How will you react if Obama gets a GREAT health care bill out of Congress?

I've heard a lot of grousing accompanying the idea that he has failed us or sold out or is a lot less capable than we believed when we elected him. Fair enough, it is a long slog to the finish line, the stakes are huge and the tension is at the quivering, muscle-snap level.

But what if he IS Mr.Cool who is waaaaay ahead of everyone?

What if everything we are seeing - from Max Bauccus flipping his position; to Weiner getting a single payer option scored by the CBO at the last minute; to a wild and wooley August recess where the 'thugs establish that they are either whack-jobs or they are opposing the bill because it costs too much - what if all that and every other event involved in this roller coaster ride is planned to deliver an outcome that we all want, single payer?

What will you do if they give us "Medicare for All"?

the kitchen sink bill?

cumbersome, unwieldy -- ripe for a republican take over bill?

will you admit obama's hand in that?

And, I would have a whole new respect for Obama.

Given his present affliations and actions, I have no reason to believe your hopeful description to be the case....

Let's hope it is...

Now, a question to you. What will you do, if all the people justifiably concerned about Obama's present actions are right, and we get a private insurance wet dream instead of real health care reform?

Then, what you do you do?

Or, the better question, is what do we ALL do?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Don't even THINK that ...let alone say it !! Think of him protected by the" Force" and leave it there! (and if you're a praying person, try saying a few)

OK, OK, I'll shut up.....

...and take pictures to prove it.

He's a known Skittleshitter. :)

He's pretty much staked his Presidency on getting a good health care bill passed and, in spite of all the noise and drivel from both the right and left, I believe that is exactly what will happen.

but when I come to, I'll be happy to admit I was wrong. Unfortunately, I think I have a better chance of winning the lottery than this happening.

:-)

Those new flat screen TVs don't have any where near as much area to dance on top of. Stick with analog for all your future naked TV dancing. :silly:

I'm ready to throw my hands in the air and scream for joy.

I'm kind of scared of the naysayers. WTF?

If Obama does manage to get a good healthcare bill out of Congress, it will probably be the result of listening to his critics on the left, or at least backing off his initial DLC, triangulation approach.

How will you feel if he fails to get a great healthcare bill out of Congress? Will you just blame the Republicans and insist he's playing multidimensional chess?

find any areas where it is potentially inadequate, exaggerate the seriousness of such deficiencies, and use them as evidence of Obama's failure. Moreover, my caps lock key will be engaged the whole time.

probably wonder how the hell I got transported to a parallel universe.

and get a check up for the first time in a decade... and my ankle x-rayed, which was fractured 3 years ago.... among other ailments.

would go down in the annals of history as one of the greatest presidents ever!

Akin to FDR. Not "liked" be everyone, but respected (AND the ones who don't 'like' him (or FDR) sure have NO PROBLEM AT ALL taking advantage of the good/worthy systems that they have put into place. Hypocrites and 'teh stupid' go hand-in-hand and will "always be among us"....we've got to take care of those people too. It's the correct thing to do).

'

It should be a participatory process for the people to be involved in and for us all to help be a part of that process for a decision this big. We can't and shouldn't always be "trusting" people to do things well for us behind closed doors. That's not the way things should work.

I'll send my thanks to Obama, but I'll also be DEMANDING public campaign financing legislation be put in place immediately, so that we no longer have to endure these sort of "stealth" gamesmanship that we've had to endure through this whole issue's life, whether we win or lose.

In the future if we get a system in place where we can feel we have all of our party's members line up and vote for what they feel truly is best for the people (kind of like Anthony Weiner has been talking of late), at that point I think that the campaign financing part perhaps is then working. But we're a long ways away from that, and therefore win or lose, we still have a real lame system to fix!

up victory sign he's ever seen!

I doubt it'd happen, but it would be great if it did.

...it will all be down to the valiant efforts of the keyboard warriors of the intertubes. If a bad bill emerges, it will all be the fault of the corporate-controlled Obama administration. Same as it always was.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

But maybe it would merit a little faith in your fellow man...

And very surprised.

Me, I'd be more financially secure, knowing that I could be a bit freer to invest a bit more money in higher-yield investments for some years.

My first reaction, though, would be to ensure that a few right-wing public figures got their faces rubbed in it but good over this political loss. Because they made this into a high-stakes game, they deserve to be shamed and humiliated when they lose.

