Reuters: (Reid) refusing to give details on the proposals that will be sent to CBO

[IndianaGreen]

"We have a broad agreement," Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid told reporters, refusing to give details on the proposals that will be sent to the Congressional Budget Office.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5B807720091209

Reuters does not say anything about Reid saying the public option was not dead, as earlier trumpeted by you know who.

Reid and the two senators who negotiated the agreement -- Charles Schumer and Mark Pryor -- would not reveal any details of the plan

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/12/08/health.care/index.html

Senate negotiators emerged from a full day of meetings Tuesday saying they had made genuine progress toward a deal on health care reform.

They declined to outline the specifics of the agreement, but said that the measures they had been discussing will be sent to the Congressional Budget Office office for cost estimates. Once the estimates are returned, the final deal will be put together.

"We have made a lot of progress. There's a lot of agreement. We have decided to take the next step and that is to ask the CBO to score what we've been discussing," said Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.), one of five conservative Democrats negotiating with five liberals.

The discussion has focused on abandoning or greatly narrowing the public health insurance option. In exchange, people 54-55 would be able to buy in to Medicare and Medicaid eligibility would be expanded to people within 150 percent of the federal poverty line. And people within 300 percent of poverty would be eligible for a program pushed by Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) modeled on her state's Basic Health. Cantwell is not one of the ten in the meetings but has stopped by to brief negotiators.

Senators, after the meeting, would not confirm which elements of the discussion were sent to CBO. Much will depend on the results of the CBO analysis.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/08/senate-sinks-abortion-ame_n_384846.html

[ClarkUSA]

1. Before the story at the link was updated, Reuters reported Reid denied the public option was dead.

Just sayin'... :)

[IndianaGreen]

2. Your side accused MSNBC of lying because their reporting didn't fit the crap you were peddling

[jefferson_dem]

3. "Your side"...

What the fuck is with that "fer us or again us" crap? Ack.

Aren't we all Democrats here? Oh, maybe not.

[IndianaGreen]

8. We are not the ones that started the Saint Dennis crap

[jefferson_dem]

11. No...he and his supporters started that.

Whatever.

We all have our favorite and our not-so-favorite Dems... If you think that means we at DU are split into "your side" versus "my side" factions I can't do much for you.

Enjoy the bitterness.

[IndianaGreen]

12. but we are split on the war!

and will remain so until all the troops are home.

And Kucinich supporters were not the ones that started this shit.

[ClarkUSA]

17. Since when are you a Kucinich supporter when you're such a fan of Hillary ?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8695513&mesg_id=8696780

You know, the same Hillary who wanted Pres. Obama to listen to Gen. McChrystal's 80K troop/10 year Afghanistan plan?

Who do you think you're kidding? :eyes:

[Name removed]

18. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[freddie mertz]

33. The primary is over. Hillary is a major member of the cabinet.

Some folks need to just accept it and move on.

[freddie mertz]

34. Transparency we should never have believed in.

It's nauseating.

[JTFrog]

35. Yes.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x45333#45437">Some folks do.

[freddie mertz]

38. Of course, that was a response to another primary invoker. nt.

[ClarkUSA]

40. Bullshit. I merely revealed whose "side" Indiana Green is really on. And it explains alot.

It's interesting how birds of a feather always defend each other. :eyes:

[freddie mertz]

42. Who cares? I don't care a whit about your little outdated primary battles.

He supported Hillary, so what?

You supported Clark, so what?

They were Democratic candidates.

It's not a crime.

Get over it, is my advice.

[ClarkUSA]

43. Um, you're the only one bringing up "primary battles" on this thread and trying to start it up.

Take your own advice and get over it. :eyes:

BTW, unlike some here on this thread, I'm quite happy with the way things turned out last year and have happily moved on into supporting my President.

[freddie mertz]

44. I object to the dredging up of these old battles to derail useful discussion.nt.

[ClarkUSA]

45. Is that why you recently agreed with someone when they compared Pres. Obama to "Britney"?

Link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=44375&mesg_id=44442

[freddie mertz]

46. That post compared the OP's line of thought to a famous comment...

... by Britney about Bush.

It was in Fahrenheit 911.

There was no comparison of Obama to Britney there.

I thought it was funny.

Not a crime.

[ClarkUSA]

49. Uh huh. Sure.... I believe you. Really..... No, really!

:sarcasm:

[freddie mertz]

50. Obviously you completely misunderstood the post I was reacting to.

It did not "compare the president to Britney".

It compared the OP to a statement BY Britney.

In your search for an "outrage," you completely misread a bit of very mild, very obvious satire.

