Dean: Bush would have had healthcare a long time ago

[kpete]

Source: Raw Story

Dean: Bush would have had healthcare a long time ago

By John Byrne
Wednesday, January 20th, 2010 -- 9:03 am


Dean: Bush would have had healthcare a long time ago
Howard Dean seems to be sick of Democrats' bipartisan attitude.

In sharply worded comments Tuesday night following the loss of former Sen. Ted Kennedy's (D-MA) Senate seat, the former chairman of the Democratic Party asserted that party leaders needed to bypass their quest for sixty Senate votes.

“We’ve got to be tougher," Dean quipped. "I’ve said the Democrats are not tough enough. Bush would have had the health care bill done a long time ago. He would have gone through reconciliation.”

Under reconciliation, Democrats can move to pass parts of their healthcare reform bill with a simple fifty vote majority, evading the need for a 60-vote filibuster-proof supermajority. Liberals lost their sixtieth vote with the defeat of state attorney general Martha Coakley in Massachusetts to Republican Scott Brown.

Read more: http://rawstory.com/2010/01/dean-bush-healthcare-long-time/

[xultar]

1. He is right. Now let's watch all the previous Dean lovers become haters.

[harun]

15. This Dean lover still loves him and I don't think anyone else who likes

Dean is going to fault him for stating the obvious.

I not only think they need to pound through HCR through reconciliation, I think they should use the nuclear option and destroy the 60 vote's required to end a filibuster. It isn't democratic and it is an outdated relic of a previous age.

[Highway61]

"an outdated relic of a previous age"

AMEN to that. "Change" can come by getting rid of that once and for all.

[TheWraith]

94. No, Dean is wrong.

Not hating, just stating the facts. Bush got utterly clotheslined on a similarly ambitious proposal to privatize Social Security. To say "Bush could have done it" simply doesn't reflect reality.

And by the way, for all the people suddenly in favor of the "nuclear option," were you also in favor of it when the Republicans were threatening it in order to get their judicial nominees through? And are you going to be okay with having gotten rid of it when we someday again have a Republican senate and White House?

[AlbertCat]

99. To say "Bush could have done it" simply doesn't reflect reality.

Yes, technically. But rhetorically...yes, the GOP would indeed have pushed harder with no "worries" about bipartisanship. Now I also understand that Obama's instinct tells him the American People are tired of partisan bickering that holds things up. But obviously from the result of the Health Care pre-vote season, Repugs have no intention of playing the bipartisan game. It's obvious. Does this new Senator from Massachusetts say "Bipartisan!"?

We still have a huge majority. Bi-pass the filibuster and get things passed without Repugs. They already look unreasonable and obstructionist. Play that up. Of course the MSM (and Congress) still act as if Repugs are in charge. But it's THEY who are not getting anything done. They have no ideas and are just blocking everything Dem...whether it helps the country or the people want it or not. It would help if the media and the Dems themselves would stop acting like the GOP is in charge. That is what Dean is saying. That's what his words mean.

[robinlynne]

103. Bush pushed through things that were a lot more difficult than a health care bill.

bush got democrats to sign on to wars with obvious lies for motives, spying, removal of civil liberties, torture, billions of dollars to halliburton. Everything he wanted, he got. We are still using his election systems, his patriot act, fighting his wars, today.

[tomp]

120. obviously they were NOT more difficult...

...because they got done.

sooner or later people have to stop pretending that the dems actually care about peace, justice, and the welfare of ordinary americans.

what bush did was easy because democrats agreed with him. what barack obama is pretending to try to do is easy too, apparently, because the republicans and most democrats agree with it.

the white house and the congress stiff the american people. it's easy.

[robinlynne]

135. Bush did not try to move towards the center. neither did FDR. That's how you get things

done.

[lib_wit_it]

167. Yep. Did he learn nothing from reading up on FDR?

[Demeter]

134. Howard Dean Would Have Pushed It Through By Now, Too

and he would have done it through the grassroots, which ORahma thinks is for walking upon.

[robinlynne]

136. right on.

[TheWraith]

137. Nope. "Grassroots" doesn't change Senators.

I don't know if you've forgotten all the OFA calls, parties, education, etcetera, etcetera. For some people here, "grassroots" just means "Do it the way *I* want it done!"

[Lasher]

139. Maybe you haven't heard about what just happened in Massachusetts. n/t

[suzie]

161. Howard Dean wouldn't have done anything, because he had no shot at getting

elected.

The man is a loose cannon, which is why he's talking on TV and not President.

And that's from a Dean supporter. I like the man a lot, but the public didn't.

[tblue37]

173. The public liked him fine--until the MSM did a smear job on him. nt

[bvar22]

122. Bush could have NEVER gotten away with:

Individual Mandates to BUY from the For Profits
NO Public Option
Trillion Dollar Welfare for the Big Corporations


It takes a "Democrat" to do that.


The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

[The Green Manalishi]

164. "Only Nixon could have gone to China"

[tblue37]

174. Just like "Only Nixon could go to China." nt

[harun]

111. Yes I would be for it even if we someday are back to a Republican majority in the Senate.

I was not for doing it for judicial nominees because doing it just to get a judge through was silly. However, the Republicans are now requiring a 60 vote on every single thing the Senate does just to make the Dem's look bad. I agree with what Joe Biden said about this:

As long as I have served … I’ve never seen, as my uncle once said, the constitution stood on its head as they’ve done. This is the first time every single solitary decisions has required 60 senators,” Biden said. “No democracy has survived needing a supermajority.

Too much reform is needed. To pass all of it through on 60 votes in the Senate is impossible. If the Republicans get the Senate back and they don't need 60, so be it.

[veganlush]

131. The social security thing was never popular though..

..but the HCR was popular before they gave it over to lieberman and others who turned it into welfare for corporations. They should have gotten it done when the people liked it. When the public option was possible, and people were beginning to understand what it was, that was the time.

edited to overcome shitty spelling.

[Q3JR4]

141. I've never been in favor of the nuclear option,

but somebody must point out that countries with a parliamentary do not have a filibuster and they seem to do all right, so I don't know.

Q3JR4.

[harun]

146. Majority have Universal Health care.

[Autonomy]

168. Thank you

the same people calling for reconcilliation and the 'nuclear option' were supporting filibuster as the only way to preserve democracy when Bush was president. We do away with the filibuster, and Republicans will someday have the chance they need to do more damage to this republic than Bush was ever able to get away with.

[PatrynXX]

119. Once a Dean lover always a dean lover

kinda like al gore :P

[juajen]

127. I love this post.

Wouldn't it be great if this election brings on some needed shrewdness and a scalpel to carve out the fat that is crushing this country. Health care reform is not only a dem issue, it affects everybody.

