Bill Cassidy is not a bright man

Related Post Roulette

23 Responses

  1. ChrisWWW says:


    If the country doesn’t like the reform, then they can elect some different dudes to change it again.Report

  2. Jaybird says:

    Democrats are accurately representing the stated preferences of a majority of the population, many of whom voted for Democrats so that there would be health care reform.

    But many of whom voted for Democrats as the default choice when it comes to throwing the bums out. Many voted for the democrats because they promised a return of some measure of fiscal sanity. Indeed, some even vote for them on the strength of Obama’s promise that there would be a net tax cut.

    Obama is likely to be pandering to the group that is most likely to vote for him again come 2012… I mean, where are the people who, more than anything else, want health care reform going to go?

    The republicans?Report

    • Devin M in reply to Jaybird says:

      Actually, Jaybird, I can see a lot of people who strongly oppose what Republicans typically stand for voting for them if Obama fails & a R candidate in ’12 promises universal health care–including my wife & me. Universal coverage has been reconciled with conservative ideals in every other developed nation, and the Republicans have demonstrated they have no problem leading their masses in a sort of Orwellian double-think that will convince loyalists that Republicans WANTED universal health care all along. Republicans simply point out the Dem failure, then say that because universal coverage helps small businesses who currently find it difficult to impossible to get health care that they have actually been for universal coverage always. There was never a flip-flop. The loyalists will buy it. Pragmatists who just want to be able to run our businesses AND get health care will go along because really there’s no more important issue right now for us than access to health care.

      On NPR’s Fresh Air yesterday, TR Reid pointed out an example of Taiwan (possibly Thailand, I couldn’t hear it very well) where the conservatives in power enacted universal health care simply because they knew if they didn’t they would get destroyed in the next election. I think something similar could happen here in ’12 if the Dems fail.Report

      • Jaybird in reply to Devin M says:

        We will see. I don’t believe that our government is particularly capable of passing a health care law that will result in folks being better off. It may be capable of passing a bill, mind… but it’ll be more analagous to PATRIOT or the creation of the TSA or Cash 4 Clunkers than, say, a decent compromise/amalgam of Britain/Canada/Denmark.

        I’d love to be wrong, of course.Report

        • Devin M in reply to Jaybird says:

          My cynical side tends to agree with you about the inability of our govt to pass sensible legislation…not sure that my cynical side is always the best guide, however 🙂 I have read a number of opinions from people who believe the difference between us and the rest of the world lies in the difference between parliamentary forms of government and our more divided structure. Maybe there’s something to that.

          On the other hand, we manage to run a pretty effective military that’s comparable in size and complexity to what a national health plan would require. Not everybody agrees with the aims of our military, but the mainstream media and politicians simply ignore the people who oppose the aims of the military. If the politicians and media would simply ignore those who believe the nation is better off denying health care to people who can’t afford it, then we could probably have a more effective approach. Right now we’re trying to create a national plan that still honors the wishes of those who don’t want others to have health care…hard to see how something effective will come from that.Report

  3. mike farmer says:

    I think most Democrats are seriously overestimating public support for Obama’s agenda. Yes, he won, and he told the country what he was going to do before the election, but, things change — they have changed. There’s a lot of people who didn’t vote — they might be voting next time.Report

  4. North says:

    Gotta disagree. The Dems said they’d enact healthcare if elected. They got elected. I dare say they’re allowed to do what they said they’d do when campaigning. I also think it’s fair for them to claim to have majority support for doing so based on their election results. If the voters don’t like it then the Dems will get flattened in the next election and the Republicans can repeal the whole thing.Report

    • Jaybird in reply to North says:

      “If the voters don’t like it then the Dems will get flattened in the next election and the Republicans can repeal the whole thing.”

      I’m going to focus on the “then the Dems will get flattened in the next election” part of this statement.

      Do the democrats strike you as principled to the point where they’d be willing to run with this in order to protect, among others, The Children?Report

      • North in reply to Jaybird says:

        Jay, personally? I have no faith at all that if you told your average Dem law maker (even Obama) that he could pass health care but he’s be guaranteed out of his job next election that he’d choose to pass it anyhow. But I’m a cynic. My only point is that if the Dems hung together and with discipline marched a bill through congress on a strict party line vote the Republicans would be unfair and dishonest by saying that the Dems were going against the “will of the majority”Report

  5. greginak says:

    We’re going to find out how much the D’s want reform. I’ll bet something will be passed that does have some significant changes although the public option still up in the air.

    FWIW health care reform has been a major priority for D’s and consistently polled highly.

    And Cassidy can go F himself.Report

  6. Dave S. says:

    Democrats in the minority: UnAmerican obstructionists.
    Republicans in the minority: Principled raisers of reasonable objections.

    That’s all you need to remember, and it’s reflected in the process stories.Report

    • Mark Thompson in reply to Dave S. says:

      Well, I for one was calling Democrats principled raisers of reasonable objections for the last several years. Actually, I believe my complaint about Democrats the last several years has been that they didn’t raise those objections strongly enough.Report

  7. M.Z. says:

    As much as I hold the GOP in contempt over health care reform, the bigger issue right now is that the Democrats can’t run their caucus. Pelosi, for starters, should be removed from leadership. The Demcrats shouldn’t have people in leadership that are tone death to their fellow members in competitive districts. It’s okay to have internal disputes within the party, but there are people in the caucus presuming bad faith and the caucus doesn’t agree with basic facts like the impact of abortion in the current bill.Report

  8. Sycophant of the Bourgeois says:

    Democrats didn’t win because of their pandering on health care. They won because the previous administration was one of the worst in history, and their opponent did nothing but suck up to the religious right.Report

  9. medievalpoetry says:

    The strange thing is, Obama has pretty much alienated his base with his policy decisions so far, not to mention the wavering on the public option plan. As the center moves away from him, his support collapses behind him. He’s about to find himself very alone.Report

  10. medievalpoetry says:

    “yes, the resistance to the particular planned healthcare reform is lack of Democratic support, not the weener Republican opposition — if all the Democrats wanted it, they’d push it through in a heart beat.”

    He waited too long, he’s about to slip into the 40’s, the blue dogs can see which way the wind is blowing.Report

    • Yes, but aside from the direction of the wind in relation to re-election, I also like to think that moderate Dems are also seeing the danger of such sweeping reform. These men and women can calculate and the numbers don’t add up, plus it’s too much power for the government — they hopefully see the futility of expecting government control of healthcare to be effective — but this also goes back to re-election, because they might have the foresight to know that the consequences would fall to them. It’s not like they secretly believe progressive reform would work splendidly, but are afraid that their constituents would be angry — if that was the case they would be passionately explaining the wonderful benefits and persuading their constituents to go along with it.Report

  11. medievalpoetry says:

    No doubt… but when O was in the high 60’s, he still had the power and clout to bully, threaten and arm-twist blue dogs( and moderate Repubs) into signing off on his bills. There’s no way they would have passed the stimulus if he hadn’t been riding so high in the polls.

    Btw, I should make it clear that I’m an unapolagetic bleeding heart Latte Liberal, I’m not gloating about his position, I’m speaking from regret at wasted opportunities.Report

  12. mike farmer says:

    “Btw, I should make it clear that I’m an unapolagetic bleeding heart Latte Liberal.”

    Yes, that’s what I thought. Don’t worry, it’s not fatal. We didn’t have latte when I was a flaming liberal yippie, so we drank Bali Hai wine out of jug.Report