The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
Please vote in the Forum Structure Poll. Polling will close at 2PM EST on January 21, 2025.
Health Care Reform: Now With PR Gimmicks! We're Doomed.
Does mean the zombie public option is getting chainsawed though.
Also: words, not actions.
Why does it mean that?
Sorry, I'm mistaken, it's been so long I forgot the House wasn't a bunch of morons.
It still won't happen though.
enlightenedbum on
The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
Does mean the zombie public option is getting chainsawed though.
Also: words, not actions.
Why does it mean that?
Sorry, I'm mistaken, it's been so long I forgot the House wasn't a bunch of morons.
It still won't happen though.
Did Rust change his name?
I'm sorry, are you mistaking Democratic Senators with people possessing spines? They have 20 yes votes at the moment. I'll get mildly hopeful when they have 51.
enlightenedbum on
The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
They're actually seriously saying "We are going to use Reconciliation".
This is called progress.
They've been saying a lot of things for the past year. Not a lot to show for it. When they pass something using reconciliation I'll believe it.
Senate Democrats have zero credibility right now.
enlightenedbum on
The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
They're actually seriously saying "We are going to use Reconciliation".
This is called progress.
They've been saying a lot of things for the past year. Not a lot to show for it. When they pass something using reconciliation I'll believe it.
Senate Democrats have zero credibility right now.
They haven't been saying alot of stuff about actually ramming shit through.
Again, this is called progress.
astoundingly, politicians have been known to fudge the truth
maybe you don't have that kind of thing up in canada, i dunno
Yes, but they generally fudge the truth in the direction they feel the public will like the best.
See, in the real world, even a change in the bullshit politicians spew indicates a change in the political landscape since it indicates a change in what they feel the public wants to hear.
They're actually seriously saying "We are going to use Reconciliation".
This is called progress.
They've been saying a lot of things for the past year. Not a lot to show for it. When they pass something using reconciliation I'll believe it.
Senate Democrats have zero credibility right now.
They haven't been saying alot of stuff about actually ramming shit through.
Again, this is called progress.
astoundingly, politicians have been known to fudge the truth
maybe you don't have that kind of thing up in canada, i dunno
Yes, but they generally fudge the truth in the direction they feel the public will like the best.
See, in the real world, even a change in the bullshit politicians spew indicates a change in the political landscape since it indicates a change in what they feel the public wants to hear.
which in no way correlates to whether or not they will take action on what they're saying
When politicians say things that indicate no progress is being made, they're telling the truth.
When politicians say things that indicate progress is being made, they're fudging the truth.
This is because I have an emotional need to believe that progress is impossible.
Or because I've watched Senate Democrats be spineless hacks for a decade and don't expect them to stop being spineless hacks.
Past results are a good predictor of future actions is what I'm saying.
enlightenedbum on
The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
They're actually seriously saying "We are going to use Reconciliation".
This is called progress.
They've been saying a lot of things for the past year. Not a lot to show for it. When they pass something using reconciliation I'll believe it.
Senate Democrats have zero credibility right now.
They haven't been saying alot of stuff about actually ramming shit through.
Again, this is called progress.
astoundingly, politicians have been known to fudge the truth
maybe you don't have that kind of thing up in canada, i dunno
Yes, but they generally fudge the truth in the direction they feel the public will like the best.
See, in the real world, even a change in the bullshit politicians spew indicates a change in the political landscape since it indicates a change in what they feel the public wants to hear.
which in no way correlates to whether or not they will take action on what they're saying
Yeah, it does. The more they talk about how they are going to change shit, the more likely change is to happen.
A politician saying they are going to change shit is far more likely to actually do something then one who says he isn't.
They're actually seriously saying "We are going to use Reconciliation".
This is called progress.
They've been saying a lot of things for the past year. Not a lot to show for it. When they pass something using reconciliation I'll believe it.
Senate Democrats have zero credibility right now.
