RSS Feed MenuAndrew Sullivan posts a letter from a reader with some disobliging things to say about the GOP in light of Rep. Wilson’s antics last night.
Huffington Post sounds the same chime.
Conservatives and Republicans have retorted that Democrats have done as bad or worse in the past, including booing at passages in President Bush’s 2005 State of the Union address.
But this kind of back and forth is unproductive. Suppose some Republican members did act supremely badly yesterday. Saddling the nation with trillions of dollars of new debt seems a roundabout way to punish them for it.
Too much writing about politics takes the form of movie reviews. The script failed, the part was poorly played, I didn’t like the show. But it’s not a show. Perhaps some of the Republican opposition has been hysterical or buffoonish or in some cases manipulative and deceptive. But it is the president’s plan and this party’s bills that will or will not become law, and their failings are not diminished one whit by the deficiencies of their opponents.
brandon // Sep 11, 2009 at 10:36 pm
Live where you want to live, which is where by the way?
But I think it is wrong for you to detest the great state of Tennessee.
I think if you visited my state you would have a different opinion. Tennessee has 3 distinct regions and is a very pretty state especially in the Fall. The people are very friendly and we have wonderful food even though it is very unhealthy it sure tastes good.
We have two cities that with the possible exception of New Orleans are the most important places in the history of popular music, Memphis and Nashville. The whole state is rich in music from the blues, rock, and soul of West Tennessee to the country and gospel of Middle Tennessee to the bluegrass of East Tennessee.
We have the National Civil Rights Museum in Memphis and many points of interest concerning black history in Nashville.
We have growing Hispanic and Asian populations in Memphis and Nashville which are adding their food and traditions to the formerly just black and white culture of the state.
Although, we still have our racial problems especially in the city politics and schools of Memphis, people from all races get along very well on a day to day level.
If you’ve never lived in a place, you shouldn’t be so judgmental. People are pretty similar everywhere. You treat most people with respect, you will get respect back.
You really need to expand your cultural horizons.
rbottoms // Sep 11, 2009 at 10:56 pm
Live where you want to live, which is where by the way?
San Francisco, Bay Area.
We have the National Civil Rights Museum in Memphis and many points of interest concerning black history in Nashville.
I’ve been to the Civil Rights Museum, and I saw Elvez at one of the clubs there.
Nice place to visit, I wouldn’t live there if you built me a house made out of gold.
I loved living in Germany, I have a number of friends who find the idea of living there a little difficult. I have gay friends who wouldn’t go back to Iowa, or Texas, or you name the places that have supposedly become tolerant, and by the standards of 1967 probably are.
Never, not ever.
I am judgmental because I grew up knowing there were parts of town and places in America I would be killed if I visited there alone. And I’m not talking about places of crime, or some seedy par of town where any one would fear for his life.
Want to know the reason the past has stuck with me?
The reason it’s so visceral isn’t because these people who were a real threat to me and mine were some stereotype of a villain, Bull Connor, or some Kluxer. Nope.
The reason it was so scary as a child, and still tucked away in the back of my mind as an adult was because it was Floyd the Barber who hated you, who would be in the crowd at the lynching.
And Sheriff Andy was willing to look the other way as they hauled out the rope because of the color of your skin.
That’s why you can’t tell me this disrespect of Obama, this breaking of protocol in a way that hasn’t been done in more than 200 years is such an affront, is not precisely because of who Joe Wilson is, what group he chose to affiliate himself with, the man he apprenticed politics with, and where he comes from.
Never. Not ever.
balconesfault // Sep 11, 2009 at 11:19 pm
dragonlady at 71
Some good points. I disagree with you on Obama ‘telling whoppers’ of course … and I think that the media has actually erred on both sides on fact-checking Obama.
While his rhetoric was soaring as it always is, he is utterly unconvincing on how we’ll pay for it.
“How we pay for it” is a societal issue … while you’re seeing it as purely a Federal one. For example, along with our spending $800 billion or so on Medicare and Medicaid … we’re also giving about $225 billion a year in tax benefits to employers to provide healthcare to employees. We’re spending $80 billion a year between VA and DOD healthcare. And I can’t find the cost of providing healthcare to the million plus civil service employees in this country, as well as civil service retirees … that’s also Federally paid healthcare. Then let’s step down from the Federal Government … how much do State Governments spend on healthcare for their employees? County Governments? Cities and Towns? Consider that we have about 3 million people working in public schools in this country – teachers, administrators, janitors, etc. Most all of them have a substantial taxpayer funded healthcare package.
