Nancy Pelosi: Letting the Teabaggers Steep

-

nancy pelosi let them steep twn.jpg
– cartoon by The Washington Note‘s Jonathan Guyer

Comments

25 comments on “Nancy Pelosi: Letting the Teabaggers Steep

  1. Sweetness says:

    “Not surprisingly, Republicans overwhelmingly favor repeal while
    most Democrats are opposed. Among those not affiliated with
    either major party, 59% favor repeal, and 35% are against it.”
    There are more Ds than Rs. Add in the 35% who are against
    repeal and you have a lot of people against repeal.
    But as jonst said, it was a known fact that a huge percentage of
    those opposing the bill opposed it because it didn’t go far
    enough.
    As soon as those seniors get their doughnut holes filled, they’ll
    be loving it. Also, as soon as they see that their health care isn’t
    affected by the bill…and their grandkids are getting covered…
    they will settle down.
    The idea that Ds would knowingly screw seniors on a signature
    D program, Medicare, is laughable. ANY problems with this will
    be instantly correctly for selfish, if not for altruistic, reasons.

    Reply

  2. nadine says:

    jonst, maybe today’s Rasmussen poll will answer your question. It’s a fair guess, wouldn’t you agree, that people who want outright repeal of this bill aren’t in the single payer crowd. Rasmussen says 55% of voters want to repeal the bill. Was there every such a major of piece of legislation that was passed over the objections of a majority of voters?:
    Just before the House of Representatives passed sweeping health care legislation last Sunday, 41% of voters nationwide favored the legislation while 54% were opposed. Now that President Obama has signed the legislation into law, most voters want to see it repealed.
    The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey, conducted on the first two nights after the president signed the bill, shows that 55% favor repealing the legislation. Forty-two percent (42%) oppose repeal. Those figures include 46% who Strongly Favor repeal and 35% who Strongly Oppose it.
    In terms of Election 2010, 52% say they’d vote for a candidate who favors repeal over one who does not. Forty-one percent (41%) would cast their vote for someone who opposes repeal.
    Not surprisingly, Republicans overwhelmingly favor repeal while most Democrats are opposed. Among those not affiliated with either major party, 59% favor repeal, and 35% are against it.
    Most senior citizens (59%) also favor repeal. Earlier, voters over 65 had been more opposed to the health care plan than younger adults. Seniors use the health care system more than anyone else.
    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/march_2010/55_favor_repeal_of_health_care_bill

    Reply

  3. samuelburke says:

    this is judge Napolitano on his show Freedom watch discussing
    obamacare.
    http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/54410.html

    Reply

  4. jonst says:

    Nadine, question: Of the 59% of the people that you point out oppose the bill–according to the poll you employ–what percentage of them oppose the bill because it does not go far enough with health care reform? Because it does have a public option, and or, single payer system?

    Reply

  5. nadine says:

    “Nothing from Maddow or Olberman about Israel, Netanyahu, the current dust up between Obama and Netayahu, the settlements, etc.”
    Maybe they understand what a loser the issue is for Obama? There was no issue, no dust up, until Obama made it an issue. Rishat Shlomo has been there for 12 years, and it never was an issue before. Face to face talks went on all that time.
    It is OBAMA who has absolutely scuttled the talks this year, talks that OBAMA wanted more than anybody else, because Obama was going to waltz in and bring Mideast Peace in a flash. The Pals don’t want to talk, they don’t want to reach a settlement, so when there is any daylight showing between the US and Israel, they bolt. They always bolt! Abu Mazen said in advance that they would bolt! Yet Obama thought they would use the opportunity of a pro-Pal US to talk and not bolt. Obama thinks the Pals want to talk.
    That’s because Barack Obama is a MORON.
    Now Obama is mad at Bibi, over routine construction in Jerusalem. Bibi has support from 80% of Congress and 90% of Israel on this issue, so Obama has just painted himself into a corner. Again. Same mistake Obama made in January. Obama’s reaction to making a mistake is to make it again. More cowbell, that’s Obama’s only answer.
    Jackson Diehl points out how Obama refuses to learn anything from history or his own errors: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/21/AR2010032101708.html?sub=AR