[ClarkUSA]

52. The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

Watching you spin like a top is fun, though.

[freddie mertz]

53. You refuse to understand, probably intentionally.

Enough.

[ClarkUSA]

58. lol! I understand all too well.

Enough, indeed. :eyes:

[mkultra]

73. he is exposing it , not dredging it up.

[JTFrog]

62. They definitely run in packs. n/t

[ClarkUSA]

64. Yup... just take a look at that attacking flock of feathered friends.

They're so predictable.

[ieoeja]

65. You have IndianaGreen all wrong if you think IndianaGreen truly supports Hillary.

The "Green" is for Party. While I know there are plenty of posts by IndianaGreen supporting Hillary, can you really believe that IndianaGreen is a fan of the Clintons?

In fact, check out this IG post: http://journals.democraticunderground.com/IndianaGreen/96

Excerpt:

"Democratic chicken hawk Hillary Clinton's Kyl-Lieberman vote to give Bush the authority to exercise "all options on the table" on Iran is the latest example of her support of a neocon/neolib imperialist foreign policy. Like all chicken hawks, Hillary confuses "strength" with the use of brute military force, rather with the strength shown by great peacemakers like the late Archbishop Romero or Nobel Peace Laureate Desmond Tutu.

"It is highly unlikely that as President Hillary would deviate one iota from the corporatist and imperialist agenda she followed in the US Senate. Hillary will never raise the issue of justice for Palestinians, much less pursue a Middle East settlement that would require Israel to give up Arab land taken in the 1967 War. Hillary will continue the disastrous US policy of enabling Israel's imperialism in the region, including maintaining an occupation force in Iraq as a counter to Iran.

"In Latin America, the wife of the man that kept the School of the Americas open, will pursue the Bush policies with renewed vigor. Hillary will unleash the CIA and the military to reestablish American hegemony in the region."


So the question is, why would someone who hated Hillary so much when she was the presumptive nominee, become a rabid Hillary supporter when that man overtook her? Two reasons come to mind:

1. As a Green Party member, IG is attempting to drive a wedge between Democratic supporters.

2. IG would genuinely rather see Hillary be president than that man slightly to the Left of her despite IG's policies being extremely to the Left of both because ... there is something she doesn't like about Obama that is even more important to her than policy.

Maybe it's his height. Some people really hate tall people. :shrug:

[JTFrog]

63. We can all see who invoked what and who the self-proclaimed opposition is here.

No surprise where you side in it.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

4. MSNBC was the first to report that Reuters said Reid called the report "not true"

[vaberella]

27. Of course it's not. I was watching the debate when this post came out. n/t

[DeschutesRiver]

70. fwiw, saw Reid on MSNBC speaking

and he clearly stated that the reports about the public option being out were not true.

I also saw Landrieu saying the same as Reid, that she wouldn't speak about the details until the thing came back from the CBO. Kind of pissed me off that there are no details being given and that they are using the scoring as cover. I don't know what is going on any more.

[ClarkUSA]

5. WTF are you talking about now? Quote, link?

:crazy:

[IndianaGreen]

6. google it yourself

[ClarkUSA]

13. In other words, you made a false accusation for the umpteenth time. And what is "your side"?

Keep digging. :)

[IndianaGreen]

14. the single payer antiwar side

[ClarkUSA]

19. Sure, that's why you are such a fan of Hillary who is such a fan of Gen. McChrystal's.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8695513&mesg_id=8696780

You're into DLC Bubba, too.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8685795&mesg_id=8685829
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8685795&mesg_id=8685849

Who do you think you're kidding? :eyes:

[IndianaGreen]

20. Hillary is serving the President. Is she were President, she would have fired McChrystal

as her husband fired General Singlaub.

[ClarkUSA]

23. Nice dodge. You are an admirer of the Clintons, not Kucinich. That explains alot.

:)

[IndianaGreen]

24. I plead guilty for having voted for Bill Clinton twice

and for having kept several of the photos of Bill and Hillary one gets for sending money. Never got a photo of Socks.

Your point?

[ClarkUSA]

25. My links show a different perspective: your very recent admiration for Hillary and Bill Clinton.

Like I said, it explains alot. :eyes:

[Moochy]

30. Collecting Links on people now?

Internet Tough Guy and Internet Archivist! what a package!

[waterscalm]

37. It was a great pic of Hillary (first link). Such a shame that

Clark USA uses it to diss a DU member!!

[freddie mertz]

47. There seems to be a pattern of ad hominem personal attacks

I thought that was against the rules.

And since when is it a crime, worthy of personal attacks, to have supported a Democrat for president?

