the system since having company plans of one sort and another although I suppose I have some eligibility…..I’m not familiar with the background to introducing a bit more flexibility into the VA system…….I rather doubt Democrats fought in the last ditch to prevent this change and if they did shame on them……it doesn’t alter the fact that in the case you cite the VA is actually playing the classic ’single payer’ function you realize

• 24 txanne // Nov 6, 2009 at 6:04 pm

  The so called press conference was a disaster for thr republican leaders. Here you have people with absolutely disgusting signs on the steps of the US Capitol. Republican leaders screwing up the Pledge of Allegiance and the Constitution and whipping up this already rabid crowd of Birthers, Obama haters and possible anarchists.

• 25 Jim_M // Nov 6, 2009 at 6:12 pm

  SpartacusIsNotDead // Nov 6, 2009 at 3:16 pm

  Jim_M wrote: “[The AMA and AARP are] among the largest liberal lobbyist in Washington. . . Why no debate? Why just the name calling? It reveals much.”

  Are you suggesting that accusing the AMA and AARP of being the largest liberal lobbying groups is not name-calling, but is actual debate?

  Yes. Not a damn thing wrong with being a good lobbyist. It’s a reality whether we like it or not. You don’t believe that the rank and file, in it’s entirety, from these organizations have signed off on ObamaCare? You can bet a months wages that the relatively few individuals who make up the leadership of these groups have. At no time has their been an up or down vote by their membership. Just a thumbs up by those who “represent” membership.

  Our representatives have a role to play here, no question. We need portable, affordable heath insurance. Administered much like ummm…automoblie insurance. But your beloved Statists, their pals in the litigation and insurance industry have created this debacle. We need our government to shatter this Cabal. Allow a free market to compete for each dollar.

• 26 SpartacusIsNotDead // Nov 6, 2009 at 7:14 pm

  Jim_M,

  I agree there’s nothing wrong with being a good lobbyist. I just find it ironic that you admonished other commenters for name-calling and asked them to engage in actual debate while, at the same time, you offered no actual debate, but instead relied upon calling the AMA and AARP names.

  As further irony, you went on to call people who disagree with you “Statists” without analyzing the merits of their arguments.

  I guess your idea of debate is to issue grand platitudes like “Allow a free market to compete for each dollar.”

• 27 Jim_M // Nov 6, 2009 at 9:00 pm

  “”SpartacusIsNotDead // Nov 6, 2009 at 7:14 pm

  Jim_M,

  I agree there’s nothing wrong with being a good lobbyist. I just find it ironic that you admonished other commenters for name-calling and asked them to engage in actual debate while, at the same time, you offered no actual debate, but instead relied upon calling the AMA and AARP names.

  As further irony, you went on to call people who disagree with you “Statists” without analyzing the merits of their arguments.

  I guess your idea of debate is to issue grand platitudes like “Allow a free market to compete for each dollar.””

  We have a disconnect, obviously. Calling the AMA and AARP liberal lobbyists is not name calling. It may sting some, but certainly not “name calling”. They are what they are. So I fail to make that connection. Sorry. “Grand platitudes” ?? How can making private insurance company’s compete for every dollar be described as something whimsical or platitudinous? Great market solutions are something we make. The State has never produced market solutions, it only consumes. And that will never change. And lastly, whats keeping the leadership in D.C. from just getting this thing done? Their aren’t enough wet noodle Republicans to stop them. What could it possibly be?

• 28 Churl // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:37 pm

  ottovbs mentions “….On a day when Obama and the Democrats secured the backing of the AMA and AARP for their “wacky” bill….”

  The AMA backed the wacky bill because Obama agreed to drop the threatened $200 Billion cut in Medicare payments in exchange for support on Obamacare.

  This agreement may have an expiration date, however.

You must log in to post a comment.