It wouldn’t surprise me if we’re already paying about 1.5-2.0 trillion per year in taxpayer funded health insurance, up and down the system. Think 5K – 6.5K per capita for healthcare … all paid for by taxes. Sure, some of it is coming from the property taxes that pay for the lower Sheboygan School District teachers … some is coming from sales taxes for the City of Waco dog catchers … some is coming from State Income Taxes for the lawyers and secretaries in the Virginia Attorney General’s Office … some is coming from Corporate Taxes, like virtually every state employee in Alaska.
We’re already spending the money. We just split it up so it’s more like 1000 cuts, rather than one
stab.
I do want health care reform, but I prefer we restructure health insurance to be long term like life insurance, where a company cannot just drop you for a pre-existing condition or jack up rates.
Just be clear. This WILL raise the cost of doing business for insurance companies. So they WILL have to raise rates across their entire fee structure to pay for it. They will NOT have any incentive to reduce overhead, executive bonuses, or dividends to investors. On an actuarial basis I don’t know how much it will cost, but you can be absolutely certain that your premiums will increase as a result.
If we make insurance portable across state lines, insurers can have a larger pool of folks to draw from lowering costs.
True … but we can also expect insurance companies to all do what Credit Card companies do – move to Delaware or South Dakota, or whatever states provide minimal regulation and ensure them that they will receive very preferential treatment when disputes over claims are arbited.
I also would like to see folks get tax deductions for buying their own health care or get HSAs, and for drs to be able deduct pro-bono work.
Useful suggestions – but I would ask you what you’re asking Obama – how do you intend to pay for it? Giving someone a tax deduction, allowing new deductions, will all reduce tax revenues – which means bigger deficits.
sinz54 // Sep 12, 2009 at 11:11 am
balconesfault: I think that the media has actually erred on both sides on fact-checking Obama.
FactCheck.org, which is respected for its objectivity, fact-checked Obama’s speech:
* Obama was correct when he said his plan wouldn’t insure illegal immigrants; the House bill expressly forbids giving subsidies to those who are in the country illegally. Conservative critics complain that the bill lacks an enforcement mechanism, but that hardly makes the president a liar.
* The president said “no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions.” But the House bill would permit a “public option” to cover all abortions, and would also permit federal subsidies to be used to purchase private insurance that covers all abortions, a point that raises objections from anti-abortion groups. That’s true despite a technical ban on use of taxpayer dollars to pay for abortion coverage.
* The president repeated his promise that his plan won’t add “one dime” to the federal deficit. But legislation offered so far would add hundreds of billions of dollars to the deficit over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
* The president overstated the degree of concentration in the insurance industry. He said that in 34 states the “insurance market” is controlled by five or fewer companies, but that’s true only of insurance bought by small groups, not the entire “insurance market.”
* Obama said his plan won’t “require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have.” It’s true that there’s no requirement, but experts say the legislation could induce employers to switch coverage for millions of workers.
sinz54 // Sep 12, 2009 at 11:12 am
rbottoms: San Francisco, Bay Area.
That figures. With the sum total of the opinions you’ve voiced here, I knew you just absolutely had to live in either San Francisco, Chicago, Detroit, or Vermont.
sinz54 // Sep 12, 2009 at 11:27 am
balconesfault: Well, it seems that any employer in America who doesn’t have a union contract that stipulates a group insurance plan is free to drop private insurance any damn time he pleases.
But given the enormous tax breaks to group health insurance–something you consistently ignore–that’s highly unlikely. Group health insurance is treated by our tax laws as a nontaxable fringe benefit. Hence to the company, it’s cheaper to give their employees group health insurance than to give them a wage raise.
Besides, it would be extremely difficult for any large corporation to attract a skilled, educated white collar work force if they dropped all private insurance. I worked in several large companies. I would never have accepted a job offer from a company that didn’t offer insurance.
And that’s why you’ll notice that even in these troubled economic times, you don’t hear about lots of companies dropping group insurance. Because their workers, just like union workers, value health insurance more highly than generous wages. Because tax-wise, and due to the absence of pre-existing condition limitations, it really is.
balconesfault // Sep 12, 2009 at 1:11 pm
But given the enormous tax breaks to group health insurance–something you consistently ignore–that’s highly unlikely. Group health insurance is treated by our tax laws as a nontaxable fringe benefit. Hence to the company, it’s cheaper to give their employees group health insurance than to give them a wage raise.
So what you (and Factcheck.org) are saying is that Obama is not being truthful because there is a massive distortion in the marketplace that’s been caused by our tax laws – and that either eliminating that distortion (by removing the significant tax benefits) or creating an attractive alternative to companies needing to stay in the insurance business in order to attract employees (by creating the public option) is akin to coercing companies to drop healthcare coverage.