    Reply

  6. PissedOffAmerican says:

    The Crisis That Wasn’t
    by Philip Giraldi, March 25, 2010
    It might have seemed a no-brainer that the vital security interests of the United States would eventually trump the demands of a small client state that lately has not been much given to rational behavior. But in the latest showdown between the friends of Israel and the Obama Administration the President of the United States blinked first, demonstrating once and for all that no one in the US has the power to say no to Israel. And the truly amazing part was that the America Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) was so confident of the outcome that it didn’t even bother to hide very much of what it was doing, hardly deigning to engage in its usual clandestine arm twisting and slipped under the door “position papers.” It immediately issued a public statement slamming the White House, asserting that “The Obama Administration’s recent statements regarding the US relationship with Israel are a matter of serious concern. AIPAC calls on the Administration to take immediate steps to defuse the tension with the Jewish State.” It then unleashed its friends in Congress and the media. Its brazen campaign against the American president was executed all out on public view, right up front and recorded on the AIPAC website.
    Lest there be any confusion about what happened, the White House said “Thou shalt not” and Bibi Netanyahu responded “I shall” with Bibi left standing at the end. AIPAC managed to get the support of nearly every congressman who mattered, including many leaders from Obama’s own party. Half of the entire Congress attended the Monday evening gala dinner where Bibi Netanyahu was the guest speaker and there was what amounted to a bipartisan love fest when the Israeli Prime Minister visited Capitol Hill on the following day. Many legislators wrote statements affirming the US-Israeli relationship, carefully recorded by AIPAC in a 39-page document on its website. House Minority Leader John Boehner weighed in with a comment that might have been composed by a twelve year old, which means that he probably actually wrote it, and was echoed by Republican stalwarts Eric Cantor, John McCain, and Sarah Palin. Other commentary repeated the same themes: a threatening Iran, Palestinian intransigence, and Israel as a staunch ally. It all read as if from a script, suggesting a common source. Israel’s apologists never took Tel Aviv to task for anything, not even for being rude to the Vice President of the United States. Meanwhile the media was on board the trashing of the White House right from the start, supporting the perceived interests of a foreign country against those of the US. The Washington Post led the charge, calling on “expert” analysis of the situation from Elliot Abrams, Danielle Pletka, David Makovsky, Aaron David Miller, Daniel Curter, Martin Indyk, and Charles Krauthammer while excoriating the White House with its own lead editorials.
    And this was in spite of the fact that opinion polls revealed that two-thirds of Americans were supporting the President, finally aware that far from a strategic asset, Israel is a strategic liability costing billions of dollars annually and has been so for years. And the Pentagon had even weighed in, for once telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth by saying that the fallout from Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians directly threatens US troops in the Middle East and Central Asia. But it wasn’t enough.
    At the AIPAC conference on Monday, Hillary Clinton agreed to the terms of the final surrender by the United States, telling the assembled friends of Israel that American commitment to Tel Aviv is “rock solid, enduring, unwavering and forever.” Her entire speech portrayed Israelis and even the despicable Netanyahu in purely positive terms while blaming all violence in the region on the Arabs. She peppered her oration with commentary that is palpably ridiculous, like “The United States has long recognized that a strong and secure Israel is vital to our own strategic interests…And we firmly believe that when we strengthen Israel’s security, we strengthen America’s security.”
    continues……..
    http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/2010/03/24/the-crisis-that-wasnt/
    This story trumps all others, hands down. First, these assholes that are in denial of Israel’s influence on our own government and its policies, (or CLAIM to be in denial), can no longer posit such asinine arguments with a straight face or any conviction (as if they ever could). Of course, they may try, but even the ones of meager intelligence will surely know, in doing so, they are making asses of themselves.
    This has HUGE ramifications for EVERY American. The United States citizenry is no longer represented by our government with the institution of foreign policy in the Middle East, and our politicians are turning us into a pariah within the global community. This is ion direct conflict with our security and world standing. With virtually the entire world comnmunity decrying Israeli crimes and human rights abuses, we stand alone in condoning, financing, and arming a racist regime engaged in the oppression and apparent attempted genocide of an entire people.
    We are now being marched to war in Iran by some arrogant little parasitic band of racists in Israel, whose gestapo and storm trooper’s tactics, crimes, and atrocities would do Adolph Hitler proud. They even target American citizens engaged in legal activities, with nary a peep of protest from these whores and cowards that disgrace our country in Washington DC.
    We are now getting the ultimate “fuck you” from our own government. Your destiny, your security, and your future is not decided in Washintion DC, it is decided in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. Does anyone here really believe China and Russia will stay out of it when these pieces of shit in Israel and Washington attack Iran using another catalogue of trumped up charges and mythical threats to justify the act?

