Adam Nagourney of The Times:
Yes, but is there any sign of brainwaves?
Dare I say it? The party of Terri Schiavo has become Terri Schiavo. Transiently, one hopes.
My latest Dept. of the Obvios memo tells me that the Republicans ought to make a move on health care identifying any of their points of agreement with Obama's principles and putting together a package that could be pitched as bipartisan and passed right away. Just for example, Obama gave a rhetorical nod to tort reform in his big speech. We all know his own party will never agree to it, but why not try to take him up on it? Such an approach might generate some useful press coversage and position the Republicans as the party of something other than "No."
I know I am not asking for much here - Republicans were waving plans during Obama's speech. Why can't they publicize one?
The RNC has their principles for health care reform at their website. The Democrats have a fairly clear position on pre-existing conditions - insurance companies can't deny coverage on that basis. That creates huge free-rider problems, which leads to the call for a mandate obliging people to buy insurance, but at least I can grasp the Democrat position.
Here is what I see at the RNC:
I have no idea what that means.
How about just lock them in the room, and don't let them out, after a period of time, they will fade out of memory.
Posted by: bishop | September 19, 2009 at 08:30 PM
My latest Dept. of the Obvios memo tells me that the Republicans ought to make a move on health care identifying any of their points of agreement with Obama's principles and putting together a package that could be pitched as bipartisan and passed right away.
Why?
Why pass anything?
Not just the party of NO!, the party of HELL NO. Don't pass any of this Socialist swill, and start taking a message of what will work straight to the people.
Number one.
GRADUATE MORE DOCTORS AND MAKE THEM COMPETE FOR YOUR DOLLARS.
Posted by: Pofarmer | September 19, 2009 at 08:33 PM
Good News, Guys!
Mark Hemingway at NRO reported that:
... "(though it's worth noting that half the attendees didn't bother voting in the straw poll),.."
Posted by: Ann | September 19, 2009 at 08:35 PM
Most Uninsured Americans are short term problems usually less than one year. They are probably between jobs and cannot afford Cobra. Why not an addition to either Unemployment or Health Insurance that would cover the cost of COBRA for the 18 Months is available? I am sure the cost per person would be minimal and perhaps could be a voluntary rider. I do not know what numbers would work but I would assume it would be relative to the current Unemployment rate. No freebies. Just private market insurance.
Screw that.
Get an HSA.
It's YOUR money.
Posted by: Pofarmer | September 19, 2009 at 08:35 PM
The Republicans should announce the formation of a high powered team of experts to conduct an in depth analysis of health care. Should be good for ten years or so.
Posted by: PeterUK | September 19, 2009 at 08:39 PM
Po - I'm in.
Posted by: Jane | September 19, 2009 at 08:59 PM
OBAMA PUSH FOR 'WORLD' REGULATIONS
this Drudge headline can't be good. Quick someone divert him by prosecuting Dohern! (I think I spelled that wrong)
Posted by: Jane | September 19, 2009 at 09:02 PM
Could you strangle him in his sleep, Sue?
No. It's his only bad quality. I'll have to work on changing his mind.
Posted by: Sue The Skinny Bastard | September 19, 2009 at 09:06 PM
Over at American Thinker they are now reporting an article saying that Obama was "appointed by God".
His 5 Sunday shows will become a regular Sunday feature and will provide the Sunday worship service for Democrats-tuning in will be mandatory and devotees will be required to kneel and face Washington during each sermon. Prayer rugs will be optional.
(Actually I made the second paragraph up) -but the 1st one is true.
LUN
Posted by: Pagar | September 19, 2009 at 09:09 PM
Independent prosecutor for ACORN
Posted by: Neo | September 19, 2009 at 09:17 PM
For a good laugh LUN
Posted by: Neo | September 19, 2009 at 09:21 PM
((How about just lock them in the room, and don't let them out, after a period of time, they will fade out of memory.))
I'm with bishop on this one.
Posted by: Janet | September 19, 2009 at 09:23 PM
Divine Right of Presidents ?
Posted by: Neo | September 19, 2009 at 09:23 PM
On second thought, I was too hasty in advocating the GOP JUST SAY "NO"
We need a party to say YES
YES we will scale back government and regulation.