They haven't been saying alot of stuff about actually ramming shit through.
Again, this is called progress.
astoundingly, politicians have been known to fudge the truth
maybe you don't have that kind of thing up in canada, i dunno
Yes, but they generally fudge the truth in the direction they feel the public will like the best.
See, in the real world, even a change in the bullshit politicians spew indicates a change in the political landscape since it indicates a change in what they feel the public wants to hear.
which in no way correlates to whether or not they will take action on what they're saying
Yeah, it does. The more they talk about how they are going to change shit, the more likely change is to happen.
A politician saying they are going to change shit is far more likely to actually do something then one who says he isn't.
maybe, but it's still nowhere close to a guarantee
but hey, whatever, i know that people like you and qingu are beyond convincing anyway
i'll just be unsurprised when everything falls through, again, which'll be a mercy because this bill should've been dead months ago anyway
When politicians say things that indicate no progress is being made, they're telling the truth.
When politicians say things that indicate progress is being made, they're fudging the truth.
This is because I have an emotional need to believe that progress is impossible.
Or because I've watched Senate Democrats be spineless hacks for a decade and don't expect them to stop being spineless hacks.
Past results are a good predictor of future actions is what I'm saying.
Your position is un-nuanced. The Senate Dems are not a monolithic block. And they did pass a health care bill. And a stimulus bill.
Fine: enough Senate Democrats (10) are spineless hacks that it is effectively as if the caucus as a whole were. The caucus is only as good as its 51st/60th member depending on the vote in question. With 60 votes they passed a health care bill that can't pass the House without being fixed and is thus DOA unless they pass this reconciliation fix. Which won't include a public option for a variety of reasons, the most obvious of which is that the politics of it inside DC suck and these morons watch too much cable news.
The stimulus bill was a huge example of them being spineless hacks, so it doesn't really dispute my point. They ignored economic reality and cut some of the most useful funding because they needed the votes of the Maine twins. That's not exactly a glorious example of Senate Democrats being awesome.
enlightenedbum on
The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
I think the student loan bill is the one that finally broke my view of the Senate (and Senate Democrats in particular as they still had 60 votes at the time):
We can save the government 10 billion a year AND make it easier for students to go to college. All we have to do is not give free money to banks.
NO!
enlightenedbum on
The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
They're actually seriously saying "We are going to use Reconciliation".
This is called progress.
They've been saying a lot of things for the past year. Not a lot to show for it. When they pass something using reconciliation I'll believe it.
Senate Democrats have zero credibility right now.
They haven't been saying alot of stuff about actually ramming shit through.
Again, this is called progress.
astoundingly, politicians have been known to fudge the truth
maybe you don't have that kind of thing up in canada, i dunno
Yes, but they generally fudge the truth in the direction they feel the public will like the best.
See, in the real world, even a change in the bullshit politicians spew indicates a change in the political landscape since it indicates a change in what they feel the public wants to hear.
which in no way correlates to whether or not they will take action on what they're saying
Yeah, it does. The more they talk about how they are going to change shit, the more likely change is to happen.
A politician saying they are going to change shit is far more likely to actually do something then one who says he isn't.
maybe, but it's still nowhere close to a guarantee
but hey, whatever, i know that people like you and qingu are beyond convincing anyway
i'll just be unsurprised when everything falls through, again, which'll be a mercy because this bill should've been dead months ago anyway
And it's nowhere close to a guarantee that they will fail, regardless of how much you say it.
But hey, far be it from me to get in the way of your burning emotional need to be disappointed in your government/life/world/etc.
Inception -> 1860, South uses it to force shitty compromises that make the North pissed, intractable situation culminates in Civil War
1865-1964 -> Segregation forever!
1918-1920 -> The League of Nations is evil and must be destroyed!
1939 -> Oops
1964-1968 -> Fair amount of not sucking, also: cedes war powers to the President. Good idea!