This is wrong thinking.
balconesfault // Sep 12, 2009 at 1:13 pm
And by the way – I do not “ignore” those enormous tax breaks. They account for $225 billion a year, and as group insurance premiums continue to rise the size of that tax break will continue to rise. In fact, some of the proposed regulations for insurance companies (eg – coverage of pre-existing conditions) will inevitably drive up the cost of insurance for all consumers, including businesses – and that will drive up the size of the tax subsidy.
EscapeVelocity // Sep 12, 2009 at 1:31 pm
Rbottoms in the Rev. Wright school of anti Americanism, racial hatred, and bigotry…..and is likely to carry it to his grave like most older African Americans. There will be no breakthrough on race until this older generation dies off.
Obama is mysterious in this regard. It would seem that he is the new post racial type with his rhetoric, however by association, he seems stuck in the past….an enigma on race.
Ive been particularly interested in racial politics and issues, and especially African American viewpoints, being that I live in the South.
dragonlady // Sep 12, 2009 at 1:54 pm
balconesfault, I’m not sure I follow your logic on spending. The CBO estimates Obamacare will cost us, the taxpayers, $1 trillion on top of what we spend currently. There are differences between public and private employees. The folks who want a public option are making a free-market argument to implement an anti-free market system. My concern is that the gov’t will dictate prices and crowd out private insurers. We already see some of this effect with the govt health care you cite—Medicare underpays for medical services which is one reason why prices rise and hence, our private insurer premiums have gone up. It’s another reason many drs don’t stay in primary care since the field is so underpaid. So my question to you would be how would you pay for the public option? What would you do to increase the supply of more drs? You don’t really believe it can be paid for by cutting waste and fraud in Medicare, do you? I have no problems cutting waste but experience shows us the govt isn’t good at it.
We can get premiums to go down through appropriate competition such as increasing portability to increase pooling, and stop abuses from insurers through regulation. I would be open to a patients’ bill of rights. When you lose your job, you don’t lose your auto insurance; we should offer more options than keeping people tied to their employer’s health care program since our work force is more mobile. It seems to bother you that insurers work for profit; not me as long as they are being fair to their customer. As for your Q on how do we pay for HSAs and tax deductions, we probably differ on how to pay for it, but I would cut govt spending, like the waste of a stimulus package we passed. I do not believe we’re here to serve the govt—they are here to serve us. And allowing people to keep more of their $ for health care enables them not to be at the mercy of insurers or govt. Finally, I would consider reforming current programs like Medicare and Medicaid. I said in another post I want an honest discussion of what Medicare projections will cost us. If it’s reformed properly, I may open to paying higher taxes for it since it does serve a vulnerable demographic.
EscapeVelocity // Sep 12, 2009 at 2:07 pm
Its pretty clear there are a lot of great ideas about reforming the health care system and insurance and markets.
Unfortunately, the Left seems primarily concerned with creating a Government Insurance company that will kill off competition so that the whole industry can be micromanged from the commanding heights of government.
Furthermore, they are hedging to get illegal aliens covered as well.
And no tort reform.
I just dont think these people are serious about Health Care and Insurance Reform. They are making stands on what should be non contentious issues, if they were serious.
They are serious about furthering their grandiose Leftwing Utopia visions via the vehicle of Health Care Reform. Again and again, its always the same with the Left. We care for the environment, that is why we are fearmongering about global devestation and faulting human carbon emmissions, our fix is…
the same as always. And expansion of government power, and more taxes and regulation. To further the Leftwing Utopian project.
rbottoms // Sep 12, 2009 at 2:58 pm
That figures. With the sum total of the opinions you’ve voiced here, I knew you just absolutely had to live in either San Francisco, Chicago, Detroit, or Vermont.
Yes, you the San Francisco Bay Area, home of Silicon Valley.
Originator of the iPhone and other technologies that are among of the only sectors besides health care that is adding jobs and innovation. Times are tough, but the only reason I have made it through the crash is Steve Jobs’ little invention. I haven’t had to work in a dirty, dangerous line of work since leaving the Army eighteen years ago. I make my living reading books and typing.
I could pump gas in Alabama, but why would I want to?
Tens of thousands of people have work that pays exceedingly well (with fantastic health insurnace) and in times of unemployment the top rate here beats the $230 you get down in Dixie.
And since almost every job here in the tech industry has insurnace from day one, if you lose your job you get COBRA, which while not cheap is better than what happens to a lot of folks.
