Comments Posted By Postagoras
Displaying 11 To 20 Of 55 Comments
THE PUBLIC OPTION: NOT A SLIPPERY SLOPE -- JUST PLAIN LIES
Has Obama renounced his support for single payer? Not that I’ve heard. Perhaps then you could tell me why we should assume he has and that he doesn’t see the public option as a way to achieve it?
You can assume that, sure. But from what's in the public record, you could NOT assume it, too.
The interesting part of health care reform this time around is that it's really damn hard to figure out what the President really wants. Obama has stated some lofty goals, but the devil is in the details. When President Clinton tried this, there was no ambiguity about the President's details, and the whole thing went down to crashing defeat. Obama sure isn't doing that.
At this point I don't know what Obama thinks about the bills that are in the committees. He has made zero statements about them. Is this a strategy? I guess so.
I think that, if nothing else, this has been a good lesson in how policy is made in the Federal Government. Most people have only a passing notion of what happens in this committee or that committee, but so far, this has brought the "sausage-making" into the public eye. And as the saying goes, it ain't pretty.
If it's really a strategy of Obama's to let the process work out in Congress while making few detailed statements, then we can all expect to be frustrated and annoyed with him until the Fall. He's keeping his cards close to his chest, and we're left with reading the tea leaves in the various bills.
And making dire warnings based on assumptions.
Comment Posted By Postagoras On 19.08.2009 @ 13:22
Ideally, it would someday magically turn into single-payer.
Your entire slippery slope argument is based on this one phrase. It's the only item that you quote that indicates that the "real goal" is a single-payer system, and that this is just a trojan horse. But that is an editorial comment from the reporter- it's not a quote.
Is there anything in your post that says that the Obama administration has this magical belief? No.
If that is eliminated from your post, then there's nothing there to say that this the public option is a trojan horse. You can believe that if you want, but you can also believe in the Easter Bunny if you want.
Slippery slope arguments from either party are more about creating FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) than arguing about policy. Your other posts on the problems of health care reform are much better.
"But the downside is that the political process turns out to be as resistant to stealth single-payer as it is to plain-old single-payer..."
The whole idea of the public option was created as "stealth single payer." The creators sold the idea to the presidential candidates. Barney Frank. Weiner, Obama himself have all said they prefer single payer so one would easily assume that they see the public option as the way to achieve that.
Has Obama renounced his support for single payer? Not that I've heard. Perhaps then you could tell me why we should assume he has and that he doesn't see the public option as a way to achieve it?
ed.
Comment Posted By Postagoras On 19.08.2009 @ 11:38
a huge majority of Americans are satisfied with the insurance they have and don’t want that to change.
This is true, but the plain truth is that people's insurance changes pretty much every year, and not for the better. So this is pretty much a dishonest point to bring up.
You can certainly argue that the reform will not be better than doing nothing, but that has nothing to do with the results of the poll. Quoting this poll is a PR move.
Comment Posted By Postagoras On 19.08.2009 @ 11:16
What any government board’s decision regarding end of life means is that the most intimate and personal decisions someone can make - how to manage their death - allows for a government bureaucrat to be in the room when one discusses such issues with their doctor. It is a humiliating loss of freedom that should be prevented by making such decisions off limits to government entirely.
But having an insurance company employee in the room is perfectly fine? Sorry, but you completely avoid the point that we already have a rationed health care system.
Comment Posted By Postagoras On 17.08.2009 @ 10:43
To keep the musical thread going... this is one of the most tone-deaf posts you've ever made. I mean, OK, it was a rock concert. It did not change history.
But it was one part of the culture of the times- now, the folks who passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not go to Woodstock, but they were part of the 60s nonetheless. Woodstock didn't occur in a vacuum, and it has been used as a banner for many things that were happening in the 60s. Did peace, love, and understanding break out all over the world after Woodstock? Nope.
I guess you'd call that a fiasco.
Comment Posted By Postagoras On 15.08.2009 @ 20:17
NO, AMERICA -- YOU CAN'T KEEP THE HEALTH INSURANCE YOU HAVE NOW
Pretty good analysis, Rick. I agree that Congress has been reluctant to deal with the enormous cost of the health plan. The CBO has been very good at their job, thank goodness.
A few comments, though.