I still love Dean, also, most of the time. I have found that it is not wise to love any politician all the time.

[wordpix]

158. +1 Dean is showing real leadership here, which I don't see many other Dem "leaders" doing

I'm talking about Barack O., Reid et. al. Dean will get his licks for saying the obvious, but he's right.

[Hawkeye-X]

20. Same here - he's right.

I stand by Dean.

What was the quote about truth being hell - oh yes. Harry S Truman once said: "I never gave anybody hell! I just told the truth and they thought it was hell."

Dean is telling the brutal truth.

Hawkeye-X

[Mithreal]

21. "haters" of what?

[peace frog]

22. Say what?!

Dean lovers don't become Dean haters. We appreciate the man and his honesty too much to turn on a dime.

[Ruby the Liberal]

32. Not this one. He is right.

[Dr.Phool]

35. Dean is providing something sorely needed by Democrats.

LEADERSHIP!

Reid can't provide it. Pelosi can't provide it. And Obama hasn't provided it.

It's time to kick-ass, take names, and banish the Republicans to the wilderness they belong in. They are not interested in bi-partisanship. They're ONLY interested in obstructionism. Trying to placate them makes us look weak.

[wordpix]

159. +1 My post is basically same as yours on this subject

[alberg]

54. Why would I become a Dean hater?

If we don't need the 60 votes anymore then we don't need all the sellout compromises that were made to get the current disaster of a bill passed. That means we can have a strong Public Option, real regulatory control of the insurance companies, expansion of Medicare enrollment etc. We have the 51 votes to pass these things right now - especially if Obama comes out strongly for them. Dean understands this. It's what he's been saying all along.

[Mithreal]

61. May have been more than one way to read xultar's comment

My first reading of it was to think Dean lovers becoming Dean haters, but my second thought was that it was more likely Dean lovers becoming Obama haters which seems to be the most common theme when hater is mentioned. I hate that phrase though so I would like to be wrong. However, I think the statement is more powerful given the second meaning. That said I think either interpretation is oversimplification at best and ignorant flamebait at worst.

[xultar]

106. Nope, your first was right. Dean lovers becoming Dean haters...you know how DU is

they love you one second and hate you the next.

[Mithreal]

108. Gotcha, I like to think the best of you

:hi:

[TheEuclideanOne]

58. No way! Dean lovers are that way because he says things exactly like this!

We need more people to make points like he makes and, more importantly, politicians to take on his attitude (including the pres). If anything, Dean Supporters will support him more as a result.

[freddie mertz]

64. Ain't gonna happen. Dean lovers love him for his honesty.

Don't you get it?

[shadowknows69]

86. Nope, sorry, still a Deaniac.

[anigbrowl]

100. No, I'm fine with it - it's a point worth making

I think both strategies work out OK in the long term. by following the 60 vote strategy, Reid and Obama don't get reform done as fast, but on the other hand they can legitimately say 'we tried working with the Republicans for a whole year and they wouldn't cooperate with us on anything'. I didn't want Obama to start governing like Bush as soon as he came into office. It's frustrating not to be able to do an 'anti-Bush' and push through progressive legislation at high speed, but refraining from doing so pays better dividends over the long term, IMHO, by denying free ammo to the GOP.

[Capn Sunshine]

109. how does that work again?

Howard is always right, so far.

I wonder if we'd used reconciliation if we would have this tea bagger thing?

[emilyg]

123. I still love him.

[Forkboy]

133. This predictions looks about as good as my Coakley by 8 prediction.

;)

[Ken Burch]

151. Dean's talking about leadership style, not ideology.

So far(and this is a horrible thing to realize)this is what we have to face up to:

Bush got stuff DONE(it was reprehensible stuff, stuff the people never wanted, but he got it done).

Obama hasn't got ANYTHING done(even though the things he supposedly want are overwhelmingly supported by the people in principle...like universal healthcare and making it easier to form a union).

What we're seeing here is the failure of safeness and niceness and blandness. You'd HAVE to agree on that if you're at all honest.

[onehsaquestion]

2. Do It

Go ahead.

Would you like gift wrapping on that election you're about to hand to the Republicans?

[Myrina]

8. False argument.

Looking at the headlines, it appears a Republican got elected last night despite Obama's 'bi-partisan strategy' was used.
A new thought process is called for.

Try another strawman though, we've got time.

[Igel]

13. Hardly.

"Bipartisan" amounted to "fall in line behind us." Because * and the repubs that mindlessly followed him in lock-step screwed things up and are really entirely and solely responsible for the country's messes.

When that didn't work, it was redefined to mean "including a few ideas that we dems think are widely accepted by all repubs because a repub said them." Even as everybody says "the repubs" are firmly behind defending the big insurance companies and the status quo.

When that didn't work, it was redefined to mean "having accepted lots of repub amendments, regardless of the content of those amendments--public option versus altering the punctuation, what's the diff?" And then saying that all the repubs want is to hurt dems because, well, they're mean and nasty.

Then the narrative shifted a bit: "We've never said anything bad about repubs, Obama's taken responsibility instead of trying to blame * and the opposition party."

Obama was bipartisan briefly, at the beginning of his term. The repubs didn't roll and the blame game started.

Now, I don't necessarily think that Dean was right in what he said. * didn't always get what he wanted and often had to compromise. Which is to say, he'd say, "I want X, Y, and Z" and might get, at the end, "X, 2/3 Y, and 1/10 Z". Take the first stimulus package for this recession, for instance. He didn't get what he want, and many dems kept saying that the stimulus wasn't important nor needed to be big. Fend off the recession 3 months in or 13 months in, which is easier?

The problem is one of bias in perception. Any concession by our side is viewed as monumental. Any win by their side means we utterly failed to win. That sums up much of the current blather about "bipartisanship" in a nutshell. You want bipartisanship, look at NCLB. You may hate the bill, I may hate the bill, but it was bipartisan. Even voting Medicare into law was bipartisan.

But since I don't think Dean is necessarily right in what he said in the OP for this thread, it gives me a bit of leeway to disagree with him perhaps a bit when he says, "People who blame others are losers. If you want to win elections, you stop blaming and get to work."

[johnfunk]

16. Grover Norquist, bless his black soul, is right: "Bipartisanship" = Date Rape

... and it isn't Dems doing the raping.

[liberation]

78. I prefer Carlin's words “bipartisan means some larger-than-usual deception is being carried out"

The old fool was correct, as usual.