San Francisco, home to one of the largest geographic centers for biotech research in the world.
The Bay Area, one of the largest, best run networks of light rail, public transportation, with support for low carbon impact transportation in the nation. You absolutely don’t need a car here. But if you have one. the chances that it’s a hybrid (like mine) is pretty high.
Gay men and lesbians can live their live pretty much without hassle and we have some of the most fantastic scenery, boating, hiking, beaches, and fishing all within an hour’s drive in any direction.
I could live in so dirthole town supported only be riverboat gambling and shrimp but why would anyone want to do that.
When the economy does come back again, I’ll still be living in one of the bet places on earth instead of next door to some gigantic hog farm’s lake of manure, enjoying a wonderful breeze from the nearest rendering plant, or down stream from some toxic soup called a river near a strip mine.
Enjoy the heartland.
brandon // Sep 12, 2009 at 4:28 pm
rbottoms,
What would be your opinion on the following articles about African Americans and San Francisco:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0615/p02s04-usgn.html
http://www.blacklightonline.com/sfnoir_1.html
rbottoms // Sep 12, 2009 at 4:36 pm
My opinion is that it is one of the most expensive places in the world to live. That’s why I live in a nice little town about 35 miles away and take BART into the city.
balconesfault // Sep 12, 2009 at 5:06 pm
The CBO estimates Obamacare will cost us, the taxpayers, $1 trillion on top of what we spend currently.
That is Federal taxpayers. And spread out over a decade (so really, given the annual basis I was citing, we’re talking $100 billion/year).
Skipping over that – I wasn’t talking about Obamacare. I was talking about how much we are currently as a society spending, per annum, in taxpayer funded healthcare. And my guess is that the number is between 1.5-2 trillion a year. In other words, we’re spending an enormous amount of taxpayer money.
So my question to you would be how would you pay for the public option?
Personally, I’d use taxes. There are many investments that government makes via taxes that end up making our private sector more efficient and better performing – in my opinion, this would do so as well.
What would you do to increase the supply of more drs?
Personally, I’d establish a number of federally operated med schools/teaching hospitals, educating physicians for free with them signing onto a 8 to 10 year committment to work in underserved communities at a set payscale. None of those excuses about the cost of med school making working for less than an enormous salary right away being impossible because of student loans.
You don’t really believe it can be paid for by cutting waste and fraud in Medicare, do you?
Nope. And I think “without waste” should be a baseline, and not a way of paying for other stuff.
We can get premiums to go down through appropriate competition such as increasing portability to increase pooling, and stop abuses from insurers through regulation.
I like the idea of increased portability, but are we going to have insurance regulation via the federal government? In which case, insurance lawsuits will be settled in federal courts, instead of state courts?
When you lose your job, you don’t lose your auto insurance; we should offer more options than keeping people tied to their employer’s health care program since our work force is more mobile.
Ok. But try that, and you immediately lose most of your support for not going to a single payer system. Seriously, I believe that there would be no faster pathway to a political groundswell for single payer than everyone losing their employee paid policy
It seems to bother you that insurers work for profit; not me as long as they are being fair to their customer.
I’m a big fan of profits, particularly by my company, or those I’m invested in. That said, growth of profits in the insurance industry will mean more money being spend societally on healthcare without the money going to actual healthcare. I think this is creating a serious drag on our economy.
I do not believe we’re here to serve the govt—they are here to serve us.
I wholly agree.
And allowing people to keep more of their $ for health care enables them not to be at the mercy of insurers or govt.
This quickly devolves into empty rhetoric.
I said in another post I want an honest discussion of what Medicare projections will cost us. If it’s reformed properly, I may open to paying higher taxes for it since it does serve a vulnerable demographic.
OK, but that’s really not the discussion here, is it?
EscapeVelocity // Sep 12, 2009 at 5:07 pm
Of the last 100 times Ive heard the word “nigger” used…
99 came out of African Americans mouths, mostly Music related, but also in casual usage around where I live….
…and one came out of Homosexuals or their Leftist buddies mouths, calling African Americans in California racial slurs for voting overwhelmingly for Prop 8.
rbottoms // Sep 12, 2009 at 5:35 pm
Seen on 9/12: ‘Bury Obamacare with Kennedy’
A passer-by forwards this image of a printed sign being distributed at the conservative rally at 13th and Pennsylvania in Washington today.
Of course you know, this means war.