YES we will pass bills whose only purpose is to whittle down and negate previous laws and regulations -- whittle and negate the sclerosis of 200+ years of enfeebling legislation.
Posted by: mockmook | September 19, 2009 at 09:32 PM
I have a question about Huckabee.He was/is a Baptist Minister.The Baptist Pastors I,ve heard say their career choice is a "calling from GOD"So if you have a calling by GOD how can you then just change your mind as to your career.Isn't that kind of like hanging the phone up on GOD
Posted by: jean | September 19, 2009 at 09:41 PM
Sorry, this post just pisses me off.
Why do we need government to come up with MORE ideas?
Just let the PEOPLE come up with new solutions -- we already have more than enough government necessary for justice, domestic tranquility, and sustainable development.
Posted by: mockmook | September 19, 2009 at 09:44 PM
Isn't that kind of like hanging the phone up on GOD
Let's not get into theology, but, maybe God wanted him to do something else?
Posted by: Pofarmer | September 19, 2009 at 09:46 PM
Neo, that was awesome.
How about just lock them in the room, and don't let them out, after a period of time, they will
fade out of memoryrun out of oxygen.But we should pull Charlie K out before that happens.
Posted by: bgates | September 19, 2009 at 09:47 PM
Mock, if you haven't figured out, there's a method to Maguire's madness, he writes these
provocative posts exactly to elicit this type of reaction,
Saw that Gerald Posner was the author of the Daily Beast interview with Zbig, WTH went wrong with him, he used to be the conspiracy debunker, the man of reason,
then he went overboard and joined the Huff Po.
Posted by: bishop | September 19, 2009 at 09:49 PM
His 5 Sunday shows
Small ball. I hear he's working towards the Jerry Lewis model: 24 hour Tel O Thon. He'd obviously like to take over Labor Day, but will probably give it a test run May 1.
Posted by: bgates | September 19, 2009 at 09:57 PM
Absolutely, we can put Kenneth "Where is Beaks" Adelman instead. Kmiec got Malta, what did he get for the Shiv he dropped
last fall
Posted by: bishop | September 19, 2009 at 09:57 PM
Why do we need government to come up with MORE...
I agree mcmook. Say the government was already carrying our all of its' duties very well, or half its' duties, or one of its'. Then I would still say "keep your stinkin' fingers out of my life!"
Posted by: Original MikeS | September 19, 2009 at 10:00 PM
PO I,m sorry if I came across as flip.I don't get the change from Pastor to poltico/talk show host.
Posted by: jean | September 19, 2009 at 10:03 PM
"OBAMA PUSH FOR 'WORLD' REGULATIONS"
That probably fits in well with his future plans. He's already been in the President's job for a few months and learned all there is to know there. His next move will be to take over the UN and then--well, there is a whole universe out there.
Posted by: Pagar | September 19, 2009 at 10:06 PM
Phyllis Schlafly said everything that needs to be said about Huckabee, i.e.: "He killed the conservative movement in Arkansas."
Posted by: Uncle BigBad | September 19, 2009 at 10:09 PM
He strikes me as the Republican analog to Carter, preening, slef righteous, economically illiterate and a little too apologetic, he would be an easy mark if he
ever got elected
Posted by: bishop | September 19, 2009 at 10:11 PM
OT... but I thought Congress robbed us so he could pay his mortgage?
LUN.
Posted by: willem | September 19, 2009 at 10:18 PM
--YES we will scale back government and regulation.
YES we will pass bills whose only purpose is to whittle down and negate previous laws and regulations -- whittle and negate the sclerosis of 200+ years of enfeebling legislation.--
But mockmook,
That would require the Repubs to stop playing 75 years of defense. Even when they're in power they argue that their tax cuts are great because, wait for it, they give the government more money to spend.
Until these idiots throw off the desire to be the tax collectors for the welfare state and decide to put the left on permanent defense, we will continue toward the coming political and economic paroxysm.
Posted by: Ignatz | September 19, 2009 at 10:22 PM
I don't get the change from Pastor to poltico/talk show host.
Which has the bigger audience?