[stillrockin]

31. Howard Dean is 100% correct.

[murray hill farm]

33. Yes!!!

He is 100% right!

[liberation]

75. So when exactly did Obama stop being "bipartisan?"

We all must have missed his recent spine growth.

And I would not consider the "concessions" that the Dems made on the whole HCR debacle neither insignificant nor trivial. When you handle a health insurance reform by giving the insurance companies everything they wanted (and more) while completely stifling the middle and working classes... that is pretty fucking far from a mere "concession." And that is one among many policy items in which the Dems have not only caved but failed us miserably....

[Mithreal]

27. I am not seeing this as a strawman at all. Sorry. Convince me better.

[TheEuclideanOne]

60. Not seeing the logic in your argument.

It seems completely backwards in my opinion. I would argue that the Republican got elected as a result of Obama's bi-partisan strategy.

[TomClash]

14. Weclome to DU!

why not make a $50 contribution before you are tombstoned.

[msongs]

24. nice try but it's the past year of weak leadership that will do any election handing nt

[go west young man]

45. Fearmonger much?

That fear (which is a right wing trait) has cost us far too much already. It's time to follow Dr. Dean's advice and shove health care down their throats. Then the DLC/DNC will take the mid terms because they stood for something for a change.

[Tempest]

68. You're wrong

Rasmussen's polling from last night shows that people are disappointed with the pace of Obama's policies, not with the policies themselves.

Coakley got the most votes from people who said health care reform was their number one priority.

Enjoy your short stay.

[Mithreal]

79. Was that people who voted or the ones who did not?

I pretty much ignore polls, but if you are going to cite them, some context, think that is the right word, would be appreciated, please and thank you.

[Tempest]

121. Ones who voted

There's two polls out from last night, one from Rasmussen and one commissioned by MoveOn.

Both say the same thing, Obama is weak on Wall Street and the health care bill is fatally flawed.

[Mithreal]

124. Thank you. I suspected the #s were only from those who voted

Will keep an ear out for the MoveOn poll.

[Tempest]

140. Correction to MoveOn commissioned poll

The company conducting the poll also spoke to Democratic voters who sat out the election.

[Mithreal]

147. thanks : )

[Myrina]

3. ... and Bush would have what HE Wanted in the bill ...

... what was good for HIS base, as opposed to selling out to the other side (which unfortunately means we probably would have the same bill under him as is now floating around DC) rather than all the 'bipartisan' bullshit which has led to this lame-ass insurance company giveaway/indentured servitude bill.

[Mithreal]

26. delete

[bluethruandthru]

4. As I keep saying...

Why did we bend over to the repubs and moderates and allow them to gut the HCR bill....when we knew they would never vote for it!!

[ShortnFiery]

5. For all his faults, Dubya was NOT "conflict adverse." That's President Obama's PROBLEM.

Wanting to be everybody's BUDDY.

A GREAT LEADER is not "everybody's pal."

A Great Leader FIGHTS for what is morally sound and often times is not recognized until years after his/her death.

Too many politicians want to win "American Idol" not behave as "A Great Leader."

[whathehell]

10. You are absolutely correct...One can't be a "conflict averse"

president and hope to get ANYTHING accomplished...Especially when one is dealing with the rabidly aggressive Republican party.

If you can't fight..You're not suited for the job, simple as that

[MissDeeds]

12. Agreed

He has to fight for change. It's not happening.

[polpilot]

11. He has 'buddy addiction'. Get help Obama!!!!!

[SammyWinstonJack]

29. He's buddy addiction isn't working for those who got him elected. So yeah, Get help Obama.

:thumbsup:

[lib2DaBone]

82. Mr. Obama reaches across aisle with his one remaining hand....

Do you think he has learned yet? I don't think so.. no hope, no change,

[Divine Discontent]

36. ha! 'everyone's buddy' - I just was shown a personality thing for someone born on his birthdate,

and it said he wanted to be everyone's friend, and believed that everything would work itself out.

Regardless of the accuracy of the profile/personality thing, that is this president through year 1, at least how the most of the public perceives him.

How could he not get a Public Option done with the large majorities in Congress? I would have told them right after the inaugural that we're doing HC first, it's a mandate by the people, the biggest problem, etc - and held them to getting it done. Otherwise, he was going to face this kind of slow political end, where he ended up being a 50/50 chance at re-election a year after his inaugural, which ain't none too impressive.

[liberation]

81. The problem with Mr. Obama is not that he needs to be "everyone's buddy" (a Leo trait BTW)

His problem (although it is more like our problem really) is that he is not that interested in being our buddy.

This whole "bipartisan" and "everybody's buddy" crap would imply that Obama has thrown bones to both the left and the right. However for such a left handed fella, he sure has trown 99% of his bones with his right hand, hasn't he?

[Not Me]

6. I have said that repeatedly.

I live in Alan Grayson's district (Orlando). He won a gerrymandered strong Republican seat away from an 8 year incumbent and has since been an attack dog. The locals Repub's have pretty much written off this seat. They can't find anyone to run against the guy.
Obama: take notice.

[BonnieJW]

18. You are sooooo lucky

to have Grayson as your rep!

[midnight]

89. Good advice....

[Iowa]

142. We could use Grayson to replace Obama in 2012...

Grayson appears to be the real deal.

[704wipes]

163. We need less blue dogs and more Attack Dogs like Grayson

Fuck bipartisanship we still have a fucking MAJORITY. USE the motherfucker.
If we don't, I have no reason to vote for Bayh in November and I WILL FUCKING NOT,
I will vote for the person with the best chance to kick him to the curb, regardless of who it is.

Enough Blue Dog Bullshit. I'm over it.
And if the DLC and the DNC is not then fuck it, I am over them too.

[BeyondGeography]

7. Asinine

The shit Bush ran through reconciliation was corporate wet-dream stuff that his narrowly-focused, homogeneous party could fairly easily get behind. There are a multitude of reasons why using the same approach for health care with the Democratic Party is far more problematic.

Stop jacking off about a Bush-style presidency, Howard. It doesn't become you.

[still_one]

19. Actually that is true, however republicans always stuck together, Democrats never have, and that

is where Howard's assessment is wrong

Dean's 50 state strategy brought Democrats victory, but it also brought in-fighting

[BeyondGeography]

25. If Obama can be an effective President of the Democrats, he'll be fine

What people should appreciate is that's harder than being President of the Republicans.

[Mithreal]

40. Right, winning brought such in-fighting.

Confused people with the idea that Dems wanted to govern all of America.

And empowering the grassroots was always poor strategy for DLC, New Dem, corporate shill types, would come back to bite the party in the ass.

