Which is it? "Reid met privately with four Rs to assure them that he still wanted a bipartisan bill"

[masuki bance]

Or this, just yesterday-

Source: Roll Call

July 7th, 2009

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Tuesday ordered Finance Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) to drop a proposal to tax health benefits and stop chasing Republican votes on a massive health care reform bill.

http://www.rollcall.com/news/36546-1.html

July 8th, 2009

As the Senate Finance Committee tested its own alternative funding options, Reid (D-Nev.) met privately with four Republicans active in the negotiations to assure them that he still wanted a bipartisan bill. This was a shift in tone from a day earlier, when the Democratic leadership expressed frustration with Baucus over the extensive courting of Republican senators.

"We are all committed to working on a bipartisan basis to achieving health care reform," said Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine). "He underscored his commitment and support for a bipartisan package. He wants us to work it through."

The four Republicans asked Reid to reconsider the timeline, saying it was too rigid given the scope of the bill. Several of the members said Reid suggested that he was flexible.

"We made a very strong plea that this is a very complicated issue and the deadlines are hurting," said Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), the ranking Republican on the Finance Committee. Snowe, Sen. Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.) and Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) were also in the meeting.

...

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=5D114F77-18FE-70B2-A8A2FE5748CFCC6E

Olympia Snowe: 'We are all committed to working on
a bipartisan basis to achieving health care reform.'



-----------------------------------------------------------------------




Or is it- "It's all lies!!1111! I tells ya, lies!1!!!!" ?




*eta pic from story.

[babylonsister]

1. I love the fact that everyone is trying to work this out. I see you have

a problem with that, or maybe not. What are the rethugs doing? Do you care? Links would help, too, thanks.

[masuki bance]

4. here's a link

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3957849&mesg_id=3957849

[babylonsister]

6. Sounds like the Dems are finally finding their spine. That link didn't

share anything about the rethugs' spine, or argument, or anything.

[masuki bance]

7. Who cares what the r's are doing? nt

[babylonsister]

8. Ha! Y-O-U. nt

[masuki bance]

9. Right. We don't need them to pass this, why waste time?

Why do you care so much about what they're doing?

[DJ13]

2. Reid is practicising his own version of the "Moonwalk"

Two steps forward, then sliiiiiide backwards four steps.

[Jennicut]

3. who the hell knows at this point? Reid has always had no backbone

but to dissect it day by day, hour by hour is not going to tell us where its heading. Making policy is notoriously messy.

[Arkana]

17. Leo McGarry said it: "There are two things you never want to let people

see how you make 'em: laws and sausages."

[NYC Democrat]

5. I actually agree with them on the time-line I really do not think this thing can be done by August

[riderinthestorm]

10. "Deadlines are hurting" THEIR obstructive efforts. Their stalling is killing Americans right now. nt

[vaberella]

11. Hello..these are NEWS articles. You take them with a healthy dose of skepticism.

You do this all the time. When the article is negative, you're the first to say there is some truth to it even if there is an article saying the opposite. What you need to consider is which has the substantive quotes. Like you posted yesterday an article by Janet Adamy on Rahm's so-called "statements"---anyone who reads that article can see which statements are quotes (because they're in quotations) and which are speculations or beliefs that the author made up. 98% of her article was her own interpretation of what was being said with two quotes that could be used any way she wants to sell her point.

Everyone on DU, including you believed the twit from WSJ---it coming from WSJ should have been another tip to doubt.

So the point is, that you take it with skepticism until the individual themselves makes a press hearing or their spokesman that either supports or denies a point. End of story, you need to realize that, accept it, and move on.

ie...grain of salt for everything---rather than building up on outrage that may be---just to spin a story and build up the hate.

Just like the other article you posted on this thread in regards to a Harry Reid statement on the stimulus package that actually puts Harry Reid in the right and you in the wrong, but you were spinning it as something wrong on his part.


Edited: due to horrible spelling errors.

[masuki bance]

12. For the love of all that is holy, Obama came out with a statement

and even Rahm walked back what he said. They would not have done that if what he was quoted was wrong. They would have loudly called out anyone who had lied or who had planted a false story. All the Dems referred to what Rahm was signaling, and made their voices known that they would not stand for it. That's what gets attention and gets them to change course, not blaming the papers and covering your eyes.

[vaberella]

13. First off show me Rahm's statement. And Obama would put out a correction for misinformation.

ie...The section in his primary website called "Stop the Smears" and where reporters ask him questions about smears and he responds to them with derision but definitely responds to them.

[masuki bance]

14. I can't help you, I have provided links for you in the past.

You are convinced that Rahm did not signal an openness to a trigger for the public option. Obama, Rahm and the Dems in Congress knew what he had done. Obama first, then Rahm with a much stronger statement reversed course. It's the same thing with Kerry, he signalled it, but in his case his statement never ended up reversing it his spokesperson ended with a squishy- "...and obviously if it's the only way to get universal health coverage then people will consider a trigger that ultimately guarantees a strong public option." which does not deny the story.

Anyway, it's always easier when you can just say that it's a lie. However, I have yet to see any proof from you on these 2 examples.

[Birthmark]

15. Can't Harry Reid find some job...

...to which he is better suited? He seems like a nice man who happens to be utterly lacking in the most important quality necessary for the position he occupies. Strong leadership.

Seriously, Harry, turn the job over to someone with some backbone.

[Vinca]

16. Poor Harry and his collapsible spine.

One day he's Mister Tough Guy, the next back to Mr. Milquetoast. I have zero respect for this man.