Slog Comments
A Defector in the Delegation
3
According to the Great Orange Satan, McDermott is also a potential holdout. Can Slog confirm, since I'm too lazy to look up his office's number and wait on the phone to be given a nonanswer?
6
He could possibly be because he knows this bill is absolute crap and 180 degrees from single-payor.
8
Speaking of Vancouver, why no coverage on SLOG of Cy Young Award winner (and pride of Bellevue) Tim "The Freak" Lincecum being busted for pot possession in Hazel Dell?
9
Time for a progressive opponent for Mr. Baird. I'll work on that campaign.
@6: Screw the "anything less than single-payer is crap" attitude. We need this bill. (Besides, that doesn't actually seem to be why Baird's opposing it.)
@6: Screw the "anything less than single-payer is crap" attitude. We need this bill. (Besides, that doesn't actually seem to be why Baird's opposing it.)
11
I'm not so sure I disagree with Mr. Baird if that legislation corresponds to the first draft of it I happened to peruse.
Firstly, it IS NOT healthcare reform, but HEALTH INSURANCE changes. Now the changes I saw regarded financing this bill on the backs of the middle and working class people, especially taxing union health plans as well as cutbacks in Medicaid, etc. Not good.
Also, it mandated the private insurance be purchased -- a boon for the private insurance vultures, as well as establishing insurance exchanges.
What these insurance exchanges are suggestive of is the government, on the tax payer dime, creating the next exchanges for Wall Street to save them the cost. Wall Street has, over the last several years, suddenly created a whole bunch of healthcare hedge funds. What these are for is usually speculation and manipulation of the markets --- driving up the costs for the rest of us while running off with their ill-gotten and seldom-taxed gains.
They have been steadily creating an entirely new class of derivatives: mortality derivatives, mortality-linked securities, mortality swaps, q-forwards, etc. They appear to be gaming the system for an entire new round of securitized financial instruments (debt-financed riches for them, sticking the rest of us with their bills). One can surmise that these will be traded, or based, upon those 2013-created insurance exchanges.
Just doesn't appear to be similar to Rep. Kucinich's HR 3200, and certainly says bad things about Pelosi for stripping out the legislative verbiage which would allow individual state governments to opt out and create their own sinlge payer networks.
Real healthcare reform would involve single payer. This appears to be simply a future backdoor bailout of the insurance industry, which like the banksters, has suffered from too many toxic assets on hand.
More...
Firstly, it IS NOT healthcare reform, but HEALTH INSURANCE changes. Now the changes I saw regarded financing this bill on the backs of the middle and working class people, especially taxing union health plans as well as cutbacks in Medicaid, etc. Not good.
Also, it mandated the private insurance be purchased -- a boon for the private insurance vultures, as well as establishing insurance exchanges.
What these insurance exchanges are suggestive of is the government, on the tax payer dime, creating the next exchanges for Wall Street to save them the cost. Wall Street has, over the last several years, suddenly created a whole bunch of healthcare hedge funds. What these are for is usually speculation and manipulation of the markets --- driving up the costs for the rest of us while running off with their ill-gotten and seldom-taxed gains.
They have been steadily creating an entirely new class of derivatives: mortality derivatives, mortality-linked securities, mortality swaps, q-forwards, etc. They appear to be gaming the system for an entire new round of securitized financial instruments (debt-financed riches for them, sticking the rest of us with their bills). One can surmise that these will be traded, or based, upon those 2013-created insurance exchanges.
Just doesn't appear to be similar to Rep. Kucinich's HR 3200, and certainly says bad things about Pelosi for stripping out the legislative verbiage which would allow individual state governments to opt out and create their own sinlge payer networks.
Real healthcare reform would involve single payer. This appears to be simply a future backdoor bailout of the insurance industry, which like the banksters, has suffered from too many toxic assets on hand.
12
Until conservative Americans get over their horror toward socialism, we'll never have single-payor. And their reps won't vote for it.