[semillama]

73. What, there wasn't in-fighting before Dean?

The 50 state strategy was the best thing democrats have done politically in the last 10 years, in my opinion. We as a party ignore Dean at our peril.

[liberation]

84. Indeed....

.... I love the whole creative history re-writing by the DLC.

I guess they don't want us to remember the clusterfuck that was the 90s when the Clintons pissed the base off so much that the Dems ended up losing both houses and and thus the "contract on America crap" was enabled. They even shoveled Dick Morris down our throats to get Clinton re-elected at any cost. And of course the Gore 2000 campaign was an ode of unity and professionalism... because it was such a well ran campaign. Etc, etc.

Hadn't been for Dean, it is doubtful Obama would have won the election. And honestly against such lame ducks like the worst president in modern US history and the most insanely incompetent dynamic duo sired by the GOP to substitute him, Obama's win margin wasn't that impressive. And I am sure the Dems would have managed to lose even that election hadn't the 50 state strategy not been in place, and let's not forget that Dean brought a certain level of discipline to the DNC. A lot of people do not grasp who utterly incompetent was the previous DNC chair.


The main problem for the Dems is that they never understood that the DLC is a cancer, and rather than getting rid of it. They instead removed the cure, and now... once again the DLC is getting back in charge. That is why the Dems end up offering such a compromising, spineless and useless milquetoast candidate that they even managed to lose one of the most iconic spots in the senate. Of course, the DLC will use their own abject failure as the very reason why the base should be even more abused.

[RaleighNCDUer]

41. And that narrowly-focused, homogeneous party could not do a fucking thing

without MASSIVE aid from 'compromising' Democrats. Yet they still pushed through some of the most atrocious legislation this nation has ever seen since the Fugitive Slave Act.

They start with the outrageous and the Dems say 'OK'. We start with weak-assed shit, and compromise down from there.

Which method works?

[Mithreal]

42. "jacking off"

:wtf:

[Nite Owl]

9. That's only if Obama really

wanted what he campaigned on and not the resulting bill from the Senate. He surrounded himself with so many DLC, Wall St. types that you gotta question that. He's no dummy so the Senate bill can't be an accident.

[Mithreal]

49. The other side prides themselves on electing dumbasses, not us

Obama is brilliant and many Dem legislators are as well. How they use it otoh.

“In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.” FDR

[still_one]

17. Does anyone really believe they will be tougher? Listening to Frank and others, nothing

will change, and HCR is history

[Mithreal]

50. Despair is not an option. You left out the people. We are powerful.

Don't let anyone tell you different. You just have to figure out what you will do and how you can help other people realize it.

[ejbr]

23. Dems are too weak and misguided to do what is right...

I hope I'm wrong.

[Mithreal]

51. So guide them. Make them do what we want. No more carrots, lot more stick.

Make them uncomfortable, make them feel our suffering.

Never give up, never you know what I mean.

[ejbr]

145. But when I see them caving in to the likes of Lieberman,

I LITERALLY want to use a stick on them!!

[Mithreal]

148. Me too. There was a reason Obama chose Lieberman as his mentor.

[ProSense]

28. Bush was a great leader?

Dems, acknowledging that the RW was right one comment at at time.

[Divine Discontent]

37. a horrible leader that ignored everyone else, did his signing statements and signed in what he

wanted that was sent to him, and bullied just enough votes in Congress to get his agenda through. The president is the most important cog in American politics, and should have their mandates heeded. Obama had one imho.

[Mithreal]

55. There is the question of effectiveness at pushing an agenda that cannot be ignored.

No one here would accuse Bush of being a great leader and you know it.

An example of the President's effectiveness is and will be his response to Haiti. The Bush crime family worked to destroy Haiti as I understand it and let over 1800 people drown in New Orleans and sat on their asses for nearly a week while people suffered. If President Obama deserves the praise for his humanitarian mission to Haiti he also has to take the criticism that goes with his shortcomings in his agenda. Dems are much more honest people. We tend to see both the positive and negative and don't look away from suffering. So, with the praise will come the criticism and I wouldn't have it any other way.

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

115. Dean's commenting on style, not ideology

Bush had a single-mindness of purpose which pushed through all obstacles. Don't have a super-majority? Use reconciliation. Still not able to get what you want? Issue an Executive Order. Still not getting everything you want? Just do it, admit you're breaking the law and keep going. He was stubborn, and damned proud of it.

Bush's agenda sucked big time -- beyond that, since it was aimed at nothing less than remaking the American system of government into a unitary president accountable to no one -- but he was effective at implementing it.

Obama is proving to lack that laser focus it takes to accomplish anything in Washington. The Repugs have found his weak spot -- he avoids conflict -- and are exploiting it to the fullest.

The fact that Obama's appointments and reversals on long-held positions (universal health care) is disappointing, to say the least. "Majority rules" (while protecting the rights of the minority) is supposed to be the law of the land. He won by a substantial majority, and has the 60 Senate votes he needs to make things happen. There's no question he has the backing of the voters (70% want single-payer healthcare) to bring change to Washington; he just lacks the killer instinct Bush had. In that I think Dean is right.

Unfortunately I am afraid that the result of Brown on the WH will be to circle the wagons. Obama's advisors, Rahm specifically, have their own agendas, and like Cheney (evil) know how to guide Obama in the direction that supports their goals. Taking single-payer healthcare off the table before negotiations begins has Rahm's fingerprints all over it.

BTW, I still think Bush should be tried for all his crimes, both foreign and domestic, and that every one of his EOs be overturned.

[SlingBlade]

30. “We’ve got to be tougher"

And THAT is and has been the problem with the Obama Administration AND Congress since 2006

War Criminals walk free, Health Care Reform has been hijacked by pipsqueaks such as
Joe LIEberman who has made a career out of backstabbing democrats and then these so
called blue dog (DINO) democrats who have run the entire show.

This is the democratic party today, Afraid to stand up for what they SAY are their principles

Howard Dean is 100% correct.

Democrats need to be tougher, The rest of it is just Bull Shit grandstanding by a sorry lot
of weak kneed slack jawed DINO'S who are at this moment celebrating THEIR victory.

Enough !

[suzie]

44. So, you're a prosecutor and you're absolutely sure that we can put cases

together against all your "war criminals", just like that?

And you were undoubtedly the biggest Kerry supporter in the nation? Since John Kerry is the only person who ever really investigated high level crimes.

So, where are the "We missed out when we didn't elect John Kerry" threads?

[Mithreal]

62. When people gloat about how their candidate would have been better, you are there

fighting them. I am way cool with that.

But when they are not mentioning their favorite past candidate you are egging them on to do so.