Since any new legislation -- particularly a program that proposes such sweeping reforms -- never goes into effect for at least a couple of years, my hospital bill will cause a lethal MI and I'll miss being around for the great day when it's private insurers turn to go to hell.

sf

that we had no idea what Mr.Cool was doing behind our backs.

And then I'd wonder why he didn't trust the people who elected him!!!!!!!!!!!

It's becoming clear that there is a hard core anti-Obama faction that simply is not living in the reality based world. I imagine their reaction would be something like Glenn Beck's. Perhaps they'll find the left wing equivalent of "death panels" even in the best bill.

I'd probably drop dead from the shock of it all.

No matter what bill gets passed and I am sure something will get passed they are going to proclaim it as the best bill possible. I am fairly certain the Insurance Companies will be satisfied with the bill, and even pretty sure many Democrats will be satisfied, but will employers be satisfied? Why do Americans insist that their employers take care of them, especially Republicans that are supposed to be so "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" kind of people. They insist that their "employer" babysit them but heaven forbid the Government pay for their health care bills..No I do not believe a really great bill will come from this Congress.

And then join the ranks of people who think that man can do no wrong.

Until then, I will hold his fucking feet to the fire. Because that's my duty as an American. Single Payer.

I mean, I hope I know what you *meant* by that, but "give" is not what it is when it is your g-d right.

I'm just sayin' :hi:

And I elected to use "give" because traditional usage isn't limited to the meaning 'give' as a present or gift; it also includes the meaning where one causes something to happen, such as "he gave his team the victory".

But it is certainly valid to point out that health care for all is a right and not something granted by a higher, sovereign power.

and be convinced that he is the greatest president america has ever had

i would be so proud of him

and so thrilled for this country

shocked, flabbergasted, and thrilled.

Do you really think Congress will send him HR 676, especially without castrating it?

And, if so, do you really think that would be because Obama "got it out of them?" That the passing of a good bill would be Obama's doing, rather than Congress', and the people who have pressured them?

Do you really think he wants the Conyers-Kucinich plan, admittedly better than anything he ever came up with, instead of the Obama plan he's been pushing all this time?

The problem I see with analysis like you present is that it revolves around the presumption of power being held by someone serving selfish interests above public interests. If you substitute for that presumption one where the leader involved is both highly intelligent and motivated by a genuine desire to effect real change for the public good, then the questions you ask as a follow up to the OP will answer themselves.

And for the record, it isn't HR 676 that is up for a vote, it is an amendment that is being offered by Congressman Weiner that proposes the same basic plan that Max Bauccus was endorsing just 6 months ago. Since that was actually a version of single payer, why in the world did Bauccus not only cease being an active proponent of that strategy, but actually BAN discussion of it at all during the hearings? Has anyone offered a reasonable explanation for that bizarre behavior?

I think the reason it was taken off the table was that they didn't want it to be specifically attacked during the process of legislative construction. By introducing single payer and its economic benefits at the tail end of the discussion they insert it as an answer to the questions that have been pounded into people's minds by those working to oppose a public option.

Notice that even Kennedy's bill didn't include a public option worthy of the name. Why in the world would they have done that? It was the perfect chance to get the CBO to confirm that a public option would reduce costs over time. Instead, they put a watered down ambiguity in that they must have known would confound the scoring process used by the CBO. Why did they do that?


I'll admit this is so far outside the realm of business as usual in Washington that it is incredible, and that my interpretation could be just the product of an active imagination and wishful thinking, but odd behavior that seems to support the theory just keeps popping up.

I do think that there are people, leaders and potential leaders, how are both highly intelligent and motivated by a genuine desire to effect real change for the public good.

I just don't think Obama is one of them. If he were, his appointments would be profoundly different, and his policies would favor the public good instead of the corporate good and the status quo.

One of the best things he could do to stimulate the economy would be to get behind HR 676, instead of trying to appease insurance companies.

Another of the most obvious things he could do would be to end the bogus war on terror, a big part of the reason the economy is in the gutter.

He could bail out people before banks. He could avoid tying stimulus money to destructive union-busting and privatization.

He could use his power to protect and defend the powerless instead of the power holders.

I don't know how Weiner's amendment compares to HR 676. Single payer is good. Does it take the profit out of the equation, or does it continue to allow health care to be a for-profit industry?

And I think we need to e-mail the WH everyday with that message.

As much as I admire the president and hope to see him motivate Congress to real action, he is one against many. He's simply not able to effect the change needed to make a great bill.

is that cool? They know what my threat is, and I am prepared to fulfill it.

Hell if that happens my donation budget goes back to normal. Otherwise it stays on the ACLU