This'n'That; August 18th[FluffyCare]

Fluffy obama "On The Ropes?" Analysis: Liberals tired of health care compromise WASHINGTON – Frustrated liberals have a question for President Fluffy obama and democRATic lawmakers: Isn't it time the other guys gave a little ground on health care? What's the point of a bipartisan bill, they ask, if we're making all the concessions? A case in point: Sen. Charles Grassley, a key Republican negotiator on health care, was on a winning streak as Congress recessed for August, having wrung important concessions from Democrats, including an agreement not to tax employer-provided health insurance and a limit to demands on drug companies. How did Grassley reciprocate? With an attack that struck Democrats as stunning and baseless. Grassley told an Iowa crowd he would not support a plan that "determines when you're going to pull the plug on Grandma." For liberals supporting far-reaching changes to the nation's health care system, it was another sign that months of negotiations have been a one-way street. It's time to move on without Republicans, they say. On Tuesday, liberals were fuming over obama's recent remarks suggesting he might also yield on the federally run insurance option he's been promoting. Many saw it as a huge concession that could leave them with nothing more than watered-down insurance cooperatives. "It is clear that Republicans have decided 'no health care' is a victory for them," Andy Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union, said in an interview. "There is a point at which bipartisanship reaches a limit, and I would say it's reaching that limit." The growing liberal unhappiness sets a difficult stage for obama this fall. Political pragmatists want him to keep seeking a middle ground that will attract at least a few RepublicRAT lawmakers as well as moderate democRATs who could prove crucial to passage in the House and Senate. Even modest achievements, such as preventing insurers from refusing to cover pre-existing medical conditions, would allow obama to claim a victory and perhaps try for more later, they say. For now, obama seems on the defensive. He spent valuable time this month knocking down claims that democRATic plans could lead to euthanasia of the elderly. And his chief spokesmen spent much of Monday and Tuesday insisting that obama still supports a government-run health insurance option despite mixed signals from the administration. On Saturday, obama told a Colorado crowd, "The public option, whether we have it or we don't have it, is not the entirety of health care reform. This is just one sliver of it." While liberals are discouraged, the endgame remains unclear. Some still hope that obama and congressional DemocRATic leaders will use all their parliamentary powers — which could prove especially divisive in the Senate — to pass a far-reaching bill that would include a public option for health insurance and more palatable consumer costs for prescription drugs and other needs. The pivotal decisions will be made this fall, with administration officials saying the debate cannot lapse into the midterm election year of 2010. What seems clear is that the room for compromise between republicRATs and democRATs is shriveling to almost nothing. Some democRATs found Kyl's remarks particularly galling. Even if democRATs manage to produce a health care bill that won't increase the federal deficit over 10 years, Kyl said, "that doesn't mean RepublicRATs would support it." And Grassley has said he's uninterested in a compromise that draws only three or so Senate republicRATs' votes. The continued outreach to republicRATs, meanwhile, is testing democRATs' unity. This week, more than 50 House democRATs issued a letter saying: "Any bill that does not provide, at a minimum, for a public option with reimbursement rates based on Medicare rates — not negotiated rates — is unacceptable." Some of them told House Speaker Nancy Porklosi, d-Calif., in a conference call Tuesday that discussions with RepublicRATs are pointless. White House spokeswoman Linda Douglass played down the intraparty fuss, noting that it's far from clear how the final legislation will turn out. She said negotiations involving obama have led drug manufacturers to agree to reduce costs for the nation's health care system by $80 billion over 10 years, while hospitals have agreed to an additional $155 billion. Those concessions will carry weight with lawmakers as they "look at enacting reform that will lower costs and increase stability and security," Douglass said in an interview. But such concessions cut several ways. Pharmaceutical industry leaders say the $80 billion agreement should end efforts to allow the government to negotiate lower prices for prescription drugs used in Medicare and other programs. Liberals say such price reductions are precisely the type of change obama called for in his presidential campaign. And now, they say, is the time to turn those promises into reality.

• Why ARE the democRATs holding out for a bipartisan fluffycare bill? If the bill is passed, Americans will finally realize all the undesireable points of the bill. The negativity [not negative-press; the media are Fluffy's bed-partners!!] will sweep the nation. With bipartisanship, Fluffy can claim that republicRATs were behind the bill as well as democRATs; It's not HIS FAILURE-It's Congress' failure!!
• Grassley was very correct in attacking the democRATs after winning concessions!! He will not support a bill that allows the government to decide when to "pull the plug on Grandma!!" This is in direct contridiction to Eric Massa, a freshman from New York's southern tier who said that he would not vote his constituents' desires if he didn't agree with their point of view!! [This guy should be a "One Term Wonder!!!] His job should be seen as doing all in his power to shut down the entire fluffycare bill completely and forevermore!!!
• If ANY PORTION of fluffycare is passed, Der Fluffmeister will proclaim victory-regardless of the number of items or the impact on society!!
• How can this truly be called "healthcare reform" when Fluffy obama is proposing reducing Medicaid and Medicare's dollars in the next budget?
• This bill has very little to do with healthcare improvement; everything to do with control of all aspects of American life!!!
• America DOES NOT NEED THIS REFORM!!! If we did..... Why are patients flying in from all over the world for medical procedures?? We have the BEST HEALTHCARE ON THE PLANET!!!
• What America really needs is healthcare INSURANCE reform!! Why not a system based on the success of the auto insurance industry?

• Start with a base amount.

  Subtract percentages for positive lifestyles, actions.

  ADD percentages for negative lifestyles, actions.

• Americans would be far more fairly if they were paying their fair share-either higher or lower than the base rate. America must return to a nation that relies on personal responsibility and away from this "sucking-from-the-government-teat" mentality!!! The Constitution does not guarantee us healthcare, welfare, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, a minimum wage, etc. These programs were only put in place to guarantee the authors a supportive voting block!!!
• The Constitution DOES guarantee, among other things, the freedom to do the best one can; to borrow a phrase from the US Army-to "be all you can be!!"

Til Nex'Time....