:wtf:

[jillan]

34. Yep - that idiot bsh was able to get his agenda done without a super majority.

What am I missing here? How could he do it and Obama can't?????

[ProSense]

39. Bush failed at Social Security privatization and a host of other things.

The notion that Bush got everything he wanted is bogus. What he did was nothing and stalled progress on anything for nearly a decade.

If Bush was such a great leader, there would have been no Obama.

[jillan]

59. The Patriot Act, Prescription Drug giveaway to the insurance cos., No Child Left Behind

Invading Iraq - just to name a few. Roberts & Alito.

Don't get the message twisted - bsh was the worst President in history, but he was able to get his agenda passed thru congress.

[Mithreal]

65. No one here thinks Bush was a great leader. He did get MOST OF his agenda passed.

Few exceptions, no one questions that.

"The notion that Bush got everything he wanted is bogus." is a STRAW MAN.

[wordpix]

155. * might have gotten that passed, had it not been for 9-11 interfering

[Madman of the People]

38. Dems: Grow a pair of balls, already!

When are the Democrats going to finally grow a pair of balls
and fight just as dirty as the Republicskums?  When two
opponents face each other in the ring, you can't have one side
abiding by the Marquis of Queensbury rules while the other
side fights with brass knuckles and a shiv up their sleeve. 
It's time for the Dems to fight just as mean an dirty as the
Republicscums do!

It's the only way we're ever going to win.


Madman of the People

[Quantess]

175. Welcome to DU!

:hi:

[Botany]

43. Dean speaks for me

“We’ve got to be tougher," Dean quipped. "I’ve said the Democrats are not tough enough. Bush
would have had the health care bill done a long time ago. He would have gone through reconciliation.”

There's not much “real” reform in the Senate bill either way, Dean said

[Gin]

47. I agree with Dean

g

[louis-t]

72. Only if he 'wanted' a health care bill.

bush didn't want health care reform. Neither do any of the repugs. I don't care how many times they say it's needed. They will do nothing. They will NOT "get it right" because they don't want it.

[wordpix]

156. +1

[goforit]

46. Yep the Dems have been nothing but patsies!!! Go Dean, but watch your back!!!

[big poppa]

48. health care reform

The Obama administration screwed up by allowing Congress to come up with the plan. Obama should have presented them with a plan within the first week after the inauguration and then let Congress "flesh out" the plan for implementation while maintaining the spirit of the white House plan.
Once it was left up to Congress it was delayed needlessly by the Republicans and certain members of the Democratic party who had there own little agendas on healthcare reform.
We would have health care done last summer.

[Botany]

53. Do you know anything about how a bill is passed?

Congress writes the bills not the President.

[Divine Discontent]

57. they probably were better off in just saying O blew it. What's the old sayin'?

A fish rots from the head down? Rahm and the White House Admin. have not been stellar, to say the least.

[joeybee12]

67. The President can tell them what he wants...he didn't give any guidelines,

no markers, and he just let the most dysfunctional family in the world go at it.

[Mithreal]

69. The Executive branch negotiated the terms of surrender

so don't propagate the lie that the Obama admin had nothing to do with the bill.

[Mithreal]

71. The Senate Finance Committee bill was the Obama bill with some amendments

here and there.

The Obama admin fought progressive amendments to that bill. The reason, it would nullify deals brokered with PhRMA and the Too Big To Fail Insurance companies.

Please make an effort to find out for yourself.

[NeeDeep]

52. Pass it in pieces - first would be their insurance monopoly and

getting rid of their choke hold. Anytime centralization occurs as in insurance at some point it needs heavy regulation like our utilities or it needs to be broken up. Unnatural monopolies - health insurance providers, oil companies, walmart, all take advantage of their position and the consumer pays and pays one way or another. No competition can save us if it doesn't exist and spineless politicians just allow these corporations to keep throwing dirt on the grave.

[Wizard777]

56. If they want bipartisanship. America will give them bipartisanship.

Now who else wants to lose their seat to bipartisanship? We did not get this super majority by playing nice with the republicans. We will not maintain or increase the super majority by playing nice with the republicans. The only thing Democrats trying to play nice with the republicans says is that it's safe to vote republican again. If the Democrats don't get to kicking the Republicans in the teeth at every given opportunity and if they don't have a given opportunity. They need to create opportunities to kick the republicans in the teeth. The democrats need to tell Obama point blank. We're not going to play nice with the Republicans and you can't make us! Welcome to reality. You can have bipartisanship or you can have your bills passed. But you will not get both. Obama must choose between repairing the damage the Republicans have done to America or repairing the damage the Republicans have done to the Republican party. It's really THAT damned simple.

[AzDar]

63. And he's right.

:-(

[sufrommich]

66. He's right. nt

[Rosa Luxemburg]

70. what's stopping them?

let's get a good healthcare system which actually benefits people through reconciliation!!!!

[Stumbler]

74. Well, that's kinda obvious

The one thing I'm most disappointed about the Obama administration is their insistence on bipartisanship after 8 years of strict Republican-only partisanship in Washington. I don't understand why they've broken the golden rule of politics: Help your friends, punish your enemies. *sigh*

[Jefferson23]

76. Dean, thank goodnness you speak out. Here is Glenn Greenwald on how progressives

are already being blamed for Coakely's loss and ultimately are to blame for health care reform to fall apart, lol.(remainder in full at link.)

Wednesday, Jan 20, 2010 08:21 EST

It's the fault of the all-powerful Left

By Glenn Greenwald
(updated below)

I have a contribution this morning to the New York Times examining the Scott Brown victory, and I'll post the link to it once it's up. But for the moment, I want to address two equally moronic themes emerging over the last couple of days which seek to blame the omnipotent, dominant, super-human "Left" for the Democrats' woes -- one coming from right-wing Democrats and the other from hard-core Obama loyalists (those two categories are not mutually exclusive but, rather, often overlap).

Last night, Evan Bayh blamed the Democrats' problems on "the furthest left elements," which he claims dominates the Democratic Party -- seriously. And in one of the dumbest and most dishonest Op-Eds ever written, Lanny Davis echoes that claim in The Wall St. Journal: "Blame the Left for Massachusetts" (Davis attributes the unpopularity of health care reform to the "liberal" public option and mandate; he apparently doesn't know that the health care bill has no public option , that the public option was one of the most popular provisions in the various proposals, and the "mandate" is there to please the insurance industry, not "the Left," which, in the absence of a public option, hates the mandate; Davis' claim that "candidate Obama's health-care proposal did not include a public option" is nothing short of an outright lie).

