I'm confused. Didn't Obama sign the House bill into law? Even if the R's are successful in getting it sent back to the House, isn't the House version a done deal?

he wants all the Erectile Dysfunction drugs for himself....

@1 The amended version IIRC would then go from the Senate to the House, then House would vote it up, then Obama would sign that, superceding the previous law--which is still live. If the reconciliation one fails, we still have HCR. We won, it's done. This is just to adjust and tweak it.

No ED drugs covered, just like no abortions covered. Period. Boners are elective, like implants. It has nothing to do with health care. Besides, ED is an indicator of more serious issues, especially for the vascular system. Instead of just popping pills, they should get a doctor's recommendation for long term vascular care/cholesterol reduction, etc.

On today's episode of Great Moments in the Party of No...

Republican Talking Point:
"The Democrats have spent an entire year talking about Health Care when what Americans have said in poll after poll what they really care about is jobs and the economy."

Reality:
Republicans are introducing dozens of amendments to a bill which, even if their amendments were to be accepted, they will never vote for anyway. They could end the debate today and move on to, you know, "that stuff Americans really care about," but alas, it's better to just delay an inevitable vote on a bill that has, essentially, already become law.

How is this not totally and irrefutably ridiculous? I perhaps will never understand. How can anyone reconcile this rhetoric - which I'm sure many Republicans fully believe in, even if they do not say so in this context - with these actions of delay and obstruction?

It is only logical that if you actually cared about moving on to the "more important issues" then you would do everything in your power to do so, including withholding objections you've already voiced continuously and you're sure won't change your position even if they are addressed. And you would do this no matter who "started it."

So even if one honestly thought the Democrats should never have brought healthcare up, there doesn't seem to be any way one can justify allowing it to unnecessarily continue when they themselves claim that the right thing to do is move on.

[Ominous music] "He even voted for giving Viagra to sex offenders."

@1 - I think if the Republicans succeed in amending it, then it has to go back to the House for another vote; otherwise, it doesn't, since the House has already voted on it.

Actually, why don't the Dems accept amendments like this, and then have the Republicans vote against them? That would cause their little plan to backfire - Dems could then use the script in @7 in their commercial.

So what if it has to be sent back to the house? It'll pass there immediately.