I'm afraid the final will contain a clause allowing states to opt out of a lot of things, especially enlarging their Medicaid rolls, and anything else that increases states' costs. Congress will just be kicking it to the states, whose blame it will be if this thing doesn't work, and every state in the country is broke right now.
This is no reform indeed, barely a change.
I'm afraid the final will contain a clause allowing states to opt out of a lot of things, especially enlarging their Medicaid rolls, and anything else that increases states' costs. Congress will just be kicking it to the states, whose blame it will be if this thing doesn't work, and every state in the country is broke right now.
This is no reform indeed, barely a change.
14
Washington state's worst Dem, along with our esteemed lieutenant governor DINO Brad Owen. An absolute son of a bitch.
15
@11: Yes, I'm entirely sure that the reason Baird wants more input from Republican "Dachau" rabble-rousers is to make the bill more progressive.
16
I hate being a democrat sometimes. why does the party continue to try to play nice with the bullies that hate them? do what the voters want and kick sand into their faces!
17
The information about this bill is extremely vague.
If you search on the web, you'll see people saying "Health plan good" or "Obama care bad", but the specifics are sorely lacking!
Where are the basic facts of cost, service and so on illustrated clearly?
The information about this bill is extremely vague.
If you search on the web, you'll see people saying "Health plan good" or "Obama care bad", but the specifics are sorely lacking!
Where are the basic facts of cost, service and so on illustrated clearly?
18
@2
Great Idea!
We'll back a "Progressive" in the Primary- the kind Seattle liberals can get all wet and sticky about- and beat this turkey for the Democratic nomination.
Then we can watch a Republican win the seat in November. . . .
Great Idea!
We'll back a "Progressive" in the Primary- the kind Seattle liberals can get all wet and sticky about- and beat this turkey for the Democratic nomination.
Then we can watch a Republican win the seat in November. . . .
19
18- Grayson of Florida holds a traditionally Republican seat, and has no problem standing up for what he believes in, and no problem standing up to the right wing. He is in no danger of losing his seat. the lesson spineless milquetoast dems such as Baird should take from that is this: Stop being such a fucking pussy and fight back.
20
This is how the Dems who abandon HCR are going to play it. They are going to argue they are protecting Medicare.
21
19
Grayson got that seat because the Republican self-destructed.
He has ZERO% chance of being re-elected.
That is not snark or bravado or hyperbole.
It is a fact.
Research it.
Grayson is being Mr Loudmouthed Assertive Democrat because he knows he has NO chance to be re-elected and he is trying to line up a gig on MSNBC as a commentator.
(hence his weepy asskissing pussywhipped apology for the Whore comment-)
Grayson got that seat because the Republican self-destructed.
He has ZERO% chance of being re-elected.
That is not snark or bravado or hyperbole.
It is a fact.
Research it.
Grayson is being Mr Loudmouthed Assertive Democrat because he knows he has NO chance to be re-elected and he is trying to line up a gig on MSNBC as a commentator.
(hence his weepy asskissing pussywhipped apology for the Whore comment-)
22
I love how a bill must be 100% perfect before Baird can be bothered to vote for it. I'm assuming he felt the same exact way when he voted for HR 2997 (Ag, Rural Development, Food/Drug Admin, & Related Agency Appropriations Fiscal Year 09-10), HR 146 (Omnibus Public Land Mgmt Act of 09), HR 2892 (Dept of Homeland Sec Appropriations Fiscal Year 10), HR 1 (Stimulus Act), HR 2454 (Cap & Trade)
23
#20, please do me a favor and go back and re-read Pres. Obama's speech before congress on the reframing of his "public option." (Please note I said "reframing" -- not repeating.)
He completely changes the original message, promising that the purchase of private insurance will be mandatory, proclaiming that millions more will be covered (then immediately fudging on that promise), and misleading everyone with suggesting there will now be more competition for the insurance industry (a falsehood, just read the final legislation and do the math), along with stating that the health insurance industry will no longer be allowed to turn away applicants due to "pre-existing conditions," but then allowing them a concrete way out by also proposing tort "reform."