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/index.html?story=/opinion/greenwald/2010/01/20/left

[stevietheman]

77. The House should just pass the bad Senate bill, and then push fixes...

as subsequent legislation using reconciliation in the Senate.

[liberation]

88. Or, here is a "radical" idea, maybe the reps and senators could do their damned jobs

and actually write a decent bill. It is not rocket science really.

I am at a loss how the passing of a bill which is verbatim from health insurance lobbyist should even be an option. Passing an utter piece of shit bill, just for the sake of passing it... and expect us to believe it will be "fixed" later on, even though there are almost no examples of such a thing having happened in the 200+ years of our nation's history. It is either a desperate attempt at stalling any due criticism, or an expression of utter contempt for the intelligence of the average American.


So why don't the congress critters and senators actually do their damned jobs? If they pass such a piece of shit bill, what exactly is your basis to claim it can be fixed later on.... when later on they will have absolutely no incentive to fix it?

[april]

80. Dean is so right .The dems have no backbone

[WinkyDink]

83. Dean's point is well-taken. But his specific example is not.

[scytherius]

85. Absolutely!!!! Obama and the Dems are a DISASTER

This loss in MA is a major blessing. Either the Dems will change (unlikely) or the establishment Dems will be voted out and hopefully new and better leaders will emerge.

[RobinA]

102. Can I Have

some of what you are smoking? The media screamers and Repub base are calling the shots in this country. Have been for some time. One would have thought that the recent economic disaster would have scared some people awake, but apparently not. It seems we need an even worse disaster to turn things around.

The MA loss was because Brown probably (I didn't follow it) said the "T" (as in "taxes") word a couple million times and everybody went to the polls to vote against the socialist regime and their deficit spending. So-called. Bottom line is most voters do not want anything that will cost tax money today in order to help anyone besides themselves today. No one thinks they will be sick the day before they are diagnosed, no one thinks they will be laid off the day before they are, no American thinks they will be in any kind of trouble the day before they are, because trouble is the result of sin and only other people are sinners. Until the majority of people in this country are out of work/uninsured/without retirement money/eating from the food pantry, are we going to see this attitude change.

[highplainsdem]

87. Dean's right. K&R

[Dr.Phool]

90. Howard Dean speaks for me!

[athenasatanjesus]

91. Im guessing that the reality is

that there are more then only 8 democrats in the Senate that would kill any bill that didn't help the health industry.

[Hubert Flottz]

92. K&R

Howard Dean 2012!

[stray cat]

93. SS is not in the stock market, and employers still contribute to health care benefits

Bush wanted to change both

[SanchoPanza]

95. Not quite.

The clearest analogue to HCR that the Republican Party has in its platform is the privatization of Social Security. That's something they've wanted to do since the program's inception, over 70 years ago. Bush tried that in 2005 and it never even got out of a congressional committee. It was a miserable failure.

And the parts that could pass through reconciliation would hardly qualify as significant reform. You can't pass anything that doesn't pertain to the budget, which means no insurance reforms are possible. And the nature of reconciliation would mean that a few committee chairmen would have complete control over the entire process, as it's incredibly difficult to pass amendments.

The package Dean proposed in 2004, for instance (expanding SCHIP and Medicaid, add a Medicare buy-in, and give tax credits to people who still won't qualify for either) could pass through reconciliation but it wouldn't cover as many people. It's better than the status quo, but not better than the current reforms.

[happygoluckytoyou]

96. BLESSING IN DISGUISE--->

with bipartisianship sounding more like bipartishianshiT.... this loss of 60 is not such a bad thing....
we NEVER really had JOMAMA LIARMAN
we NEVER really had a few of the BLUE DOGS

so LETS GO WITH THE MAJORIT WE HAVE AND GIT'ER'DONE

......as much as i hated DUBYA.... you have to ask which is worse.... a jerk getting bad ideas completed.... a different jerk NOT getting anything donw

SORRY SLOW-BAMA NO-GO-BAMA MO-JO-BAMA WATCHING-GRASS-GROWBAMA but TAKE OF THE F'ING GLOVES AND GET THIS PASSED OR FOREVER LOSE YOUR BASE
(guess all that bi-part-shit didn't win you many republican votes---- but you sure lost a lot of dems)

[SandWalker1984]

97. The Dems didn't just screw up.....

....they got PAID to screw us, by the health care corporations that we have been paying to screw us for years.

Everyone that thinks the Senate version of health "care" reform is a bad bill needs to contact their members of the House of Representatives and tell them loudly DO NOT VOTE YES TO ACCEPT THE SENATE BILL AS WRITTEN. Otherwise, this could be our future...


Dems look at bypassing Senate health care vote

Jan 17, 11:30 PM (ET)
By CHARLES BABINGTON


BOSTON (AP) - A panicky White House and Democratic allies scrambled Sunday for a plan to salvage their hard-fought health care package in case a Republican wins Tuesday's Senate race in Massachusetts, which would enable the GOP to block further Senate action.

The likeliest scenario would require persuading House Democrats to accept a bill the Senate passed last month, despite their objections to several parts.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20100118/D9D9U7Q80.html

*************************

So, that means we would be stuck with the Senate version of "health care" reform, the version that is mostly about keeping corporate profits intact and full of loopholes such as:


Provisions permitting insurers and companies to charge more than double to employees who fail “wellness” programs because they have diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol readings, or other medical conditions.

Insurers permitted to sell policies “across state lines”, exempting patient protections passed in other states. Insurers will thus set up in the least regulated states in a race to the bottom threatening public protections won by consumers in various states.

Insurers can charge four times more based on age plus more for certain conditions, and continue to use marketing techniques to cherry-pick healthier, less costly enrollees.

Insurers may continue to rescind policies for “fraud or intentional misrepresentation” – the main pretext insurance companies now use to cancel coverage.


And don't give me that crap about it can be amended later to make it better. Bill Clinton & Congress promised us we could revisit NAFTA in 6 months after passage and it's the "gift" that still keeps giving. In the last few months we've lost thousands more manufacturing jobs to Mexico and overseas.

[katty]

98. bush/cheney did whatever the F*** they wanted to! That's what

the Dems need to do!

[AlbertCat]

101. bush/cheney did whatever the F*** they wanted to! That's what the Dems need to do!

No..the Dems don't need to break the law or lie.

[katty]

104. they aren't doing that - or anything. no worries there

[jwirr]

105. But President Obama wanted to be nice to the repugs. So we played

Rahm's games. Hopefully they have learned something from this but too little too late.

[Lasher]

114. They haven't learned a damn thing.

What's going on in the Senate and Oval Office right now? Setting up a commission to gut Social Security. Maybe then Grover Norquist and his pals will like them.