1969-2009 -> Passing major legislation is hard guys.
I'm going to say being optimistic about the US Senate is the extension of the stopped clock principle.
enlightenedbum on
The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
I think the student loan bill is the one that finally broke my view of the Senate (and Senate Democrats in particular as they still had 60 votes at the time):
We can save the government 10 billion a year AND make it easier for students to go to college. All we have to do is not give free money to banks.
NO!
They've waited so long on this fucking bill by the time they reexamine it, it will cost money because everything is falling apart and costs are shooting through the roof.
I just hope the US economy hold together in some fashion because our leaders are pretty much only interested in letting the place burn while they count their money while the population sits and caws that they're socialists trying to kill grandma.
We're not doomed, really, but things are going to get much worse before they get better. It's going to take a major scandal or a Republican president that isn't aweful.
Yes, I just said that, the only way out of our mess is with a Republican president. None of them ever have trouble pushing most of their agendas, and its significantly more likely we'll get one of them that happens to not want to see the nation fall apart than a Democrat with any balls.
Well, we really just need Senate reform and a couple Senators whose votes don't match their states to be gotten rid of. The former being much harder, but there are a few candidates explicitly running on a repeal the filibuster platform, which is a good sign.
It'll just take another decade or so. If we're lucky.
enlightenedbum on
The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
The way I see it the current rhetoric is an improvement. Before they were talking about bipartisanship and trying to pass it through cloture. Reconciliation wasn't even discussed. Now they're talking about reconciliation, and getting 50/51 votes with 59 senators is easier than getting 60 with 60. Furthermore 20 senators going on record for using reconciliation for the public option is 20 more than we had before.
This is a marginal improvement. You don't have to be naive to think that, you just have to be able to recognize incremental progress. Before the public option was dead, now it's on life support: improvement.
I think we had something like 40-45 in support of it in the main bill. I'd have to go back and check the vote counts.
I know, for example, Feingold is dubious about inserting it via reconciliation because for all his awesomeness he's a stickler for Senate rules.
And I think it's more that the public option has been revived and then killed to placate the media/Republicans so many times that I have a hard time believing this isn't just that again.
enlightenedbum on
The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
Well I'm hoping that in the death throes of HCR and the subsequent murdering the dems take in the election that we'll still have at least 54 Ds in the senate and that less than 4 of them are assholes.
If the republicans manage to get the majority after the election Obama might as well hang up his hat and put his feet on his desk, he's got nothing to do until his term ends.
The way I see it the current rhetoric is an improvement. Before they were talking about bipartisanship and trying to pass it through cloture. Reconciliation wasn't even discussed. Now they're talking about reconciliation, and getting 50/51 votes with 59 senators is easier than getting 60 with 60. Furthermore 20 senators going on record for using reconciliation for the public option is 20 more than we had before.
This is a marginal improvement. You don't have to be naive to think that, you just have to be able to recognize incremental progress. Before the public option was dead, now it's on life support: improvement.
"incremental progress" doesn't matter if they take two steps back for every one step forward
and the increments are usually rolled back as soon as party leadership changes hands anyway
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
Posts
Why does it mean that?
Sorry, I'm mistaken, it's been so long I forgot the House wasn't a bunch of morons.
It still won't happen though.
Did Rust change his name?
I'm sorry, are you mistaking Democratic Senators with people possessing spines? They have 20 yes votes at the moment. I'll get mildly hopeful when they have 51.
This is called progress.
They've been saying a lot of things for the past year. Not a lot to show for it. When they pass something using reconciliation I'll believe it.
Senate Democrats have zero credibility right now.
They haven't been saying alot of stuff about actually ramming shit through.
Again, this is called progress.
astoundingly, politicians have been known to fudge the truth
maybe you don't have that kind of thing up in canada, i dunno
Yes, but they generally fudge the truth in the direction they feel the public will like the best.