Obama has been very clear all along that if nothing is done, there is little chance that you will have the same health plan in the near future. And most likely it will be a worse plan.
Your post ignores the elephant in the room. The health care system is not working for the country as a whole. For example, the cost of providing emergency room care to the uninsured is expensive. We all end up footing the bill for that, but that does not appear on any balance sheet. It's a hidden tax, one of many in the current system- the goal of health care reform is to reduce those taxes, and to bring them out into the open- not eliminate them, but reduce them.
If we can agree that there's a problem that needs to be fixed, that's a start.
How about a post where you discuss the competing plans that have been advanced by Douthat and any other conservatives? Then show how those plans has been adopted by the Republicans in Congress, and how they have tried to advance them, but been spurned by the Democrats.
I'd be very interested in that.
Comment Posted By Postagoras On 17.07.2009 @ 10:01
SOME NEW BLOOD FOR INTELLECTUAL CONSERVATISM
Awesome post, Rick. This is a great start for some real political discussion. A wonderful alternative to the current political discussion, which is fundamentally "Who gets to slice the pie today?"
The challenge is, if the Republicans adopt a position of being market-friendly versus business-friendly, then where will the funding come from for their campaigns? That's how we got into this mess, because the only people who got elected were the ones who took $$$ for the corporations.
It's really up to the grass roots to mobilize- so your post is just what is needed.
Comment Posted By Postagoras On 13.07.2009 @ 11:15
PROSECUTING TORTURE AS A DISTRACTION FROM THE ECONOMY
I would like to see an investigation or a truth commission, but I frankly doubt its efficacy. I think that an investigation would be a circus, but prosecutions would be a three ring circus.
I think that Rick has summed up what happened pretty well, and we all have a good idea as to who ordered what and when. Let's let history judge these actions.
The next time that we as a nation face an attack and a war, there will no doubt be some more slippery characters willing to bend the intent of the law and the needs of national security to justify whatever the President wants. There's little value in attempting to find culprits and get to the root cause of the problem. In this kind of situation President can do whatever he wants, after which his aides can all conveniently forget what exactly happened.
I'd be a bit curious to see if Libby turned out to be the fall guy again.
One can take some solace that the current woes of the Republican Party can be traced in some measure to the number of people who associate them with torture. That's the type of consequence which may affect whether this happens again.
Comment Posted By Postagoras On 12.07.2009 @ 17:19
THE CHICAGO WAY TO DEAL WITH NOSY IG'S
You might call me an Obamabot, but I think that this is well worth investigating. You might've pointed out that Claire McKaskill, a Democratic Senator, is also asking the White House questions about this.
You might've also reported that the bipartisan board of the Corporation for National and Community Service unanimously requested a review of Walpin's performance. If that's a lie, it's one that is easily exposed. If it's true, then there may actually be a valid reason for Walpin's dismissal? That is not just a "he said she said" argument.
If, in the end, the White House wanted to get this guy canned and did the equivalent of pulling him over for a broken taillight, it's definitely worth following up.
Comment Posted By Postagoras On 18.06.2009 @ 10:53
IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE THE RIGHT ATTITUDE
From many on the left - gross exaggeration, hyperbole, hysterical denunciations, false assumptions, and a deliberate effort to smear, tar, and feather conservatives by tying them to the most extremist, wacky, nutjobs who would fit right in with just about anyone who currently occupies a padded cell in a mental institution but has absolutely nothing in common with mainstream conservatives.
The problem is that the blogs and media amplify the nutjobs on both sides of the aisle. There are mainstream liberals, too, you know. Both the mainstream conservatives and the mainstream liberals get attacks from the wings of both parties. The echo chamber of the media makes it easy to score cheap points.
However, your concept of "presenting to the world a snarling, spitting, pit bull-like exterior that will strike terror in the hearts of liberals everywhere" sounds more like a way to score cheap points than appeal to the mainstream.
Yeah - probably a little over the top with the pit bull analogy. My point was more toward being relentless in pursuit of a goal.
Poor Michael took the whole thing a little too seriously. I mean, c'mon. "Connect to your inner Visigoth?" A typical (for me) combination of satire and wisdom.
ed.
Comment Posted By Postagoras On 17.06.2009 @ 11:42