[katty]

153. hopefully, but 'play nice' has never worked with the GOP

so I don't know what the hell the Dems are waiting FOR??!!! - the GOP to give them an engraved invitation to the negotiating table?!! Not ever gonna happen.

[Gregorian]

107. Yes, but with Bush came an entire propaganda machine. One we don't get to use.

How much of that helped him pass legislation, I don't know. Maybe I'm full of it. But public opinion plays a role, and it is swayed by the Pretty Propaganda People.

[Democat]

110. Democrats Never Learn - The Clock is Ticking

The Republicans are just running out the clock until they regain the majority. They spent years running out the clock on Clinton and now they'll do it to Obama. Then they'll get someone into office and push through as much as they can as fast as they can, like they did with Bush. And our side will sit around and look surprised that it worked again.

Obama didn't learn from Clinton or Bush, apparently.

[NoFace]

125. I totally agree.

Obama has wasted the nation's goodwill toward him trying to make friendly with calculating reptilians.

[barb162]

112. I think Dean's right. n/t

[patrice]

113. Am I the only one wondering if the rest of us aren't getting lost in a struggle between two factions

of the DLC?

[robo50]

118. Do you want to stay lost or do you want to get a meaningful HCR bill passed?

It's as simple as that, really, let's get it done, get the elderly their prescriptions, break the insurance monopoly price-fixing, let drug companies compete in the entire real world for pricing, where drugs in Canada cost 1/10th as much as they do here.

Obama, get off your speaker podium and get to work. I'm so sick of excuses and speeches, I want results, and so do the rest of Americans. 365 days so far, and what have we gained?

[patrice]

126. I am with you on that. I was just wondering HOW it was that the rug got pulled out from under

some people who had certain expectations of the Kennedy legacy.

[Deep13]

116. So would Hillary.

It would not have been everything we wanted either, but she would have gotten something passed that would be an improvement over what we are getting. She would not have done it by being the professor, but by being the school yard bully who knows which arms to twist, where the bodies are buried and where to find spots for future buried bodies.

[BrklynLiberal]

117. Truthtellers do so at the risk of being vilified.

I think Dr Dean is very courageous and admire his willingness to step forward when all the others are "admiring the Emperor's new clothes".

[winyanstaz]

128. I still like Dean....plus...he is correct

Bush would have been in their faces everyday screaming for whatever part of the bill he wanted.
He would have been on tv every day as well...making Congress that didnt vote for it look even worse.
Obama obviously didnt care about the public option enough to fight for it.

[varelse]

129. Wish he'd wanted that for us, instead of all the tax breaks to the "have-mores"

Oh, and endless war.

[tonekat]

130. Enough with the bipartisanship, It Doesn't Work!

Every time Obama extends an Olive Branch, he gets kicked to the curb!

I don't remember this happening in the previous 8 years with Bush.

If only they'd just stop shooting themselves in the foot!

They let a bunch of stupid teabaggers run the debate all summer!

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

132. Consider me a Dean fan now

I was always skeptical of him, and he wasn't among my favorites in '04, but now he's just fucking right.

[defendandprotect]

138. Love Howard and he's correct -- but he's being very kind to Obama/Dems today . . .

We need to boot Rahm and the DLC out of the White House --

[Mithreal]

150. Absolutely. But then Obama would be unemployed.

[h9socialist]

143. Frankly, I think the Dean approach will come up empty, too . . .

But, we might as well try it, since the standard procedure ain't working . . .

This should be a "wake up call." A call to wake up and accept the obvious truth that American "democracy" has become cynical and decrepit. The only way to improve things is a massive, if not revolutionary re-write of the US Constitution. Right now, the institutions sanctioned by the Constitution are acting in complete accordance with Madison's Tenth Federalist Paper. In the 10th Federalist, Madison essentially explains how the US Constitution was designed to frustrate democracy --> reason being that debtors and poor folks make up the "majority" and if that majority acted effectively on its own behalf, it would be terrible for the creditors and rich folks who wrote the Constitution.

Let's re-open the Constitution -- and if we start a revolution, Hurray!

[BlueIdaho]

144. Of the corportions and by the corporations...

The reason we don't have a health care bill? A lack of political will on the part of the WH, the House, and the Senate. Lets face it, if Democrats really wanted a health CARE bill they could have done it by now. Period. What we have witnessed instead is endless political posturing by virtually every Democrat who stands in front of a TV camera. We've heard about their anguish over their home districts, we've seen their hand wringing over budget deficits, and with each version - we have seen health care reform made worse and finally turned into a health insurance bonanza.

Lets face it - you can't make things this bad unless you are trying, and oh how they are trying. The power of corporations and the powerlessness of American citizens has never been more painfully obvious. Greed trumps greater good. Money talks and nobody walks.

Who is left to speak for ordinary citizens in America the corporatist nation?

Who indeed.

[Crunchy Frog]

149. Let's face it. Repubs know how to exercise power, Dems don't.

They wield power effectively whether they're in the minority or the majority. We've just had the biggest majority that we're going to see in a long time, and our party has pissed it away. The Repubs would do whatever they have to do to get what they want. Our party will miss an opportunity that's handed to it on a silver platter.

I've pretty much had it.

[wordpix]

157. unfortunately, you're right---Dems like to play "nicey-nice" & go along to get along

I learned long ago in some local environmental battles that you cannot deal with the repukes in a nicey-nice way. They don't play nice, they lie, cheat and distort, they don't do their homework, they have no vision and a lot of them are idiots, to boot.

Dems need to hammer away with serious purpose, instead of constantly playing by repuke rules. You're never going to win the game if one side keeps cheating, lying and playing dirty tricks, so take the damn ball away and play your game, Dems!

Geesh :mad: :grr:

[tonekat]

182. I totally agree with you. It's sad but true.

I did not expect them to destroy themselves so quickly though. But they did.

A chance that is not likely to come again, and they flubbed it at every move:

Letting town hall meetings be shouted down, and then not altering strategy, they kept charging into the breach, and came out bloodied. As a result, the public got to see them in retreat and failure almost every night on the news for about a month. Great P.R.! Public humiliation leaves a lasting impression. Barney Frank and Arlen Specter gave it back to the idiots, but it was too little too late.

Another mistake: Not contesting myths and lies strongly, if at all (i.e., "death panels")

Overestimating the intelligence of the American people on a complex subject. No one even reads the Explanation of Benefits that comes with their insurance. Really, a "visual aid" like a flowchart or diagram published in a paper or something like that would have helped a lot.