[Moochy]

54. Sorry Freddy, self-delete

I thought I was replying to the poster upthread regarding his copy paste habit. I blame my iPhone. :hi:

[freddie mertz]

55. What? Have I ever posted an NYT article?

I think you may have the wrong person here.

[Moochy]

56. Yes, my bad

Sorry bout that!

[freddie mertz]

57. Was it about Clark-O?

[Moochy]

66. yeah pretty blatant

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=44894&mesg_id=45422

[freddie mertz]

68. How many ways can you spell right-wing, militarist tool? nt.

[ieoeja]

69. What if you only "pretend" to have supported a Democrat for president?

Searching through her journal, I find nothing but attacks against Democrats and the Democratic Party.

More to the point, go back a few pages in her DU Journal ... and you find IndianaGreen heaping the most virulent attacks imaginable upon Bill and Hillary Clinton. Vicious attacks on Hillary -- excerpts: "Queen of Darkness", "unleash CIA in a murderous rampage" -- account for about half of her Journal entries in 2007.

Her "change of heart" since December 2007 was the realization that Obama, not Clinton, was likely to win the Democratic nomination. Her pretense at being a Clinton supporter just gives her cover and unwitting allies in her attacks on a Democratic president (whomever that may be).

Had Clinton won out against Obama, and had Obama supporters not accepted their loss, it doesn't take a mind-reader to know that IndianaGreen would be on here pretending to be a rabid Obama supporter while attacking Hillary.

But don't take my word for it. Read her journal. A few choice links:

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/IndianaGreen/51
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/IndianaGreen/53
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/IndianaGreen/62
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/IndianaGreen/73
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/IndianaGreen/82
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/IndianaGreen/83
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/IndianaGreen/87
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/IndianaGreen/88
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/IndianaGreen/91
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/IndianaGreen/94

[IndianaGreen]

71. Did you even understand what I wrote? Do you even know what core values are?

There is no moral core in Hillary, other than what's good for Hillary

Posted by IndianaGreen in General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009)

Thu Mar 15th 2007, 12:36 PM

An example of core values was the recent statement issued by an Evangelical organization that condemned human rights abuses committed by the US government under the pretext of fighting the War on Terror. This group of evangelicals took a strong position against torture, rendition, physical deprivation, and other human rights abuses committed in CIA secret prisons, Guantanamo, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

Another example of core values was the late Pope John Paul II's warning to Bush and Blair that if they went into Iraq, they would do so without G_d. The Pope's warning was prompted by his resolute belief in the sanctity of life. The Pope's consistent opposition to the taking of human life, at any stage of life, is illustrative of a moral core. Those that disagreed with him on principle, also had a moral core.

Pax Christi, a Catholic group that organized an anti-Bush demonstration when he came to Notre Dame campus shortly after the war began, also has a moral core, as does Code Pink.

Some issues are clear cut, requiring a strong stance, and are not subjected to "tactical" or "strategic" or "triangulation." An example of "tactical" or "strategic" was the US support of South Africa's apartheid government on the basis that South Africa provided the West with strategic metals, such as chrome for the bumpers of our cars.

For progressives, wars of aggression are always wrong, as is torture, denial of habeas corpus, infringement of women and LGBT rights. The question as to General Pace's remarks that gays were immoral for just being gay, should have been met with a strong and immediate response in opposition. A person whose core belief is that LGBTs are entitled to the same rights and privileges enjoyed by straight citizens, would have answer immediately and without hesitation. A person that lacks such core belief would have responded as Hillary did.

[ieoeja]

72. You wrote that Hillary lacks the core belief that LGBTs are entitled to the same rights.

That is fairly easy to understand.


You also wrote that she would go to war in Iran if elected.

You said she advocated using nuclear weapons as a first-strike weapon instead of just for retaliation.

You wrote that she would stay in Iraq if elected.

You called her the "Queen of Darkness".

You said she would have the military and CIA go on a "murderous rampage" in Latin America.

You said she was a proponent of trickle-down economics.

You called her "evil".


You wrote it. It is in the archives for anyone to see. So there is no point in denying it. You wrote some of the most virulent anti-Hillary pieces on DU when she was the presumptive nominee. When it became apparent that Obama was going to win, you became a rabid Hillary supporter.

Or rather, pretended to become one. Because nobody who reads your anti-Hillary diatribes from 2007 will ever believe that you truly came to support Hillary.

[mkultra]

81. Its funny when you actually find a troll isnt it?

IndianaGreen is clearly a long standing troll that does nothing but create disruption. I alert on here every time she posts and unrec her.