Heck, maybe it's just ego. I'm just tellin' you the justification.
Posted by: Pofarmer | September 19, 2009 at 10:43 PM
I just finished listening to Jane on her podcast after the Tea Party. Here: FWDAJ
Jane, you are so passionate about this country. ♥ It was quite fun to listen too.
Having said that (Dick's favorite saying), Dick was dick. :)
Posted by: Ann | September 19, 2009 at 10:43 PM
Rocco, yep, I think the Ayers thing is warming up. Note, too, that apparently someone at the White House tried to intervene with a Fox News 'Face' to downplay the Ayers bit. Other legs on Ayers is his prominent and powerful role in curriculum and the ghost writing. Stay tuned.
=====================================
Posted by: It's about to blow up in his face. | September 19, 2009 at 10:45 PM
HOOOLLLLYYYYYY COOOOWWWWW!!!!
To quote whatever sports caster that is.
Just got off the phone with a landlord.
Man, Obama has got people PISSED. Lot's of adjectives getting thrown around that I'm sure the administration wouldn't think were civil.
If another teaparty is required next 9/12, or before, heaven help DC.
Should we make plans to attend now?
I'm serious about getting a bus together.
And man, I HATE buses.
Posted by: Pofarmer | September 19, 2009 at 10:46 PM
Why isn't that an instance of the gambler's fallacy? Is there no statue of limitations such that beyond a certain date malpractice claims cannot be filed?
I think if you hold insurance for year X, then you're insured against claims for events that happened in year X.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | September 19, 2009 at 10:48 PM
Then we all get behind the one they select as the worst.
I like the way you think.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | September 19, 2009 at 10:49 PM
HOOOLLLLYYYYYY COOOOWWWWW!!!!
To quote whatever sports caster that is.
The late, great, Harry Caray.
Posted by: DrJ | September 19, 2009 at 10:50 PM
It's YOUR money.
Po, sadly, in an HSA as they are arranged right now, that's not true. I learned this to my detriment when my severance from Sun ran out: in order to continue drawing against my money in the HSA, I would have had to continue paying both my COBRA at $350/month AND add another $150/month contribution to the HSA. When that wasn't feasible, the HSA went away.
And no, I couldn't use it to pay the COBRA either.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | September 19, 2009 at 10:52 PM
Over at American Thinker they are now reporting an article saying that Obama was "appointed by God".
Could have been worse: it could have been "anointed".
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | September 19, 2009 at 10:54 PM
It's YOUR money.
Oh, and remember that unemployment benefits are, at least theoretically, your money too. The unemployment fund is funded with a percentage of a company's payroll.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | September 19, 2009 at 10:55 PM
Heck, maybe it's just ego. I'm just tellin' you the justification.
I'd bet he's making a load more money now.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | September 19, 2009 at 10:57 PM
Should we make plans to attend now?
I'm hearing there will be an announcement on Monday of some other Tea Party event.
Hmmm.
Can we say that on 9/12 we TP'd the Capitol?
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | September 19, 2009 at 10:59 PM
I would have had to continue paying both my COBRA at $350/month AND add another $150/month contribution to the HSA.
That may be.
We currently pay the full cost of our HSA through my wifes employer. We can take over the policy, should something happen, or, get another policy from the same company for what we're paying now. Already checked that out seven ways till Sunday. MO is working on legislation to make it where you can pay premiums from your HSA account, and you don't HAVE to contribute to the HSA, in fact, there's a limit to what you can contribute. Last year we limited out and had to quit contributing. Once again, differences in state Regs.
Posted by: Pofarmer | September 19, 2009 at 11:10 PM
I tried to listen to Jane but can't get it to work for me....
Posted by: clarice | September 19, 2009 at 11:10 PM
Clarice,
I had trouble too. Disregard the play button and go down to "Audio MP3" and hit the arrow icon for start.
Posted by: Ann | September 19, 2009 at 11:23 PM
Remember that guy who was almost elected Vice President in 2004?
". . . Mr. Edwards once calmed an anxious Ms. Hunter by promising her that after his wife died, he would marry her in a rooftop ceremony in New York with an appearance by the Dave Matthews Band."