And Blue Dogs. Silent during Bush II, but determined to sink the ship over health care.

[MisterP]

152. well, this interview only proves that passing real health reform is "Bushevik,"

just as firing Bush's illegal crony US Attorneys would be as "Bushevik" as the original purge!

same with their blatting that "extremists on the left and right are closer to each other than to the center": they measure things FROM the center, or the phoney "political compass," which is like saying that the colors red and violet are the same because they're "un-yellow"

[wordpix]

154. absolutely correct! Pass health care bill in parts & educate re: what each part means

The average American cannot absorb a 2000 pg. health care bill all at once. Pass it in parts and make each part comprehensible. My "chunking" ideas: Public Option Bill, Expanded Medicare Bill, Drug Reimportation Bill, anti-Monopoly Bill, Right to Coverage Bill, etc.

:applause:

[avebury]

160. That is so true

It is so frustrating to know that the Democrats have squandered the time and control given to them in the last election. The democrats are always their own worse enemies.

[SlingBlade]

162. Dean: Bush would have had healthcare a long time ago

Hell Yea he would have with 20 or thirty Democratic Votes and LIEberman as well

This is goddamn bullshit of the first fucking order

[marshall]

165. Bush was willing to cut his losses and compromise

Obama wants to go for the gold, as he should.

[lordsummerisle]

166. k&r n/t

[aka-chmeee]

169. Absolutely right!

Even if W had proposed a single payer, government run health care system like Norway's, they would have rammed it through and the noise machine would have had everyone who spoke against it branded as a traitor.

[rpannier]

178. We'd have gotten this from the republikkans

Do you realize your another day closer to death???!!!
The Dems are pushing you closer to the graveyard because they refuse to pass the new Health Care Legislation.

Ask yourself...Why do they want you dead so quickly?

[certainot]

170. but bush had 1000 radio stations and that coordinated uncontested repetition

working for him instead of against him.

along with a corporate media that likes to rechew the think tank talking points limbaugh and hannity chew all day long obama also has a lazy left that collectively would rather plug in another CD than talk back to those 1000 radio stations that beat the dems all day with a political 2x4.

and then there are all the 'pundits' that have no clue what's happening on radio all around them because they can't read it.

all this crap enabled only because the left ignores the talk radio machine. maybe once in a while they notice a limbaugh outrage or a beck outrage or something on fox, which is just a tick on limbaugh's ass, but generally the left is going to play catchup and cant frame an outhouse until they start talking back by picketing those radio stations and calling their local sponsors.

[EvilMonk]

171. Reasons to NOT use Reconciliation:

(1) It will look sketchy to do after Brown wins. Might drive away moderate D’s.
(2) You get a swiss-cheese bill. Anything not related to budget gets dropped.
(3) Bill has to be sunseted if it raises the deficit by even a little bit after 5 years.
(4) You’re going to lose votes in the Senate based on principle.
(5) You drag out , further depleting whatever political capital the D’s still possess.
(6) You hand GOP another issue for 2010. I guarantee they’ll aruge: “D’s go ‘nuclear’ to get around will of public.”
(7) You give Mitch McConnell an opening to exercise his parliamentary chops in the Battle of the Byrd Bath.
(8) The D’s left flank will say, “Hey…if we’re doing reconciliation, give us the public option!” Is that a battle to revisit in 2010?!?!?!
(9) You make it substantially easier to kill in future. If 50 votes created it, 50 can kill it.
(10) You run the risk of getting less than 218 in the House and losing anyway…

[Phlem]

172. Personally

I support Howard Dean 100%. You just know when people speak the truth.

The gift I have is Hyper Vigilance, meaning I've had PTSD since child hood. I see threats real or imagined before they occur. I told my wife in 2000, around shrubs 1st stolen election, that he would run our country into the ground. Was that threat real or imagined?

I trust my gut and Howard Dean's the man.

Till he's changed by external influences, he speaks what I feel, IMHO, to be the best interest for the people of America... for now.

Sorry, I don't trust anybody but my wife and child for very long. Howard, however, has been consistent.

just my observation.

-phlem

[Maghetti]

176. Yep...

Sadly Dean is completely right. Obama wants everyone to hold hands and all agree but instead he is getting nothing done.

[justicia]

177. I admire and respect Dean...

It's so ironic that the people who truly can make a change
(Dean has proved to be a kind, just, person) are not appointed
to a position where they are needed.  I would love to see
Howard Dean as the president of this nation.

[democracy1st]

179. K & R

[DCBob]

180. Huh?? Bush failed to push through both social security and immigration reform..

Bush only succeeded on things that related to the war on terruh, military and national security which the Dems could/would not oppose for a number of legitimate reasons. I really do not think we want Obama to mimic or learn anything from the Bush/Cheney era. Those were some of America's darkest days.

[jonathan_seer]

181. Um, MEDICARE PART D - Medicares Drug Benefit Bush's huge medical success

Howard Dean is RIGHT, and has SOLID PROOF that BUSH would have succeeded.

Under BUSH the LARGEST NEW HEALTH BENEFIT Since the INCEPTION OF MEDICARE ITSELF - That's right the Drug Benefits for Medicare recipients called Part D.

A present to Bush's most loyal supporters at that time Senior citizens, paid for by taxes on the under 40 crowd who are set to pay for his creating a new benefit without offering any way to pay for it in the budget.

President Bush didn't consult Democrats.

He REFUSED TO EVEN MEET HOUSE DEMOCRATS.

HE limited his engagement with Senate democrats to times when the WH running short of toilet paper called upon willing and eager pliant blue dog tongues to tidy up the presidential anus. In return for their excellent deep cleanings, he listened as they obsequiously requested something in the bill (for some reason Lieberman in his last year as a Democrat comes to mind).

Once the Repugnicans were given their marching orders the only question was how long will it be before there is a prescription drug plan for Medicare.

ABSOLUTELY NO EFFORT was made to involve Democrats in the bill creation process.

The ONLY thing Bush was concerned about was making sure he had ENOUGH REPUBLICAN votes to pass the bill, his lieutenants standard tactic in the legislature.

the REAL Irony of Medicare Part D is how the only attack Dems. made was that Medicare Part D was a huge give away to Big Pharma and Medical Insurance and paid them to basically administer the paperwork for a guaranteed profit thanks to paying them 20-25% ABOVE the calculated cost it would be for medicare to provide those services.

One would think that when Democrats had a chance to craft their own healthcare bill, things would be diametrically opposite, but instead Democrats seemed to be trying their hardest to outdo the Republican's generosity to Big Pharma and Insurance Companies in the law that created Medicare's Drug Benefit.