See, in the real world, even a change in the bullshit politicians spew indicates a change in the political landscape since it indicates a change in what they feel the public wants to hear.
which in no way correlates to whether or not they will take action on what they're saying
When politicians say things that indicate progress is being made, they're fudging the truth.
This is because I have an emotional need to believe that progress is impossible.
Or because I've watched Senate Democrats be spineless hacks for a decade and don't expect them to stop being spineless hacks.
Past results are a good predictor of future actions is what I'm saying.
Yeah, it does. The more they talk about how they are going to change shit, the more likely change is to happen.
A politician saying they are going to change shit is far more likely to actually do something then one who says he isn't.
maybe, but it's still nowhere close to a guarantee
but hey, whatever, i know that people like you and qingu are beyond convincing anyway
i'll just be unsurprised when everything falls through, again, which'll be a mercy because this bill should've been dead months ago anyway
Fine: enough Senate Democrats (10) are spineless hacks that it is effectively as if the caucus as a whole were. The caucus is only as good as its 51st/60th member depending on the vote in question. With 60 votes they passed a health care bill that can't pass the House without being fixed and is thus DOA unless they pass this reconciliation fix. Which won't include a public option for a variety of reasons, the most obvious of which is that the politics of it inside DC suck and these morons watch too much cable news.
The stimulus bill was a huge example of them being spineless hacks, so it doesn't really dispute my point. They ignored economic reality and cut some of the most useful funding because they needed the votes of the Maine twins. That's not exactly a glorious example of Senate Democrats being awesome.
Even the president supported glaringly easily sensible while at the same time being populist bit of student aid legislation hasn't passed the senate.
The country is fucking doomed until it gets so bad that we force a change.
We can save the government 10 billion a year AND make it easier for students to go to college. All we have to do is not give free money to banks.
NO!
It's an extension of the stopped clock principle.
And it's nowhere close to a guarantee that they will fail, regardless of how much you say it.
But hey, far be it from me to get in the way of your burning emotional need to be disappointed in your government/life/world/etc.
A brief history of the United States Senate:
Inception -> 1860, South uses it to force shitty compromises that make the North pissed, intractable situation culminates in Civil War
1865-1964 -> Segregation forever!
1918-1920 -> The League of Nations is evil and must be destroyed!
1939 -> Oops
1964-1968 -> Fair amount of not sucking, also: cedes war powers to the President. Good idea!
1969-2009 -> Passing major legislation is hard guys.
I'm going to say being optimistic about the US Senate is the extension of the stopped clock principle.
I'll be honest, I've had you on ignore for the last few days and D&D has been so much more readable.
They've waited so long on this fucking bill by the time they reexamine it, it will cost money because everything is falling apart and costs are shooting through the roof.
I just hope the US economy hold together in some fashion because our leaders are pretty much only interested in letting the place burn while they count their money while the population sits and caws that they're socialists trying to kill grandma.
Yes, I just said that, the only way out of our mess is with a Republican president. None of them ever have trouble pushing most of their agendas, and its significantly more likely we'll get one of them that happens to not want to see the nation fall apart than a Democrat with any balls.
It'll just take another decade or so. If we're lucky.
This is a marginal improvement. You don't have to be naive to think that, you just have to be able to recognize incremental progress. Before the public option was dead, now it's on life support: improvement.
I know, for example, Feingold is dubious about inserting it via reconciliation because for all his awesomeness he's a stickler for Senate rules.
And I think it's more that the public option has been revived and then killed to placate the media/Republicans so many times that I have a hard time believing this isn't just that again.
If the republicans manage to get the majority after the election Obama might as well hang up his hat and put his feet on his desk, he's got nothing to do until his term ends.
"incremental progress" doesn't matter if they take two steps back for every one step forward
and the increments are usually rolled back as soon as party leadership changes hands anyway
it's worthless
:^: :^: This thread.
Somebody can start a new one.