I'm completely flummoxed why more haven't picked up on this? Is everyone retarded? Three-second attention span?
If Obama were an authentic democract, he never would have appointed all those many Wall Street lobbyists and pharmaceutical industry lobbyists to his administration. Period!
Just look up the backgrounds of Diana Farrell, the most anti-worker, anti-union, anti-American yet! And Larry "women can't do science" Summers!
He completely changes the original message, promising that the purchase of private insurance will be mandatory, proclaiming that millions more will be covered (then immediately fudging on that promise), and misleading everyone with suggesting there will now be more competition for the insurance industry (a falsehood, just read the final legislation and do the math), along with stating that the health insurance industry will no longer be allowed to turn away applicants due to "pre-existing conditions," but then allowing them a concrete way out by also proposing tort "reform."
I'm completely flummoxed why more haven't picked up on this? Is everyone retarded? Three-second attention span?
If Obama were an authentic democract, he never would have appointed all those many Wall Street lobbyists and pharmaceutical industry lobbyists to his administration. Period!
Just look up the backgrounds of Diana Farrell, the most anti-worker, anti-union, anti-American yet! And Larry "women can't do science" Summers!
24
#16: why does the party continue to try to play nice with the bullies that hate them?
Just what the heck are you prattling about??? The dems aren't going along with "the bullies" they are fulfilling their paychecks from all those corporate lobbyists who own them. Check their voting records and their contributions (Opensecrets, wallstreetwatch.org, etc.)
Some of President Obama's toxic appointments: Diana Farrell (McKinsey Global Institute, Goldman Sachs), Laura Tyson (Morgan Stanley, NAFTA uber-supporter), Larry Summers (whored for everyone on Wall Street), Timothy Geithner (Kissinger & Associates, NY Fed), Gary Gensler (Goldman Sachs), Tara O'Toole (pharmaceutical industry lobbyist), Herb Allison (Merrill Lynch, NY Fed), Peter Orszag (Mckinsey & Co., Brookings Institution), Patterson (Goldman Sachs lobbyist), Richard Holbrooke (AIG, Perseus LLC), Rahm Emanuel (Wasserstein Perella, number one recipient of hedge fund donations while in congress), Robert Hormats (Goldman Sachs), etc., etc. etc.
Just what the heck are you prattling about??? The dems aren't going along with "the bullies" they are fulfilling their paychecks from all those corporate lobbyists who own them. Check their voting records and their contributions (Opensecrets, wallstreetwatch.org, etc.)
Some of President Obama's toxic appointments: Diana Farrell (McKinsey Global Institute, Goldman Sachs), Laura Tyson (Morgan Stanley, NAFTA uber-supporter), Larry Summers (whored for everyone on Wall Street), Timothy Geithner (Kissinger & Associates, NY Fed), Gary Gensler (Goldman Sachs), Tara O'Toole (pharmaceutical industry lobbyist), Herb Allison (Merrill Lynch, NY Fed), Peter Orszag (Mckinsey & Co., Brookings Institution), Patterson (Goldman Sachs lobbyist), Richard Holbrooke (AIG, Perseus LLC), Rahm Emanuel (Wasserstein Perella, number one recipient of hedge fund donations while in congress), Robert Hormats (Goldman Sachs), etc., etc. etc.
25
@21: Actually FL-08 has a Cook Political Report PV Rating of R+2, which is not insurmountable. Combine that with Grayson's support from Ron Paul Libertarian types for his denunciations of the Federal Reserve, and his race is not out of reach.
26
#21 - He has ZERO% chance of being re-elected.
Shit, the GOP cannot even get a Republican to challenge Grayson. All the usual suspects will not run against him. With out a challenger, he has a 100% chance of be re-elected. He is going to own that seat for decades, because he actually cares about the people.
Shit, the GOP cannot even get a Republican to challenge Grayson. All the usual suspects will not run against him. With out a challenger, he has a 100% chance of be re-elected. He is going to own that seat for decades, because he actually cares about the people.
Comments (26) RSS