"At one point, Mr. Young wrote, Mr. Edwards asked Mr. Baron if he could find a doctor who would falsify a DNA report."
Posted by: PaulL | September 19, 2009 at 11:23 PM
Geemonellie.
Via Wattsupwith that.
"BrightSource Energy Inc. had planned a 5,130-acre solar power farm in a remote part of the Mojave Desert, on land previously intended for conservation. The company, based in Oakland, Calif., said Thursday that it was instead seeking an alternative site for the project.
The Wildlands Conservancy, a California environmental group, had tried to block the solar development, as had Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, who proposed that the area become a national monument."
Can we call them out on this alternative energy ruse yet?
Posted by: Pofarmer | September 20, 2009 at 12:39 AM
Did anyone catch Hannity's show the other day from central California where the farm land looks like the 1930s dust bowl because the Feds have turned off the water to protect a minnow. As mad as those people were, I think the dems/Obama have lost the farm labor/Hispanic vote here in Calif.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | September 20, 2009 at 12:52 AM
That probably fits in well with his future plans. He's already been in the President's job for a few months and learned all there is to know there. His next move will be to take over the UN and then--well, there is a whole universe out there.
Perhaps we could just skip the next step of world domination, then, and send him directly to Pluto to work his magic there?
Posted by: PD | September 20, 2009 at 12:52 AM
Note, too, that apparently someone at the White House tried to intervene with a Fox News 'Face' to downplay the Ayers bit.
It was O'Reilly. He said last night that they called him recently to ask him to stop covering Bill Ayers.
Didn't sound like he was inclined to follow their wishes.
Posted by: PD | September 20, 2009 at 12:53 AM
In light of the ACORN scandal, it's time to look again at this video about vote fraud in the Democrat primary.
Posted by: Uncle BigBad | September 20, 2009 at 01:06 AM
CC, A gift to open with your morning coffee:
Mainstream Media: The Devil Wears Pravda
Posted by: Ann | September 20, 2009 at 01:12 AM
APPOINTED BY GOD
anagrams to
PAINTED BY DOG PO
Posted by: Fresh Air | September 20, 2009 at 01:41 AM
He said last night that they called him recently to ask him to stop covering Bill Ayers.
Pretty much shows what rank amateurs they have in the WH. That's basically an invitation to keep digging.
Posted by: Fresh Air | September 20, 2009 at 01:42 AM
"At one point, Mr. Young wrote, Mr. Edwards asked Mr. Baron if he could find a doctor who would falsify a DNA report."
Well at least North Carolinian John Edward is from the proper State for that, so he wouldn't have to look far. Remember the Duke Lacrosse Case and Nifong's collusion with Dr Brian Meehan, head of the DNA Lab used in the Prosecution of the innocent men? "Head">http://www.newsobserver.com/1185/story/521773.html">"Head of DNA lab says he and Nifong agreed not to report results".
So remind me again which Political Party Nifong and this Doctor were members of? And in which State Democrat John Edwards made his millions off in Medical malpractice lawsuits? Oh, here it is: From ">http://washingtontimes.com/news/2004/aug/16/20040816-011234-1949r/"> The Washington Times 16 Aug, 2004:
"The American Medical Association lists North Carolina's current health care situation as a "crisis" and blames it on medical-malpractice lawsuits such as the ones that made Democratic vice-presidential candidate Sen. John Edwards a millionaire many times over.
One of the most successful personal-injury lawyers in North Carolina history, Mr. Edwards won dozens of lawsuits against doctors and hospitals across the state that he now represents in the Senate. He won more than 50 cases with verdicts or settlements of $1 million or more, according to North Carolina Lawyers Weekly, and 31 of those were medical-malpractice suits."
Seems to me this tree of criminality didn't fall far from the ACORN. Or have I got that backward?
Posted by: daddy | September 20, 2009 at 02:33 AM
Hey Daddy,
Edwards and Nifong are both grads of UNC Law - GTHC,GTH.
Paused the clicker a moment on Geraldo, he had Ann Coulter on. Hay Carumba!, Geraldo is such a tool, says Congress defunding ACORN was unconstitutional as it is a violation of the prohibition of bills of attainder. IANAL, but again, what a tool. Ann set him straight and went on to mention that the funding of ACORN was unconstitutional.