    Reply

  7. mbrucker says:

    late night on Leno –
    “This [health care reform] couldn’t have been done without the help of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and today the president thanked her for her unblinking support.”

    Reply

  8. ... says:

    here- her

    Reply

  9. ... says:

    poa 11:33pm- that would be mission accomplished from here pov…. geez what a thought that she just had a bush moment thanks to you, lol….

    Reply

  10. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Nothing from Maddow or Olberman about Israel, Netanyahu, the current dust up between Obama and Netayahu, the settlements, etc.
    NOTHING.
    Maddow and Olberman have joined the ranks of Hannity, Limbaugh, Armstrong, Miller, Coulter, etc. As “responsible” members of the Fourth Estate, they rank an F. They both should be ashamed of themselves, as any whore masquerading as a journalist should be.

    Reply

  11. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Nadine;
    Blahblahblah … lie…blahblahblah … bullshit …. blahblahblah ….. right wing talking point …… blahblahblah …. lie ……. blahblahblah …… bigoted comment of indifference to Palestinian suffering … blahblahblah … lie…blahblahblah … bullshit …. blahblahblah ….. right wing talking point …… blahblahblah …. lie ……. blahblahblah …… bigoted comment of indifference to Palestinian suffering ….blahblahblah…. ad nauseum.
    Its ruined the comment section.

    Reply

  12. nadine says:

    Maureen Dowd writes
    “The Democrats held hands, held their breath and jumped over the cliff — not that it was a radical bill. And, mirabile dictu, nothing awful happened. The markets went up. The polls went up. Their confidence went up.”
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/24/opinion/24dowd.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1269403471-g29vx0fZ5WmkfZlDGlhqAA
    To which I say, No, Maureen, the Democrats all held hands and jumped OFF the cliff. The reason they feel so good right now is that they haven’t landed yet.
    They will land in November. Look at the polls on the health care bill. Disapproval outpolls support by 15 or 20 points. Strong disapproval outpolls strong support by 2 to 1.
    We will spend from now until the election unpicking the new taxes (e.g. 10% tax on tanning salons), the sweetheart deals (e.g. Louisiana Purchase), the exemptions (Congress doesn’t have to join), the delays (the exchanges don’t start til 2014, most supporters don’t know that), the mistakes (e.g. kids with pre-existing conditions get covered only if they already have insurance, which is not what Obama has been promising), the loss of privacy, the mandates, the lawsuits over the mandates, the Medicare Cuts, the Doc Fix (needed but not in the bill to hide costs) etc. etc. etc.
    We are just getting started talking about health care reform. I wonder how many Democrats will dare to run in the fall on having passed this steaming pile of manure.

    Reply

  13. M.T. Stein says:

    here ya go, Nancy
    “America Hates Congress More Than Wall Street”
    Mar 24 2010, 10:54 AM ET
    “At least, that’s what a new Bloomberg poll (.pdf) says. Interestingly, the article accompanying the poll focuses on American’s hatred of Wall Street, even though Congress, corporate executives and insurance companies all scored less favorably than Wall Street. The broader poll has some interesting political consequences, particularly for financial reform.”
    http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2010/03/america-hates-congress-more-than-wall-street/37936/

    Reply

  14. nadine says:

    “As usual, Nadine is oblivious to reality. Higher premiums is what came my way under the old, dysfunctional “plan” that Nadine loved to defend. Specifically, my rates went up 30% this year. Republicans were given the better part of a decade to address this and did nothing.” (JohnH)
    Just because the old system has problems is not an argument for this atrocious bill that will make everything worse. Your premiums will go up again now. Bipartisan reform, like tort reform, portability, tax breaks, high-risk pools, etc, requires bipartisan cooperation, which the Dems would not give while they planned for a government takeover of 17% of the economy.
    “And Nadine’s assertion that the US is going to start looking like a third world country does nothing but show her ignorance. Even lots of third world countries provide universal health coverage. ”
    It was Carroll’s assertion, actually. She’s right that the US is broke already. Lots of third world countries do provide universal health insurance, that’s true, but they pay the doctors a pittance and if you actually want medical care and medicine you had better come prepared to grease every palm you come into contact with.
    You don’t control costs by refusing to pay them. You only control costs by making systems efficient and letting people make choices according to their own priorities, just the opposite of big government health care.