The only that will be buried in 2010 and 2012 is the last vestige of a sane Republican party.
brandon // Sep 13, 2009 at 4:19 am
rbottoms, you would be wise not to write off the Republicans so fast. In 1977, we had only 143 seats in the House and 38 in the Senate. The New York Times said we were “close to extinction” and Forbes magazine said we were “in a weaker position than any major party of the United States since the Civil War.” Some thought we would go the way of the Whigs.
3 years later, Ronald Reagan was elected president and the Conservative Revolution was on.
Don’t write the obit just yet.
rbottoms // Sep 13, 2009 at 1:51 pm
In 1980 you had Ronald Reagan. In 2012 you’ll have Bobby (The Exorcist) Jindal, Sarah (The Quitter) Palin, Newt (The Adulterer) Gingrich, and Rick (The Secessionist) Perry.
All the candidates will have to either lie about whether they think the birthers are nuts in order to survive the primaries, and thus convince independents they are crazy too or they agree with them and achieve the same effect.
Between now and then the militia crazies and birthers frustrated a their inability to bring down Obama will go further and further in their protests, accusations, and disruptions.
Freshmen members of Congress will have no choice but to kiss their behinds to survive their first re-election bids thus driving the party even further out into crazyland. Death panels? Secret detention facilities? It’s only eight months in, what comes the next three years will be pure technicolor.
ottovbvs // Sep 13, 2009 at 6:47 pm
……David old boy……can you produce one source for your claim that Democrats actually booed a speech by Bush to a joint session of congress…….I watched all of them and never saw this happen once……the outburst by that Republican idiot was unprecedented
EscapeVelocity // Sep 14, 2009 at 1:42 am
google Bush Booed at 2005 State of the Union Address.
I know you Lefty’s are history, fact, and reality challenged, but surely you arent google challenged.
dragonlady // Sep 14, 2009 at 3:06 am
balconesfault:
“This quickly devolves into empty rhetoric.”
Doesn’t the crux of this debate revolve on the affordability of health care these days? If people can better afford health insurance, why is it empty rhetoric? We’d be empowering people to have more control over their health care choices.
“Ok. But try that, and you immediately lose most of your support for not going to a single payer system. Seriously, I believe that there would be no faster pathway to a political groundswell for single payer than everyone losing their employee paid policy.”
Whoa, that’s quite a jump! I’m not sure why you’re assuming their health insurance choices evaporate if they don’t have employer coverage—the demand for health insurance would still exist. Does it make sense to you to provide employers tax deductions for health insurance but not individuals? If insurers can compete across state lines, this should bring down premiums. And if individuals can buy affordable health insurance and be satisfied by it, I see no reason they would cry out single payer. Actually, the Senate Finance Committee is now seriously considering limiting the employer tax deduction, and this idea has bipartisan appeal.
“I like the idea of increased portability, but are we going to have insurance regulation via the federal government? In which case, insurance lawsuits will be settled in federal courts, instead of state courts?”
I’m not a lawyer but since Obama opened up the possibility of medical malpractice reform, and the Senate Finance Committee is looking at specialized health care courts like bankruptcy courts to handle this, perhaps these courts can also handle the claims? Or perhaps the federal govt can incentivize states to change regulations concerning out-of-state insurers by conditioning the granting of federal health care $ on it?
I think your idea on incentivizing med school education to drs serving in underserved areas is interesting. I don’t think we need federal schools since public universities are already subsidized, but I would be open to the fed govt incentivizing med student loans (perhaps forgive a portion of it) for the amount of time drs serve in these sectors or in primary care.
We’ll have to agree to disagree on the public option and raising taxes for it. But I do appreciate the civil discussion we’re having on this topic.
balconesfault // Sep 14, 2009 at 4:59 am
otto: can you produce one source for your claim that Democrats actually booed a speech by Bush to a joint session of congress…….I watched all of them and never saw this happen once……the outburst by that Republican idiot was unprecedented
When Bush talked about Social Security’s purported looming insolvency, Dems booed. Mind you – it was a more a low grumble – not like loud, caterwauling of boos that drowned out Bush’s ability to speak or anything. In fact, it was very similar to the grumbling that you heard from Repubs at times during Obama’s healthcare speech the other night – which would really have been unremarkable.
And then Wilson cried out “liar”. Which was quite remarkable.
I’m wondering if the Republicans would consider this acceptable behavior in any situations going forward. Will every Presidential Address to Congress be susceptible to partisan heckling of such a personal level? Will some future Representative Cheney scream out “Go Fuck Yourself” at some future President when he makes a point that the Representative finds objectionable?
It was absolutely unprecedented, and absolutely wrong. And it is not conservative, in any way, shape or form to defend such bad behavior.