Posted by: Strawman Cometh | September 20, 2009 at 03:02 AM
Touche' Strawman. Have to acknowledge that you are correct.
Truth be told, the only school I ever wind up hating as much as Duke, is hating UNC---at least the Administration and some of the slimeball grad's it produces.
I suspect many of us here are in the same boat of pulling for our college sports teams, but hating the Administrators with a passion. Haven't sent the SOB's a nickel in 20 plus years. Go to hell Duke!
Posted by: daddy | September 20, 2009 at 03:46 AM
P'UK,
Today's ">http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/6208848/Lockerbie-bomber-innocence-claim-condemned-by-Scotlands-law-chief.html"> UK Telegraph has this story telling us that Scotland's top Law Officer is furious that the released Lockerbie Bomber is now working hard in the Media and Courts to get himself proclaimed innocent. Not knowing the players and positions, I can't tell from this story if this Head Law guy wanted to not release him in the first place, or instead wanted to release him but now is angry about it. I'm hoping he didn't want to release him from the get-go. And I see that Gordo is now supplying UK Troops to train Libyan soldiers.
Anyhow, If you are up on this and you have a minute, could you explain this new row in plain English? Haven't heard a good anti-Gordo rant lately, but could sure use one if you've got the time. Thanks in advance. I'm off to bed.
Posted by: daddy | September 20, 2009 at 06:02 AM
PeterUK,
My theory is that this is all part of the deal. That if word got out that Gordo was involved then they would release their so-called case to the media to ease any tension in releasing the terrorist/mass murderer. Put the onus back on the prosecutors to answer media questions about guilt or innocence not about the politics of the prisoner release. Sounds almost as if Libya is getting advice from the Obama WH since it looks like something they would think up.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | September 20, 2009 at 06:35 AM
daddy JiB,
More crap than a sewage farm.
The murder of Yvonne Fletcher has also been buried.
A very murky episode indeed.
Posted by: PeterUK | September 20, 2009 at 07:41 AM
ANN,
Thanks so much for listening to the podcast. You are very sweet.
I've decided I need my own show. And at some point I am going to hire you all to help me get it.
Posted by: Jane | September 20, 2009 at 08:38 AM
That first link is very interesting, Pete. The second good for the info that the Libyans may have given swift justice to the shooter. Do you believe the guy was framed? That might explain some of the high level schizzy behaviour on both sides of the Atlantic. I'd like to know Mueller's opinion, too.
==========================================
Posted by: Salaamic Verses. | September 20, 2009 at 08:38 AM
You know it's curious, because I've read Taheri and most recently Dore Gold's Nuclear
Iran, and looked over Bob Baer, back when he was sane, and it does seem like the Iranians with our 'good friend' Ali Mohashtemi-pur, the Syrians and the PFPL-GC
seemed to be all involved at the beginning of the investigation; and then it was dropped for Fhimah and Megrahi, and now that
has been vacated, Don't know what to think frankly
Posted by: bishop | September 20, 2009 at 09:12 AM
The Persians would fit with the Rushdie stuff, too, n.
===============================
Posted by: Rubik's Sphere. | September 20, 2009 at 09:27 AM
Dang, these comments always look so much more profound with the ikon by them. Is it gilding that does it?
====================================
Posted by: It's only a bird in a gilded cage. | September 20, 2009 at 09:29 AM
er, is it 'painting' that does it. Mine's a lovely golden arc from arcs.
========================================
Posted by: Lily Marlene Dietrich. | September 20, 2009 at 09:32 AM
Ann: thanks for the link. Yes, I read it with my morning coffee!
Posted by: centralcal | September 20, 2009 at 09:39 AM
How does that Nagourney Kool Aid taste, Tom?
Take a trip to powerline to see what real bloggers write.
Posted by: SmokeVanThorn | September 20, 2009 at 11:17 AM
Thanks for that stuff P'UK. Am still scratching my head over this relationship between the UK and Libya. Seems there are under-stories going on beneath the Headlines that casual readers like me are completely unaware of.
Posted by: daddy | September 20, 2009 at 02:31 PM