    Reply

  15. Linda says:

    Sweetness,
    It could have been and really would not have mattered if Obama or Hillary won the nomination and Presidency. Indeed the only difference that separated them was an individual mandate that Hillary wanted and what Obama ended up supporting.
    There was way too much fear of Big Pharma and insurers and months and month of stakeholder meetings with them while Physicians for National Health Plan were not invited–finally got one invitation—and as late as the Senate deliberations in December were being heard only by getting arrested very peacefully with little notic or fanfare.
    It could have passed if at the start the Democrats and Obama went for it and spent time and energy explaining it and that it is not socialized medicine that they were going to be accused of anyhow later if not sooner. T.R. Reid’s book spells it out how many nations have achieved single payer non-profit insurance without modifying their entire health care systems. Survey after survey showed that when it is explained, it’s what people want.
    Anything less than universal coverage doesn’t spread the risk. There are enormous savings by doing away with Medicaid altogether, etc. No mandates, no fines. It’s simple, and it’s easier to control costs when single payer. The only two principles needed are universal coverage and non-profit insurance. Then you are fighting for something that people can understand.
    Polling showed over and over that most people are happy with insurance they have—mostly because they are healthy and haven’t had to use it. The mantra still being said over and over is “If you like your insurance, you can keep it.” Many people aren’t so sure about that now.
    Unfortunately that only could have been done starting in 1/09 with a good populist message for the people and against drug and insurance companies. Single payer was the only good idea that never was debated or on the table.
    I’ve never understood the Democrats’ strategy as one could push for single payer from January to Memorial Day last year, see if the message gets across, and then go to the public option. But the message always was not to let the “perfect be the enemy of the good.” If the public option then didn’t work by 4th of July, then do the Senate bill by August recess or even a lesser one with bipartisan support. It was going to get contentious inevitably. So it’s like removing a bandaid, hurts less if pulled off quickly.
    Move quickly in the first year of a Congress as that’s the time to get things done. Let it drag on and on and one loses the message. It has instead become a bandage left too long on an infected wound–festering and ugly at best. Then the time from Labor Day to now could have been spent on jobs, jobs, jobs.
    I;m sure books of analysis will be written for years on all this. And we will never know if it could have passed because nobody tried it.

    Reply

  16. Sweetness says:

    JohnH nails it.
    I, too, like single payer. But does anyone think that it could’ve
    been passed?

    Reply

  17. JohnH says:

    As usual, Nadine is oblivious to reality. Higher premiums is what came my way under the old, dysfunctional “plan” that Nadine loved to defend. Specifically, my rates went up 30% this year. Republicans were given the better part of a decade to address this and did nothing.
    And Nadine’s assertion that the US is going to start looking like a third world country does nothing but show her ignorance. Even lots of third world countries provide universal health coverage. It was a disgrace that those with Nadine’s mindset couldn’t find a way to provide a basic human service to all Americans.

    Reply

  18. Carroll says:

    I have long been for universal health care but as written under a bastardized type of ‘for profit” scheme, it won’t be sustainable.
    Wait and see.
    Amazes me every day that people concentrate on single issues without ever looking at the big picture. The US is already broke. No one will admit it. When the shit finally does hit the fan
    Americans are going to find out what a third world society really is like.

    Reply

  19. nadine says:

    JohnH, higher premiums are what are coming your way under this plan. You can’t just mandate insurers to pay more and not have them raise premiums. Even though the purpose of this bill seems to be to make them all go bust in a few years, so they bring in a National Health System.
    John Waring, how does the VA or the Indian Health Bureau pay for your condition today? That is the model coming your way. I sure hope they support your treatment, because if they don’t, you’re out of luck.
    There is no cost containment in the bill, none. Cost containment will come when they really run out of other people’s money and start rationing care. That’s what they do in Canada and England. Got cancer? the oncologist can see you in 9 months. Need an MRI? that’s another 8 month wait. That’s why 65% of US citizens survive a cancer diagnosis by 5 years (and yes, that includes everybody) but only 42 -43% of Canadians or English citizens.
    But they all have health insurance, and that’s what matters, right? They only lack timely health care.