[IndianaGreen]

83. So you support General Pace's assertion that LGBTs are inherently bad people?

Because that is what prompted my post when Hillary refused to disavow General Pace's words (he was head of Joint Chiefs at the time).

[mkultra]

74. ask those who bash the obama supporters.

[freddie mertz]

39. "Are you now or have you ever been..." You've got a list of links?

1. Who appointed YOU grand inquisitor?

2. Where is the crime in supporting or voting for some other Dem candidate?

3. Clark lost.

[dionysus]

36. bullshit...

[ClarkUSA]

41. "she would have fired" a general whose 10 yr./80K troop/war escalation plan she strongly endorsed?

Wow, that's a real work of fantasy there. Your perspective is quite revealing of your bias.

:crazy:

[ellie]

7. "Your side?"

What is that supposed to mean?

[IndianaGreen]

9. post 8

[ellie]

15. Saint Dennis?

Who the hell is that?

[IndianaGreen]

16. that term has been used in DU to describe Dennis Kucinich

he is hated because he is so right!

[vaberella]

28. I prefer Koochie, myself. nt

[AVID]

21. "your side"? dude, your credibilty just went "POOF"

[IndianaGreen]

22. I am with the single payer side--the one kept off the table

I am also with the antiwar side--the one that will be proven right.

[mkultra]

78. your with the bash ALL democrats side.

[IndianaGreen]

84. The only bashing here is the one the corporate Beltway Democrats are inflicting on Democratic voters

that put so much hope on them in 2006 and 2008.

[mkultra]

86. blah blah blah i read your journal of screeds

you do absolutely nothing but attack democrats. You couldn't care less about a single democratic issue.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

60. It went poof a long time ago.

I'm surprised people still think he had any.

Although I am reminded of the longtermer yesterday who slipped up and attacked the "democrat party."

[mcablue]

75. Those who pretend there is "one side" in this form are being naive

Yes, most of us are Democrats, with a few exceptions (some may be independent liberals). But some Democrats are very, very pro-Obama (supporting approximately 100% of the things he does and proposes) while others criticize Obama often.

Those sides are very distinct.

[mkultra]

79. lol, your description is even biased.

[mcablue]

82. So you mean there are sides, but I didn't accurately describe them?

That proves me right. We are not "one side."

[mkultra]

85. in my opinion, you have. yes

again, this is just my opinion but the two sides i see are as follows.

Those who are disgusted and contemptuous of Obama and his supporters. On the other side, we have people the like him to varying degrees but most are just shocked at the level of contempt displayed here.


When you start to discuss how a series of disproportionately angry posts are wrong, you will eventually turn around and find that you are being called a cheerleader because your not joining the chorus of anger.

I haven't posted a single negative thing about Obama the whole time he has been president. Its not that i don't disagree with him, because i do at times, it just seems that the anger and contempt here are outrageously overblown so there is enough negativity already.

[firedupdem]

26. Damn...way to come out and admit you are here merely for divisiveness...

I knew you have never had anything good to say about the President, but the 'your side' comment just confirmed it.

[vaberella]

29. She redefines unhinged. nt

[Alexander]

61. With IG's posting history, is anyone really surprised?

I mean, it says "Green" in the username, for crying out loud.

[JTFrog]

31. Good to know you feel you are the opposition here. n/t

[asdjrocky]

32. Lame.

[neshanic still]

10. This shows they are close the the sellout..oops! Bad me! Close to the grand solution!

[madmom]

48. "Medicaid eligibility would be expanded to people within 150 percent of the federal poverty line"

so this sounds good BUT, my daughter already meets the current requirement for income but still can't get medicaid because she has no kids! Will this requirement be dropped or will they continue pushing illegitimate pregnancies?
She knows she's not ready to have kids, she went back to school, full time, no money, no insurance!

[waterscalm]

51. I have neices in that predictament also. I believe it also has dropped

to 133% of the poverty level.

interesting article here.

http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/12/08/public-option-grand-compromise-becomes-a-grand-big-nothing/

[Phx_Dem]

59. Good! Then the GOP can't rip it apart before CBO analysis is complete.

[tabatha]

67. Reading this thread - it seems

that some people come here just to fight.

[PBS Poll-435]

76. Yep

(Probably the intention by the OP)

[mkultra]

77. actually, most come here to support democrats

a few come here to insult, bash a and smear them. The OP auth is one of the later.

[PBS Poll-435]

80. But she has an Obama symbol in her sig line!

!!!

You just want to curtail free speech!!!


!!!

!?!

[mkultra]

87. maybe im trying to silence them from silencing me ABOUT them being silent

on the issue of silence in general?