    Reply

  20. John Waring says:

    Nadine,
    I have what is called a chronic medical condition. If the magic fluid is not metered into my body continuously, I’d be pushing up daisies, or, if my wife has her way with final arrangements, I’ll be a nice urn on the mantle.
    The passage of this bill makes my medically challenged self more secure. I’m all for fixing its shortcomings as time goes by, especially in the area of cost containment. But VP Biden is correct. This bill is a huge deal for me.
    Now that it has passed, try taking it away from me. Over. My. Dead. Body.

    Reply

  21. questions says:

    Pelosi b’day-palooza
    http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/join-netroots-saying-thank-youhappy-b
    Campaign to send thank you roses to Pelosi’s DC office.

    Reply

  22. J.Hiroshi Burnette says:

    The Texas congressman who shouted “It’s a baby killer”, was angry that hard-line anti-abortionist Democrat Bart Stupak voted against sending the health care bill back to committee. Sending it back would have been the only realistic last effort for the GOP to kill the bill.
    Stupak’s initial objection to the bill was the abortion funding; and everyone knew that Obama pledged an executive order to cut such funding, in order to grab the Stupak bloc vote.
    During the last few minutes of Boehner’s diatribe, I heard the word abortion bantered about more times than in the entire history of C-SPAN. He knew that Stupak had already gotten what he wanted, yet the GOP wanted to kill the bill.
    Why? I think I know why. A knocked up uneducated girl makes for a fine minimum wage worker… especially when she’s afraid of non-portability of health insurance. The GOP is a business party, conveniently hiding behind the thin veil of fake Victorian morality. To give these girls improved, portable medical care is the modern equivalent of freeing the slaves… (and abortion rights would completely break every chain of white male business dominance over the poor).
    Sunday’s desperate rant split the GOP into their true factions: the ultra-rich Corporate core GOP and the starry eyed religious right who want to believe the Republican party will champion their cause.
    I have yet to figure out why the hick faction, which falls under neither of these sub-categories, likes the GOP so much (other than their love of military fireworks and destruction). NASCAR? Monster trucks? “We go to see ‘em crash!” Hope they have good health insurance coverage.

    Reply

  23. JohnH says:

    Nadine rages against the higher costs of the Democrats’ plan. Of course, the bottom line of Nadine’s policy–dramatically higher premiums! Yep, that’s what doing nothing, which is what Republicans championed, would have achieved. It would have simply allowed the current, dysfunctional system to proceed without limit.
    She is outraged, simply outraged at throwing a $Trillion at fixing the medical insurance system. But she never voices a single complaint about showering the military with $7 Trillion over 10 years, much of it wasted on follies like Iraq and Afghanistan.
    And, of course, she’s delighted to spend $30 Billion on Israel over ten years, much of which will be used to buy F-35s, which have no real use against the threats Israel now faces.
    Folks like Nadine are simply shills for the military and military contractors, who want to grab as much as they can without regard for the well being of ordinary Americans.

    Reply

  24. nadine says:

    John Waring, there is no need to lie about the higher premiums and higher taxes (half a trillion’s worth in the bill) heading everyone’s way. They will see them bite soon enough – and most of the ‘goodies’ don’t start ’til 2014. That was part of the Enron-style accounting they had to use to claim this bill would cost less than a trillion dollars. In reality, it’s more like 2.4 trillion for its first 10 years of operation, not a penny of which do we have to spend.
    This widely unpopular bill (CNN poll last Sunday: 59% opposed) is politically vulnerable. You are seriously kidding yourself if you think otherwise. Why else did Nancy Pelosi have to beat her own caucus with baseball bats to squeak out a victory, when she has a 75 vote margin in the House?

    Reply

  25. John Waring says:

    Read Bernard Finel’s entry today, “The Fatal Flaw”.
    His concluding remark:
    But it is easier to lie about what might happen if the bill is passed than it is to lie about what is happening now that it has passed. That was the fatal flaw in the GOP “strategy.” It was a reckless gamble because if they lost, their whole argument would rapidly be exposed as lunatic fear-mongering.

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *