Health Care Bill That Is Hated by Liberals, Conservatives, Libertarians, Socialists, Christians, Feminists, the Media and the American People Passes Senate

Read all about it.

The striking thing is that Health Care Reform has become so radioactive that no senator or congressbot has anything to lose by voting against it. Yet it's about to become the law of the land.

This continues a pattern we've seen at least since the passage of TARP: The more wildly unpopular a package of laws is, the more desperate D.C. is to pass it. For the sake of democracy.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • ||

    Who is John Galt?

  • Ratko||

    Never heard of him, but he finally makes perfect sense.

  • ||

    Even a man who is pure in heart
    and says his prayers by night,
    may become a wolf when the wolfbane blooms
    and the autumn moon is bright.

  • Kyle Jordan||

    Kate Beckinsale was so hot in that movie.

    ...

  • CTHORM@IBIS||

    Concurred.

  • alan||

    Tie between Beckinsale there, and Lena Olin in The Unbearable Lightness of being as the hottest brunette in a movie ever. Maybe Kunis can give them a run for the money, but they have amazing legs that that petite doll doesn't.

  • TallDave||

    No, no. Mayko Nguyen.

  • ||

    http://i206.photobucket.com/al.....1/derp.jpg

  • ||

    Link FAIL, smart-ass response FAIL, obscure pop-culture reference FAIL

  • ||

    Trendy use of the world FAIL FAIL

  • ||

    word.... typo FAIL

  • ||

    Me being up to date on the latest Internet lingo FAIL, happily acknowledged

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    crayon = FAIL

    FIFY.

  • Kyle Jordan||

    Yep.

    Merry/Happy/Joyous Xmachanukwanzaa to everyone.

  • Shotgun||

    Why do you hate solstice people?

  • Frank Costanza||

    I demand Festivus equality! MY holiday! I invented it! Ingrates!

  • brotherben||

    Kwanzaa last?

    Racist!

  • Lord Acton||

    The greatest opportunity ever given to the world was thrown away when the passion for equality made vain the hope for freedom.

  • Slap the Enlightened!||

    Indeed. Never trust a man with liberty on his lips and an equal sign in his pocket.

    Now that we're officially a banana republic, can the military please step in and stage a coup?

  • Barack Obama||

    Working on it. Should be able to tear up the Third Amendment and start quartering troops by the end of 2010.

  • ||

    But the first thing they're going to do is shoot me, so maybe I need to create a "People's Security Police" for domestic military law enforcement operations against the, uhhhh, terrorists that's it...the TERRORISTS! I picked up some good pointers on setting something like that up from my good homey Wen down in Hopenchang'in.

    Merry Kwanzaa bitches! HAR! HAR! HAR!

  • The Real Barack Obama||

    Because anyone who voted for Ron Paul, the Constitution Party, or anyone who isn't a Democrat for that matter, IS a terrorist. It's that simple. And we're going to start rounding up these Tenth Amendment-hugging troublemakers as soon as we can finally put that tiresome Bill of Rights through my Change-O-Matic and reword it to fit My Specifications.

    See you in Gitmo, right-wingers.

  • ||

    As I read your words, I heard your impressive voice, Barack. You are so good for us right now, so very good for us.

    It kinda makes me hard when you speak, like you are talking right into me; your strong words confidently thrusting into my willing and pliable brain, over and over, until a feeling of pure pleasure engulfs me as your words spray like melted butter all over my mind.

    And to think people say your popularity is a cult, Ha! They just don't get it, Barack. They just don't get it like I do.

  • oaktownadam||

    racist.

  • Barackus Obamus||

    Is that you, Chris Matthews? You are truly worthy of My Benevolence.

  • In Time Of War||

    Since we are now in an eternal state of "war" with terrorists, I see absolutely no reason they can't start quartering troops in our houses immediately.
    And all Patriotic(tm) Americans should welcome the opportunity.

  • Chancellor Sutler||

    What we need right now is a clear message to the people of this country. This message must be read in every newspaper, heard on every radio, seen on every television. I want this country to realize that we stand on the edge of oblivion. I want everyone to remember, why. they. need. us!

  • John Tagliaferro||

    And I got to discover this crappy news on my own blog 2.5 hours ago. This reminder is worse than a pinch! Not shooting the messenger.

  • ||

    The lovefest press conference yesterday made me ill. They are so proud of themselves for pulling the wool over our eyes. It's almost enough to make me believe in Satan.

  • Kyle Jordan||

    Make no mistake, whatever your faith or lack of faith may be, this is evil. From the most vile pit it comes from.

    The urge to dominate and control others for whatever reason and kill freedom is what these people are about. I don't know which is worse though. The ones that willingly do this or the ones that are too stupid, blind, naive to see what they're doing.

  • MNG||

    Kyle
    You really think the supporters are evil? Do you mean the officials who voted for it, the part of the public that still supports it, both? Evil?

    I'd give you less than competent, less than courageous or less than intelligent, but I don't think of them as evil.

    Sinestro is evil. These guys ain't Sinestro.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Spot on. This is worse than evil. Evil would be much easier to combat.

  • Kyle Jordan||

    Sinestro craved order. To get it, he conquered Korugar and ruled it as a dictator. He did it also to "protect" his people.

    After he was outed and punished, he began to use fear as his weapon.

    Totalitarian methodology, using fear as a weapon. Yeah, I can see quite a bit of Sinestro in our wonderful politicians. From all parties.

    As for evil. Yes, I see evil in this bill and others like it. I would really love to say that I don't think the members of Congress are doing something evil. After getting involved, and looking over the evidence, I can't say that. And I mean this to go far back. Not just applied to this Congress.

    Others would define it as incompetence or idiocy but I simply do not think that covers the way I feel. I see willing harm being caused to people here. Wittingly or unwittingly.

    Is it the "evilest" thing happening now on this planet? No. But evil to me, yes.

    Take it for what it's worth. The opinion of an idiot who for the most part posts inane, moronic, and tedious bullshit in an attempt to engage strangers whom he has read comments from and is trying to learn new things.

  • ||

    Pelosi, Reid, and Obama are pure f'in evil. The voters that support the bill, most of them, are just misguided. They want free stuff or they have compassion, but they are not considering the implications in an unbiased and logical way. They do not consider that this is NOT free, that whatever subsidies they may receive or is given to others, is on the back of other tax payers. They also are not considering that this bill has been corrupted beyond all recognition and is not what they really support, but like Obama, they continue to celebrate it in the simpleton 'WE WON, YOU LOST!' type of reason that I frequently see from so called liberals.

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    Statism is evil, MNG. Party affiliation in this instance is ancillary.

  • Tony||

    Calling someone evil is a convenient way of avoiding addressing any of their arguments.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Thank god Tony's here. Now the party can really begin!

  • ||

    The "argument" that a massive new entitlement will lower the deficit? That taxing medical devices will make healthcare more affordable? That eliminating cheaper insurance policies will? That we can depend on their cost projections, when Medicare was 900% over budget in the first 15 years?

  • juris imprudent||

    Hey Tony is right. This isn't evil so much as it is stupid, pointless and horribly expensive.

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    Nice tapdance, Tony, considering how many on your side of the left use that tactic as a means of passing legislation.

    Notice, though, I did include BOTH major parties. Why did you gloss over that, BTW?

  • ||

    Evil is as evil does.

  • ||

    Yes, I see this all the time in liberal responses to my posts in the local paper site. I think I have also seen the word "Libertard" in some posts on this site.

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    Michael Medved uses it when he goes on his semi-regular anti-third party tirades. Hell, he uses the term "Constipation Party" - and, in theory, the Constitution Party is right up his alley.

    But he's one of those morons who think there can be only two parties, period. I'm surprised Medved doesn't come out and advocate for use of force to prevent non-R/D candidates from running.

  • Gilbert Martin||

    The Democrats are communist scum - pure and simple

  • .||

    Party of liars, beggars, and thieves...led by Shitmouth Obama, Lord of Liars, King of Thieves.

  • Rich||

    "Santa Claus is Coming to Town"
    can be rearranged to yield
    "Satan Accustoming Lion Tows".

    BWAHAHAHAA!

  • ||

    The North Pole melted. Santa, all his elves, and reindeer drowned, and the polar bears too. He has been replaced by Satan Claus and the US Senate. Would you like a little lubricant with your Christmas Gift? HO HO HO.

  • Ratko||

    This is going to be a wonderful year, can't you just feel it coming.

  • Johnny Longtorso||

    If you still feel it, use more lube.

  • Kim Jong-il||

    Democrats say they've come too far now to fail.

    Me, too.

  • MNG||

    They worked and they worked and they came up with something that dissatsifies all people! It's like the New Coke. Yeah everyone hates it but darn it we put a lot of time into coming up with this so we are going ahead with it!

  • MattXIV||

    Yeah, but New Coke's marketing didn't include repeated statements that the only reason someone wouldn't like it's taste is that they want people to die. It's harder to reintroduce Coca-Cola Classic when you've been claiming it's responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of people each year for the last couple months.

  • ||

    New Coke also wasn't a pivotal change in the relationship between American people and their government: Never before has the purchase of a good or service been a mandatory condition for citizenship. But it's for your own good, citizen.

    Congratulations to the US Congress for their efforts transforming the USA to a command economy of mandatory corporatism.

    "The Fascist conception of the State is all-embracing; outside of it no human or spiritual values can exist, much less have value. Thus understood, Fascism is totalitarian, and the Fascist State--a synthesis and a unit inclusive of all values--interprets, develops, and potentiates the whole life of a people." --Benito Mussolini


    Please someone aggrieved bring suit and take it all the way to SCOTUS.

  • pmains||

    Thank you. This is why I'm never impressed by self-satisfied "policy wonks." How about visionary "principle wonks?"

  • pmains||

    Thank you. This is why I'm never impressed by self-satisfied "policy wonks." How about visionary "principle wonks?"

  • Rich||

    Harry Reid [said] "there may not be a next time."

    There *will* not be a next time for Harry.

  • Mike M.||

    Yeah, this scumbag getting the boot will be my favorite moment come November.

    Their plunge into insanity has already cost the democrats one member of their caucus, and it will cost them many more yet.

  • dennis||

    Won't matter. He will collect a pension, get a job as a lobbyist and laugh at the fact that that fate was his "punishment."

  • Jeffersonian||

    It's too bad this hang-dog totalitarian can't be ground up for fiber supplement after being defeated. Publicly.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    As long as it dissatisfies all people equally.

  • Tim Cavanaugh||

    I'm waiting for somebody to bring in the platitude about how it must be a good compromise because nobody's satisfied, so turn that frown upside down!

  • juris imprudent||

    Ah, yes, that was said about the great California power dereguation scheme - everyone claimed to get what they wanted.

    I guess everyone wanted to get screwed.

  • rather crazy that Libertarian||

    it must be a good compromise because nobody's satisfied

  • rather crazy that Liberal||

    Bill to be renamed "No Statist Left Behind".

  • ed||

    Yesterday I actually heard one of those ubiquitous political "strategists" who infest the news cycles bemoan the Senate's 60-vote cloture rule because it was undermining the Senate's "checks and balances" against the people. Got that? It wasn't unchecked, unlimited government power that the framers of the Constitution feared, it was the people's ability to thwart it, through their Senators' right to filibuster. The people, it seems, cannot be trusted. Her opposite on the show did not question this vile notion, and the moderator had to "end it there."

  • ||

    But it's HISTORIC! You people should be excited to be watching history in the making!

  • J.W. Booth||

    Assassinations are also historic. Sic Semper Tyrannis!

  • Slut Bunwalla||

    Bad idea. The last thing we want is to make Obama a martyr.

  • boothe||

    What about Reid?

  • ||

    You know how HISTORIC this bill is? "health care" itself gets 367 million hits, while "historic health care" gets 79.8 million. So roughly 22% of the health care discussed recently has been HISTORIC.

  • ||

    ...

  • ||

    "Baby, I'm just gonna keep on smackin' you, until you say you love me."

  • ||

    "Pork Bill (mentioning healthcare) Passes in Senate"

  • Shotgun||

    Merry Fucking Christmas.

  • Shotgun||

  • MNG||

    The only way I can figure this out as a political matter is the Dems feel that they already have been branded as the party of terrible health reform and that the only thing they can save is to deliver something to the everdwindling number of people who still support having "some" reform pass. They're guessing they've already taken the beatings for this and want to get something out of it. But it's a pretty terrible bill.

  • Jeffersonian||

    As a pure, political matter, it's supremely important for Democrats to get as many people dependent on the Central State as possible, both from the delivery and consumption ends. If one scales up the British NHS to the American population, the eventual collectivization of health care in America will have about 8 million new public employees who are dedicated to voting Democrat to keep their jobs.

  • juris imprudent||

    Look, the Dems in leadership are all pretty well to the left of the party at large, let alone swing-voters who smartly dumped the idiot Republicans out of power. The problem is that leadership is deluded, they think the country as whole swung all they way out to la-la-land. That would be about as likely as a sweeping Libertarian take-over of Congress. But the leadership actually deludes themselves into believing the country wants this.

    The question will be, can the leadership keep the moderate elements of the party in camp. I expect more 'favors' a la Nelson before this is all over.

  • Michael Ejercito||

    The only way I can figure this out as a political matter is the Dems feel that they already have been branded as the party of terrible health reform and that the only thing they can save is to deliver something to the everdwindling number of people who still support having "some" reform pass. They're guessing they've already taken the beatings for this and want to get something out of it. But it's a pretty terrible bill.


    Of course it is terrible.

    What other posibbilty was there when they dismissed price controls on health care providers. If there were price controls, people would not need insurance to afford health care.

  • von Mises||

    price controls lead to shortages.

    In fact, Congress keeps avoiding price controls in Medicare, by passing the "fix" year after year.

  • Michael Ejercito||

    price controls lead to shortages.


    There is an important distinction between price controls on health care and price controls on gas.

    When the price of gas goes down, people tend to use more gas.

    By contrast, when the price of chemotherapy goes down, people do not tend to get cancer more often.

  • ||

    No, but they tend not to get chemotherapy as often.

  • John Tagliaferro||

    You know how HISTORIC this bill is? "health care" itself gets 367 million hits, while "historic health care" gets 79.8 million. So roughly 22% of the health care discussed recently has been HISTORIC.

    I prefer the hystoric system with the modern methods.

  • ComradeZero||

    Oh be quiet all of you. Are you all feeling a little less smug about not voting today? This pretense you have of being revolutionaries is getting a little less entertaining every day. This country is at the point it is in no small measure due to the fact that the most ardent champions of liberty are a bunch of whiners who sit in their dorm rooms smoking pot, slamming back PBRs, reading Ayn Rand to justify your laziness and bragging about how much better the world would be if you were running things. Here's the funny thing: since actually "doing something" is so uncool you have not actually gotten anything done. You all find that surprising which is the really sad part. So keep sitting on your asses and keep whining about how you're such tragic victims. It's helped a lot so far so why change a winning strategy?

  • MNG||

    Hey, Merry Christmas right back at ya Mr. 0!

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Come the revolution, MNG, ComradeZero is first against the wall.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Actually, while we've been sitting on our asses, ComradeZero has been furiously penning righteous letters to the editor since 1977. That'll teach the bastards.

  • ComradeZero||

    Yeah, that revolution's coming any day now, right? Just as soon as you're finished loading up your iPod and get through that last "Sopranos" DVD.

  • ComradeZero||

    Really, though, you are no more entitled to have the world the way you want it than the other side is. Just expecting them to give up is ludicrous. You want freedom? Fight for it. And keep fighting for it.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Your stirring words have persuaded me, ComradeZero! But before I follow you, I'll need to know your positions on contrails and the legality of the Admiralty flag as displayed in certain U.S. courts.

  • ComradeZero||

    A flag is a flag is a flag. And no, I don't believe in ChemTrails, black helicopters, truthers, birthers, birchers, illuminati/templar/bilderburg conspiracies, CFR conspiracies or government mind control beams either. I'm just someone who is frustrated by the lack of action in the cause of freedom.

  • ||

    ditto. There is probably more support right now in this country for a 3rd party than ever before, but we Libertarians just seem to have no ability at all to take advantage of it. It is frustrating.

  • ||

    And no, I don't believe in ChemTrails, black helicopters, truthers, birthers, birchers,

    OK, great. And there's likewise no reason to claim that people here are "sitting in their dorm rooms smoking pot, slamming back PBRs, reading Ayn Rand to justify their laziness." You have a good underlying argument -- why insult the very people you're trying to persuade?

  • ||

    Agree Tom, basically he is right about the need for Libertarians to become more politically active, but the insults are not a good way to get the point across.

  • juris imprudent||

    Well, talk about mis-reading the public just like Pelosi et al.

    I'll believe in a Libertarian groundswell when I see one.

  • Cliché Bandit||

    As a former leader within the LP I must whole heartedly disagree with your assesment. We have worked our asses off, and all we did was double our membership. I can tell that you have not done much actual work (this is not meant as a dig just an observation based on your comments). If you had you would see that it is extremely difficult to overcome certain memes within politics. Yet we still try, we still fail, and we still try again. I personally have spent over 10,000 dollars in the last 5 year, run for office 3 times (and not senator or anything...local "winable" offices). I have been pushing the message at county fairs, gun shows, civic events, on radio, tv, and in newspapers. I am also not alone. You complain that no one is fighting but the LP in my state has fought tooth and nail for the last decade at least. Please do some more research before casting stones.

    Let thee without sin...

  • juris_imprudent||

    I am not at all denigrating your efforts, but doesn't some kind of message begin to sink in after all the futility?

    I was in the party back in the 80s. I dropped out because at the time, the leadership was more interested in purity of view then actual implementation. If that has changed, great, but something still isn't working when the party can't gain any ground.

  • Slap the Enlightened!||

    Well, as nearly as I can tell, drastic political change usually involves lots of people getting killed. Unless you're willing to grab your shootin' iron and get to work, I expect all of this bloviating about liberty will amount to pissing into the ocean.

  • hoover||

    ...or maybe we're just ahead of the curve, and it's just a matter of time before our fellow citizens catch up to our assessment of the situation, and our analysis of what needs to be done.

  • ||

    Sadly enough, I have to agree with you. If Libertarians could actually get organized and politically active(outside of the blogosphere), we could probably accomplish something. After all, this is how the lunatic socialist left got so much power. They don't even have the numbers at all, but when you are the only voice being heard... what is that old saying, the squeaky wheel gets the grease, it seems to ring true.

  • Brian Lockwood||

    This is all a pipe dream. Just because people are frustrated with the main two parties doesn't mean they are ready to legalize drugs, abolish the IRS and privatize national parks. Libertarians do poorly in elections simply because most people don't like libertarian ideas. People's underlying beliefs need to change before anybody resembling a libertarian gets elected to anything important.

  • ||

    I think if you took a national poll today, you may be surprised how many would favor legalizing Marijuana. I wasn't aware that privatizing national parks was a major issue with most Libertarians. What brought me to the Libertarian party is their stance in favor of smaller government, along with more personal and financial freedom. Putting privatization of national parks as a main issue for Libertarians I think is a little misleading.

  • juris imprudent||

    You aren't actually a big-L party member, are you?

    If park privatization was the worst the party had to offer, it might actually get somewhere. Unfortunately, the party has been in the hands of the purists for over 20 years. The purists don't care about actually winning and implementing their ideas - they'd rather stroke to the beautiful vision believing they are emulating the Socialists of the 30s.

  • Bob Barr||

    "The party has been in the hands of the purists for over 20 years."

    Uh -- some folk might take issue with that.

  • juris imprudent||

    Fine, a few sensible folks slipped into the national convention (this time).

    Tell me about your candidate for Congress or the Senate.

  • barr-bo-bot||

    Voting for Barr as a Libertarian can be considered rational?

    Only if one was born after Barr left his previous office, I suppose. What a convenient time Barr chose to see the light!

  • ||

    juris, I suppose you can say I am not a big-L party member then. I would rather see us take what I perceive as the core principles of small government, free market systems, personal liberty, end the drug war, stop starting unnecessary wars, and do something with it. National parks are not imposing on my freedoms, until the democrats take over all private property and turn it into parks, which they will if left unchecked.

  • Brian Lockwood||

    I only mention the parks as an example of some of the more extreme and unpopular views held by libertarians. And although its not high on the list of priorities, privatization is the logical conclusion of the libertarian brand of government. If you can't defend this position then the whole ideology is on unsteady ground.

  • oaktownadam||

    There's nothing wrong with private land trusts.

    We could even exempt them from property taxes!

  • Robert||

    Most people shouldn't (and won't) perceive it as an ideology, just as a bunch of good ideas some people have. Stop trying to sell an ideology to the masses -- who are never sold on any ideology, and in the USA are frequently vehemently against the very idea of ideology -- and instead just do the normal things done by those who are successful politically.

  • Robert||

    Just because people are frustrated with the main two parties doesn't mean they are ready to legalize drugs, abolish the IRS and privatize national parks.


    No, but they may be ready to reduce penalties for illegal drug activities, reduce taxes, and allow more things to be done on park land. And they don't even have to be frustrated with the entirety of the main parties, just with their leadership or certain elements within them.

  • The Chad||

    I stand by my plan to hijack the Green Party, and market 'Green' as in money (the virtue of selfishness), sustainability (NOT regulations, but efficient decentralization), and as in ganja (full legalization, NOT taxation).

    Some states allow candidates to self-identify, whether a party supports them or not. Thoughts anyone?

  • The Bearded Hobbit||

    I see this and I shake my head. We have people here who are proud, PROUD, that they don't vote. What in the hell do they expect, that change will come about by osmosis or something?

    Even though individual votes may not count against some statist asshole, the cumulative effect can get third parties legitimate status on ballots.

    ... Hobbit

  • ||

    He's got a point. True, one person's vote probably makes no difference, but influencing the votes of large blocs of people can make a huge difference. And it's quite strange that certain full-time Reason writers (Mangu-Ward, Doherty), who make a living complaining about the actions of government, actually wrote pieces encouraging libertarians NOT to vote in 2008.

  • ||

    I did that in the past, refused to vote because I thought all of the candidates suck. Never again, this tactic does not work. I mean, I know that Libertarians just like to be left alone, unfortunately the only hope we have to be left alone by government now is to become very politically active and loud.

  • Shotgun||

    If you lived in MN and saw how Al Franken had the election stolen on his behalf, you'd be a moron to even consider voting again.

  • ||

    I live in MD, and there is probably no hope in hell that voting R or L will get any result other than seeing another dem win in a major race. But I am voting anyway against every dem in every race. Don't give up, that is what they want.

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    What about voting Green Party? Does that result in Republicans winning?

    See, I don't buy that idea. Votes belong to the voters, not the Rs and Ds.

  • ||

    Actually, considering the really tight margin in Franken's race, a couple thousand more votes for his opponent would have cut off any hope of stealing the election.

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    Um, show us a polling place open on Christmas Eve, and we'll be there.

  • ||

    Sorry TLG, but the dem majority have reserved times like Christmas eve to have meetings behind closed doors to make sure we 'get what we want'. I don't think they are too in favor of opening up polling places right now.

  • MNG||

    I have really good insurance through the private sector (at least it's always been pretty good, I guess I could find out in the future it's not so good, noone can really know the future about such things) so I've always been wary of any health care "reform." I think of the same organization that seems to take years to fix the road in front of where I work and think holy shit I don't want these guys to "reform" my insurance! I would think a lot of people would think like this. It occurred to me when Obama spoke of reforming health care that the best political hope he had was to cast the insurance companies as the "bad guys" and sell health care reform as a "consumer protection/stick it to the insurance companies" thing. A lot of people think their insurance companies suck, are heartless and are amazingly inefficient (friends have shown me some absurd bills from private insurance companies).

    So what does Obama do? He pushes through a bill that forces everyone to buy insurance from one of those companies, whether they want to or not.

    Brilliant!

  • ||

    Finally something that we agree on MNG, but I really don't see how you think cap and trade will turn out better for us. You really think this same Obama will not push through climate change legislation that will be bad for tax payers and do absolutely nothing to prevent so called climate change?

  • MNG||

    I'm against cap and trade.

  • ||

    Really? Never have heard you say that. Not saying you did not say it, just that I have not seen that post.

  • MNG||

    I've said it like a hundred times, probably on every GW thread I've been on. I think the scientists who say AGW is for real are more likely right than their critics. Having said that I am very, very opposed to cap and trade. The bill that passed the House is a nightmare, as I expected.

    Thinking the scientists are right doesn't mean you have to be for every goofy-ass idea that comes down the pike to address AGW. Hell, you can think they are right and not think anything should be done about it.

  • anonymous||

    He's consistently said that, just because he thinks AGW is real, doesn't mean that cap and trade is an appropriate solution.

  • CrackertyAssCracker||

    I'd much rather have CapNTrade than this health care reform. CapNTrade sucks, don't get me wrong, but when it comes down to it, its nothing but a bunch of taxes. That seems to be the only thing that is occasionally repealed by the boys in DC. This helth care crap is step one in permanently screwin up the system.

  • ||

    MNG, your oscillations between logical analysis and trollery boggles my mind.

  • ||

    Health care reform may hurt the wallet of MNG, apparently cap and trade puts money in his wallet, or so he speculates...

  • MNG||

    There's a search mechanism on the right side of your screen if you scroll up. Look at the threads on GW and let me know when I endorsed cap and trade...

    Cap and trade will hurt economic productivity, and I happen to like economic productivity (it means a bigger pie for me to have a slice of, also as productivity increases human misery tends to decrease). Cap and trade will involve things I buy every day being more expensive, and I try very hard to find inexpensive things, so I don't like that. Cap and trade will harm heavily unionized industries, and I like traditional unions. Cap and trade will mean higher taxes, and I don't like to pay taxes. Cap and trade will probably not work to address what its supposed to, so all that negative stuff will not be balanced by any benefits. And to top it off I can't see how a cap and trade bill could possibly pass through our political instituions without being full of rent-seeking provisions for the connected.

    I remember many years ago reading cap and trade proposals from pro-market types, they based it on Coase's ideas. Interesting in theory, but I've never been convinced its correct (even in theory, much less in practice).

  • ||

    Fair enough. But, I still disagree with you that AGW is real. There was a warming trend and now there is a cooling trend. All natual cycles. Perhaps if you would like to engage in more rantional discussion about that in the future instead of resorting to personal insults to posters who disagree with you?

  • ||

    I diagree with MNG over most stuff, but in his defense he doesn't troll. He actually seems to believe all the arguments he advances.

  • oaktownadam||

    Shut the fuck up, Hyperion. Your work as self-appointed troll-police is not helpful, and just sounds like whining to me.

  • ||

    Wow, Id say its time to Go Gadget Go

    Jess
    www.Ultimate-Privacy.net

  • Citizen Nothing||

    You can say THAT again!

  • Citizen Nothing||

    I really think anonymity-bot has as good a handle on this thing as anyone. He's become like a god to me.

  • Kyle Jordan||

    It's a bit unnerving how he manages to be some damn spot on sometimes.

  • Byron||

    Sub-par effort, bot.

  • ||

    These pass-something-now bills are always bad, and they usually cost through the nose. When the GOP takes over both houses next year--yeah, I think it's probable now, despite their crappiness--they'd better actually think about doing something unprecedented: Undoing the damage.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Heh, heh, heh.
    Right.

  • Kyle Jordan||

    I highly doubt it. But I secretly hope this is what happens.

  • ||

    The change in party I think is pretty likely. The undo? Nah.

  • ||

    The change is very likely. Although amazingly, the Dems do not see it coming, they are too out of touch with reality. The undo is not impossible, but I think it will take some time. Part of the reason I think the undo is possible is that I just do not think it is sustainable and once it is enacted it is going to be hugely unpopular compared to now.

  • Hey You||

    If the Repubs take over both houses they won't have super majorities plus Obama will still be around for 2 more years. They could possible remove the worst parts of the bill and put in some market reforms, but the Repubs have proven to be pretty spinless. Maybe the new crop of Repubs will actually have some principles.

  • In Time Of War||

    And exactly why should we trust them *this time*?

  • ||

    Not before a change in the Oval Office in 2012.

  • ||

    What we need to do is vote every fucking Democrat out of office. I want to vote Libertarian but I feel now that I have to vote Repub to get these slimeball socialists out of power before they completely wreck the country. Once that is achieved, like you said, the Repubs better get their asses in gear and actually do something to restore the economy and our liberties. We need to put them under the microscope and watch every move they make, letting them know we are going to hold them accountable. I think they will at least listen a little, unlike Pelosi and ilk who think they do not answer to the American people. Once we have dismantled the socialist party, we need to start getting more Libertarian leaning Repubs into office and hopefully some true Libertarians.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Jesus, Hyperion. They've got you right where they want you.

  • ||

    Not really Citizen, it's just that I am starting to realize that for Libertarians to accomplish their political goals is going to take patience and doing some things that may at first appear to be going against their own party. Unfortunately, I am looking at the lesser of two evils. Right now, there is no balance of power at all in the Senate, that needs to change and change soon, in 2010.

  • ||

    You've completely bought into their system. So when the Republicans brutally betray you after you vote them in, well, shiiiiiiitt, you'd better vote Dem to punish them, right?

    This is what they want you to do, dude. Precisely.

  • ||

    Epi, don't think that I am too stupid to realize what you just said, but the best case scenario right now, IMO, is to get some balance of power back. I do not trust Republicans, I just want to make both big parties less powerful. What is your solution to this? You don't think the dems could get a majority in both houses that would be most impossible to overcome for many years? Myself, that prospect scares the hell out of me. I will vote Libertarian in every race I can vote in, if we have a candidate, including POTUS, but for US Senate and HOR, I am voting R. Sorry if that offends some of my fellow Libertarians, but I really feel it is the best thing to do. I can be convinced otherwise if someone presents a good enough argument.

  • ||

    First of all, see Tara below. Secondly, the only way you'll actually get change is to let them fuck things up so badly that two things can happen:

    1) you get a populist, Hitler-like (Godwin!) demagogue who rolls into power, or
    2) people are feeling the pain enough that they vote for someone who actually wants to roll a lot of this shit back (sort of like Reagan vs Carter--and this is in no way an endorsement of Reagan, just that he ran on this type of platform)

    So roll the dice, and see what happens.

  • burn baby burn||

    I'll take the Hitler-type demagogue gladly! A final solution for these socialist parasites is long overdue!

  • ||

    The reason we are where we are now is because so many libertarians in 2006 and 2008 were saying (in response to wars & wiretaps), "What we need to do is vote every fucking Republican out of office. I want to vote Libertarian but I feel now that I have to vote Dem to get these slimeball fascists out of power before they completely wreck the country."

    See how they git'cha?

  • ||

    I think the right thing to do, and I failed to do it, would have been to vote L in every race except US Senate and HOR, and voting R there could have eliminated the 60 vote clusterfuck that has given us the Christmas gift that will keep on Fucking us all.

  • LibertyCowboy||

    This would almost make sense if you lived in a swing state, but the chances of your vote influencing the outcome in MD are less than the likleyhood of you dying in an accident in-route to your polling place.

  • ||

    True, I have already acknowledged this. MD was never intended to be a long term ride for me. I came here for a great job op, and that has worked out well for me. MD is a beautiful state with so many things to do and see, I do like it here. But when I came here I knew what the political climate was. Oddly enough, I have found Libertarian friends amoungst my colleauges. I feel that the support for a 3rd party is growing, but I am more of an optimist, so what do I know?

  • ||

    True, I have already acknowledged this. MD was never intended to be a long term ride for me. I came here for a great job op, and that has worked out well for me. MD is a beautiful state with so many things to do and see, I do like it here. But when I came here I knew what the political climate was. Oddly enough, I have found Libertarian friends amoungst my colleauges. I feel that the support for a 3rd party is growing, but I am more of an optimist, so what do I know?

  • ||

    Don't worry, we got that covered too!

  • ||

    The GOP isn't getting the Senate back in 2010. They'd have to defeat incumbents in deep blue states to do that. The Dems were able to win in deep red states like NE and AK due to mass GOP retirements and utter disgust with Bush. And even that didn't get them to 60 votes, it took a back-room deal with Spectraitor.

    I think it's likely the GOP gets back the House and drops the Dems to 55 votes or so in the Senate. No more than that.

  • ||

    A much better situation than we have now, at least it gives some balance to slow these lunatics down a little.

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    That's like saying only 3/4 of a house is on fire, instead of the whole building being ablaze.

    But, yeah, it is kinda better. Sorta.

  • ||

    They would need a 60 vote supermajority to repeal it.

  • LibertyCowboy||

    If they wanted to, the Republicans could just shutdown the government for two years by refusing to pass a budget unless this were repealed. However, they would hae to give up their war.

  • CrackertyAssCracker||

    Even if they wanted to, and really only 20%ish of them want to, how are they going to get past the Veto pen? Take a principled stand and use the power of the purse? Now that is funny.

  • ||

    They would need 67 votes to repeal it before 2012. Maybe 60 after then, maybe not.

    It seems unlikely. Once it's in, it's in permanently.

  • ||

    Take over the House, yes. Winning 30 of 36 races to take over the Senate? Seems wildly improbable.

  • James Cromwell||

    That'll do, bot. That'll do.

  • ||

    I think there's a direct correlation between how "historic" and sincere pols are getting, and how hard we're about to get fucked.

    Hey, at least it happened at Christmas, when there's no stigma about drinking in the morning.

  • ||

    Indeed. If someone thinks "historic" = good, they haven't read much history.

  • Draco||

    +1

  • ||

    ....for a magazize called reason.....

  • ||

    I would really love to say that I don't think the members of Congress are doing something evil.

    Robbing Peter to pay Paul is always evil.

  • ||

    especially when Mary doesn't get a cut.

  • Warty||

    What the fuck? I thought this bill was all but dead. I check out from the world for a few days, and this shit happens? Fuck you, Jesus.

  • Kyle Jordan||

    It's all his fault! He came back from the dead for free but he forgets we all don't have daddies with that kind of clout. Some of us work for a living.

    I love your post Warty. Thanks for making me laugh.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    We needed just one more voice, Warty, just like in Horton Hears a Who. But you were off fucking around.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    ComradeZero would like a word with you.

  • BakedPenguin||

    C'mon, lay off a bit. Captain Zero might have been a bit hyperbolic, but the "fuck it, what difference does it make" shit annoys the hell out of me, too. Libertarians poll around .5%. If that was even 2 or 3%, we might have enough say to push on certain key votes. As it is, all politicians know they can safely ignore us.

    Meanwhile, libertarians won't vote for a Libertarian candidate because he/she won't privatize roads or the Post Office or the police. And then we wind up with shit like the permanent Republican majority voting themselves a few new wars, and tons of pork, until everyone gets sick of it and votes in "change", and we're right where we are now. Wheeeeee.

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    According to some people, we "cost" Republicans in some elections because we "stole" just enough votes to tip it to the Democrat candidates.

    You're right about the average vote totals, btw, but in some areas we get a lot more. Michael Cloud damn near got 20% against John "I served in Vietnam, did I mention that?" Kerry, for instance - which is miraculous in a state like Taxachussetts.

    One of my colleagues pulled about 22% in a three-way race for a county commissioner seat. Hell, *I* pulled close to five percent running against my own state rep, and I spent less than five hundred bucks.

    You are right about the shit cycle, though. Repubs get absolute power, go apeshit... then Democrats get elected and do the same thing. Wheeeee, indeed.

  • ||

    True dat. Everyone that thinks these ersatz cowboys are going to ride into D.C. on their plastic horses and restore freedom to the good ol' U.S. of A. have a big surprise coming.

    I'm not that old, but I have seen enough election cycles to know it's all bull. The best we can hope for is a mixed party Washington where nothing gets done, a la Clinton's second term.

  • ||

    Oh yeah, forgot... Wheee!

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    Indeed. Gridlock is good.

  • ||

    I got 46% running for the state senate. I didn't run on the LP ticket, but I sure would have voted like a radical libertarian if I had got in.

    We need more Rand Paul like candidates, libertarians taking on a major party label.

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    What party did you run under, prole? Or did you run independent?

  • juris imprudent||

    No the problem is the Libertarian Party won't run candidates that might win, with platforms with broader appeal. The party is run by purists who cast out all those that don't worship at their own private Rand altar.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Right, j.i.
    And who was it the Libertarians ran for prez in '08? Oh. Right.

  • juris imprudent||

    Barr was an aberration, and a hotly contested one at that.

    Quite frankly, if the party keeps picking up candidates like him, it may be an indication that the purists are on their way out - and that would be a damn good thing.

  • ||

    I think L.P. needs to focus more on specific pieces of legislation and ally up with groups in agreement, whether they be left or right, to defeat or pass said legislation.

    Instead we worry about how many county commissioners we have.

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    Not every libertarian is a Rand worshiper, juris.

    But we did drop the ball by not nominating Mary Ruwart. Smart woman, and it would've given Hillary a bit of notice that someone better-looking AND more feminine was running.

  • anonymous||

    Is he your Soviet counterpart or something?

  • ||

    Santa was going to save us, but with the North Pole melting and all, he didn't have time.

  • Al Gore||

    Um, that North Pole cap melting thing... I, uh, kinda fibbed about that.

  • ||

    Shhh, don't tell the children that! We need to sell them more propaganda and custom made stuffed bears. Just imagine, next year maybe we can get federal funding to make stuffed bears that speak government propaganda in English and Spanish!

  • Syd Henderson||

    It's a Festivus miracle!

  • ||

    I've got the gosh-darnedest wintry wonderland right outside my door. I'm gonna wax the old boards, and go do some turns.

    O frabjous day!

  • Old Bull Lee||

    "This will be the most important piece of social legislation since Social Security passed in the 1930s," said Obama without a trace of irony.

  • Jeffersonian||

    Look at it this way: It's not Social Security that will be bankrupting us the most quickly now.

  • ||

    Nothing personal, but I think some of you guys are seriously deluded. I wexpect every one of those motherfuckers to be re-elected.

    P Brooks|12.19.09 @ 6:59PM|#

    "He may be a mendacious, venal idiot, but by golly, when you get right down to it, he's OUR mendacious, venal idiot. If it wasn't for those OTHER ninety-eight venal idiots who represent those other states, this would truly be the land of milk and honey."
  • Kyle Jordan||

    I'm at the point of hopelessness to agree with you.

    I've said it before, and I mean it now more than ever, but the 2010 elections will tell me, in one last fail swoop, everything I need to know about my fellow countrymen.

  • ||

    The 2010 elections will tell you in one fell swoop which brand of thievery and authoritarianism your fellow countrymen prefer, this cycle.

    Then '12, '14, '16,..., ad infinitum.

  • anonymous||

    It's 'fell' swoop, but your way works too.

  • Kyle Jordan||

    I wrote "fail" purposely.

    Yeah, that's the ticket...

    ...

  • ||

    It's difficult to be optimistic now, but the polls are showing a different story. I think it is only a question of how many seats the dems will lose, but lose seats, they will.

  • ||

    True. IIRC, in the runup to '94, Republicans were even with or slightly ahead of Democrats on the generic ballot question ("Which party do you prefer...."), but there was an historic blowout. At the moment, on the same question, Reps lead Dems by eight points. That looks huge to me. Hard to see how the Dems turn it around in ten months.

  • ||

    They will try by pretending to focus on 'creating jobs', and if we are lucky maybe they will hold off on cap and trade. But it will not work, they are going to lose seats in 2010. I am not sure it will be huge, but agree that the poll numbers may suggest that.

  • ||

    "wexpect"

    A contraction of the "imperial we" and "expect".

  • ||

    I think our Bot has been partaking of something a little more potent than his Victory Gin ration, this morning.

  • ||

    I'm waiting for somebody to bring in the platitude about how it must be a good compromise because nobody's satisfied, so turn that frown upside down!

    There's another one, which might be more appropriate.

    "If you're sitting at the table when the deal is done, and you're not completely sure who's gonna get fucked, it's probably you."

  • Johnny Longtorso||

    The rush is to use the 2008 financial crisis and the short term Dem supermajority to push as much dependence on govt as possible, for the long term benefit of govt. Period.

  • ||

    +1. That and to satisfy Obamas maniacal ego.

  • Barack Obama||

    Smile when referring to My Ego, peon.

  • Jennifer||

    While the recent actions of Congress are "evil," I suspect their motivation is not "evil" but a form of "I know better than you" contempt. I remember when someone -- I think it was that vile Pelosi -- said something in the last pre-bailout days about how the overwhelming majority of people calling her office were opposed to the bailouts, but she was going to vote for them anyway.

    This is not evil but contemptuous, the assumption that American adult voters are like five-year-old children: the little dears cannot understand that what they want is often quite different from what is good for them.

    A good parent has the right -- nay, the responsibility -- to override the child's wishes for the child's own good. That's a fine attitude for adult parents to take toward their little children; problem is, more and more it's becoming the attitude elected officials take toward their adult constituents.

  • Ebeneezer Scrooge||

    You have a really fucking weird sense of "evil". You're letting them off waayyy to easy.

  • juris imprudent||

    When a dumbshit with power expresses contempt for the common man, that's counts as evil for me.

  • Jennifer||

    Did neither of you notice the first sentence I wrote? "While the recent actions of Congress are "evil," I suspect their motivation is not "evil" but a form of "I know better than you" contempt."

    Yes, they are being evil, but they have convinced themselves they're doing good. Problem is, they can only believe it's "good" if they also believe the American public is equivalent to a bunch of preschoolers who can't possibly be trusted to act in their own best interest, so somebody else has to have the authority to make decisions for them.

  • juris_imprudent||

    So what if they think they are doing good. C.S. Lewis nailed that particular bit quite nicely, and I suspect that his message was not aimed at those who would suffer as much as those who would inflict it - for our own good.

  • ||

    "Dem Progressives, paving the government eminent domain road straight to me since FDR."

  • anonymous||

    It sort of undermines the concept of political equality and anti-classism that is the necessary fiction on which our democracy is based.

  • Hank||

    @BarackObama's Twitter this morning: "The Senate just passed health reform. Thanks to all who made this moment possible."

    Because that's what this is all about, see. This singular moment. For him. His wonderful, shining moment. His glorious, victorious moment.

  • ||

    Dear God, all I want for Christmas is for Robert Byrd to drop dead. Today. Thank you.

    The House will flip in 2010. Senate probably won't, but they'll lose seats.

    I cannot wait for all my Obama-loving coworkers to start crying when they realize how fucked our very good employer-provided insurance is going to be. I'm gonna be the most supercilious "what? this isn't what you thought you were getting?" / "I told you so" bitch you ever did see. Stupid, stupid, stupid dumbass dumbfucks. I cannot believe I once called myself a Democrat.

    And I'm one of those who can't get individual health insurance because of a pre-existing condition. It's completely resolved, but the very mention of the word in my medical history (cardiomyopathy) makes the insurance companies scream like little girls.

    Oh, by the way? Those of you who voted for Obama? You were fucking gullible dumbfucks and don't try to tell me McCain would've been worse. McCain with a Democrat-controlled Congress couldn't possibly have done as much damage as Obama will do.

  • ||

    Sorry, stubby: McCain/Palin would have been much worse.

  • .||

    Much worse? Really? How so?

  • Jeffersonian||

    I'm phoning my Democratic Senator today to inform her that her political life ended this morning. I'll also be contacting the state Republican Party to tell them that if their federal candidates' plaforms don't have the word "repeal" in the first paragraph, they can kiss my big ass for campaign contributions, door-knocking and phone bank-tending.

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    A local letter-to-the-editor inferred that Sen. McCaskill was going to get some competition when she runs for her re-election.

    Predictably, a local feminist called that "a threat against her".

    Just can't fucking win with liberals.

  • juris imprudent||

    Just can't fucking win with liberals.

    Sure you can. Just humbly throw yourself at their feet and admit how much wiser they are than you. You'll get plenty of love then.

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    I'd rather pull out my own spleen and beat myself to death with it.

  • Johnny Longtorso||

    Don't you need a veto proof majority for repeal?

  • Jeffersonian||

    Not if you bury bits and pieces in other bills with shit Obama wants.

  • Robert||

    So basically it comes down to what Obama wants to trade for "health care".

  • ||

    Thank you Jeff. I'm in Texas, and my representative is Republican, so I have no one to yell at.

    Except my dumbfuck buddies who voted for Chauncy Gardiner, and they're hearing plenty from me.

  • Jeffersonian||

    My rep is, too, but Claire McCaskill isn't. She of the "fiscally conservative" bent. I'll be donating to her 2012 opponent to the maximum allowed by law, then I'll walk precincts and man phones to see her returned to private life.

  • ||

    McCaskill has had some pretty unhappy run-ins with tea partiers of late. I hope it gets much, much worse.

    Our mayor, Bill White, is going to be the Democrat nominee for Texas governor, I think. He doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell. Wonder if he realizes it yet.

  • Jeffersonian||

    I'll be joining the tea partiers on Delmar soon. Enough is enough.

  • ||

    If there is another tea party in DC, count me in, I will be there.

  • SIV||

    Grinches! This is a Christmas gift from the US Senate to the 30 million Americans who don't now have health insurance*.

    *(according to my local Fox affiliate news as they segued into the national coverage)

  • Brian Lockwood||

    I thought we were up to 60 million. I guess the gift is only for those who have been good this year. The rest get coal.

  • Ebeneezer Scrooge||

    So where's all those people who wax eloquent about how "the voters deserve what they get" now?

    Every other form of government may bite the big one, but we just proved it: even our limited form of democracy isn't worth shit in the long run.

    We've also proven that if you have state run schools, and one party takes them over, then that party is going to win in the long run.

    Libertarian ideals have no chance in a nation full of people who've been spoon fed "socialism is good" since the day they opened their intellectual eyes.

  • Brian Lockwood||

    I'd say its more they have been spoon fed that "greater good" garbage, and in that regard both parties are guilty.

  • Ebeneezer Scrooge||

    The principles they teach are no different from the principles that communists have used to justify themselves the world around.

    Half the problem is that people no longer recognize socialist moral principles when they see them.

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    +2

  • smartass sob||

    What they are spoonfed, even from the time they're in first grade, is that everything should be voted on and that everything the majority votes for is okay.

  • Robert||

    Sorry, but none of this washes. No such spoonfeeding is necessary. First of all, socialized medicine would just be regression toward the mean -- the expected outcome, based on the rest of the world. What needs to be explained is the outlier, the deviation from the mean, which has been the USA. You don't need effort to make water run downhill.

    Second, people rightly fear losing their health insurance. We have more and more long term survivors of chronic illnesses, because medicine keeps improving -- but that doesn't make them good insurance risks, either for health or life insurance -- but especially not for health insurance. And practically nobody could afford "whole health insurance" the way they can buy whole life insurance. So they look for some solution to their problem, no matter the cost.

    We should just be glad it's taken this long. It could've taken even longer had certain free market reforms been instituted that would've made health care less costly, but it was coming eventually regardless. In fact, to the extent good policy has allowed medical advances, it has furthered the problem stated above.

    What we need to do now is keep as much of the rest of the economy as possible unsocialized, so we can afford costly socialized health insurance. Countries have un-nationalized industries, un-communized, privatized, freed trade, etc., but none of them ever un-socialize medicine because of this dynamic. We can still make medicine more free in ways other than its financing, by getting rid of licensing of drugs, devices, and practitioners, and by making malpractice law more sensible. We can drive down the cost of health care faster than mandatory insurance drives it up.

  • Ebeneezer Scrooge||

    What needs to be explained is the outlier, the deviation from the mean, which has been the USA.

    The US has been the outlier in more ways than one for over a century. And it is explained by our economic system.

    The spoon feeding made the undoing of this very large outlier possible (big enough to have its own massive inertia).

    I hear you. But I yet maintain that if socialism wasn't the dominant philosophical perspective taught in our school systems, from start to finish, we'd remain the outlier.

  • Robert||

    Britain had the same economic system, but that didn't stop their adoption of the NHS.

    And I think you (and many others) severely overestimate the efficacy of formal schooling (gov't or otherwise) in imparting attitudes in any systematic way. You develop attitudes from school, but they're not particularly likely to be the attitudes highers-up in the chain of command intend you to develop. In fact, school is pretty ineffectual all the way around in any top-down intended way. You'd absorb those attitudes -- and knowledge -- faster practically any other way than being in school.

  • .||

    Television as a baby-sitter works pretty well for molding attitudes.

  • .||

    What we need to do now is keep as much of the rest of the economy as possible unsocialized, so we can afford costly socialized health insurance.

    Yes, indeed - keep the body in good health that it may continue with a cancerous tumor growing in it. I think not. Let the whole thing collapse and take the goddamned parasites with it - it's what they deserve.

  • Robert||

    Right, die so your parasites do too. Winner!

  • ||

    I don't know how much stock to put in this.

    If the House Dems really are determined to significantly rework the Senate monstrosity, all the better. Even though the House Dems' preferred version would be an even bigger monstrosity, it doesn't matter because the Senate would never accept the public option. So maybe all the hoopla has been for nothing, and Harry Reid will turn out to have accomplished nothing at all, or maybe just to have fucked things up even worse. Which would be par for the course for Harry.

    Y'know, maybe it's like the Dick Morris rule. Whatever Dick Morris predicts is gonna happen, bet the other way. Just like whatever Dem pol Bob Schrum is working for is sure to lose. If it looks like Harry Reid has pulled off a stunning legislative coup, maybe that's an indication he hasn't.

    If the WH is talking openly about putting HCR on the backburner while Obama tries to do something about the jobs apocalypse he created, maybe it's because he knows HCR is going nowhere soon.

  • Ebeneezer Scrooge||

    More likely, he knows that HCR can't be stopped now, no matter what anybody does.

    There are not enough intellectuals dedicated to free markets left in this country, to undo what the Democrats just did.

  • ||

    Let me try that link again.

    here

  • Jeffersonian||

    It's wishful thinking. Pelosi knows what the objective of this bill is, and it sure the hell isn't health care reform. She move heaven and earth to get her caucus to accept the Senate version so it doesn't go to conference.

  • ||

    Yes, that's the sneaky plan Mickey Kaus is advocating. I'm hugely disappointed in him on this. I don't know if she can pull it off, though.

  • ||

    More precisely, I expect Pelosi to grease the skids with pork grease to get something similar to the Senate bill passed by one or two votes to spare in the House.

  • ||

    welcome to rich fuckers gettin' the same shitty healthcare as poor fucker'

    BWAHAHAHAHA

  • ||

    Henry Clay would be proud.

  • ||

    Henry Clay beaming as a servile Abraham Lincoln gags himself mercilessly on Clay's cock.

  • Draco||

    The occasion was moving for Sen. Paul Kirk, D-Mass., appointed to fill Kennedy's seat after his death in August.

    "He's having a merry Christmas in heaven," Kirk told reporters after the tally. He said he was "humbled to be here with the honor of casting essentially his vote."

    Revolting. Black vomit revolting.

  • Johnny Longtorso||

    Ted is trapped in a car at the bottom of a burning lake of fire in Hell.

  • Shotgun||

    On the bright side, In Heaven There Is No Beer. Kennedy will be shaking for all of eternity.

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    They DO have bourbon-flavored Kool-Aid, though... sugar-free, to boot.

    Ted's gonna have one long eternity.

  • Shotgun||

    FUCK THREADED COMMENTS

  • Citizen Nothing||

    "He's having a merry Christmas in heaven". Drinkin' all God's liquor and banging his angels, no doubt...

  • ||

    FUCK THREADED COMMENTS

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Or, maybe what Longtorso said.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    FUCK THREADED COMMENTS

  • Shotgun||

    "Your long national nightmare has started.

    - Barack H Obama

  • Shotgun||

    Obamacare sparking 10th Amendment rebellion, action in seven states

    Looks like the steadily growing list of constitutional, ethical and political outrages that constitute the Harry Reid version of Obamacare is sparking a rebellion in the states, as AP reports South Carolina's attorney general plans to investigate the vote-buying that surrounded the proposal in the Senate majority leader's office.

    According to AP, South Carolina's Henry McMaster is being joined by the attorneys general of Michigan and Washington state in a suit to determine the constitutionality of the Obamacare proposal. Their initiative was prompted by a request from South Carolina's two senators, Lindsay Graham and Jim DeMint, both Republicans.

    Attorneys-general in at least four other states are also considering joining McMasters, according to AP. A move by a group of states to challenge the constitutionality of Obamacare could reinvigorate the efficacy of the 10th Amendment, which reserves to the states or the people all rights not specifically granted to the federal government.

    http://www.washingtonexaminer......37187.html

  • ||

    If only. I do have some hope that the bill may be successfully challenged on Constitutional grounds, though.

  • Robert||

    Maybe it will be. But it'll be back in some form sooner or later, probably sooner. It's pretty much only the 3 Stooges effect (as illustrated on a Simpson cartoon -- none of them able to get thru the door because they're all trying to get thru at once) that's held it back even this long.

  • In Time Of War||

    State's rights ended in 1865, deal with it. The federal government dictates whether or not you can turn right on red, fer chrissakes.

  • Yakov Smirnov||

    In Soviet Russia, no reds turn on right!

  • ||

    You'd see Robert Byrd? It's like some twisted politicized version of Weekend at Bernie's.

  • Shotgun||

    Scene 14: Christmas Eve, inside Bedford Falls Town Hall. Senator George Bailey confronts an angry mob of constituents protesting his vote on the new health care bill.
    MAN #1
    Come on Bailey, you can’t hide forever! Let us in!

    WOMAN #1
    Yeah, what is this mandatory insurance nonsense? Stop cowering behind that podium George! We want answers!

    crowd erupts into shouting

    GEORGE BAILEY
    Now now now, everybody calm down, see? If you’ll, well, see, just let me explain…

    MAN #2
    You should’ve explained these death panels before we elected you! Let’s get ‘em!

    WOMAN #2 (shaking pitchfork)
    Yeah!

    MAN #3
    Hey, pipe down youse mugs, let the man talk. It’ll be 15 minutes before the tar is hot enough to pour. Out with it Bailey!

    GEORGE BAILEY
    Well well, thank you for that Pete. Now folks, see, you just gotta understand how Washington works. Remember how you, you sent me there to bring back free things to Bedford Falls, like free heath care and jobs and that new George S. Bailey retractable midnight basketball court for the high school gym?

    MAN #4
    Hey Bailey, do know how many kids drowned at the prom last year from that stupid thing?

    GEORGE BAILEY
    Well, now now now, Clem, sure a few kids drowned. But look at all the jobs it created down at the Potter Retractable Basketball Floor factory. And that’s my point. Now, see, down in Washington there’s a whole Senate full of regular guys like you and you, and me, and we represent thousands of places just like Bedford Falls. And all of those places want their own jobs and healthcare and retractable basketball courts. And it turns out all of this costs money, so we have to get, well, revenues…

    WOMAN #3
    You mean taxes?

    GEORGE BAILEY
    Well, yeah, Helen, if that’s how you want to put it. See, we put all those revenues in a, a, a, big pile there in Washington, and then we start making deals and such, to make sure we can all bring some home. Sometimes we run out, and have to make up for it with other fees…

    http://bighollywood.breitbart......rful-bill/

  • The Gobbler||

    Fucking funny!

  • ||

    "And in Bedford Falls, when you hear the sound of all the windows breaking, a progressive gets his or her kickbacks...errr WINGS."

  • Max D.||

    What do we do now, coach?

  • Jim Tressel||

    Punt. It's the most important play in the game.

  • ||

    My boss is a near-60 doctrinaire liberal babyboomer. Doesn't shop at Walmart b/c of its labor practices, etc.

    For several years she's been in a long term study on breast cancer prevention - I know it's a very expensive study involving experimental drugs.

    She's an intelligent woman. Intelligent enough to realize that this legislation, which she wholeheartedly supports, will mean far fewer of these types of medical trials? Of course not.

    She's in the age group who's gonna get fucked first. I'm 46 and in good health - there might be time for future Congresses to fix this shit before I hit Medicare age. Or maybe I'll win the lottery and I won't need substandard government care.

  • MNG||

    Listen to your boss, she's your superior.

    The market has spoken!

  • MNG||

    What's interesting to me here is this: in the market, which stubby adores, this woman is clearly his superior; in politics and government, which he likely abhors, they are equals.

    Delicious.

  • Gilbert Martin||

    How do you know they both don't have government jobs?

  • Jim Tressel||

    I know many libertarians, moi included, who just don't have the desire to enter management. Maybe a personality/temperament thing.

  • Jim Tressel||

    Shut the fuck up Tressel. You and your fucking Tressel ball and sweater vests and joke handles.

    Sorry.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Goddamn squirrels.
    Triple sorry.
    Maybe I should've waited to get into the eggnog.

  • juris_imprudent||

    Shut up, coach was on a roll.

  • ||

    She's likely a firstborn -- they tend to become the boss wherever they work.

    Doesn't have as much to do with political affiliation as MNG seems to think it does.

  • ||

    Nothing has as much to do with political affiliation as MNG thinks it does.

    He's a fucking doctorate in political science so everything must necessarily be warped by such perceptual lensing.

  • ||

    We're both librarians - she's got twenty years experience on me, I work part time and have no interest in managing a law library.

    We don't work for the gummint. Although I'm seriously considering it. Why the fuck not? Where I work now I have to meet standards and deadlines and if I don't do a good job I'll get fired and my raise this year was miniscule.

  • ||

    Harken's starter house quote was the money quote. The left is openly admitting that they won't stop until full single payer is implemented. We need to burn down the starter house before they start adding the first wing on to it.

  • BeesInTheBrain||

    The only way I can figure this out as a political matter

    Ummmmm because the big chief muckity muck said "reform must happen this year".

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Goddamn squirrels.
    Double sorry.

  • ||

    The striking thing is that Health Care Reform has become so radioactive that no senator or congressbot has anything to lose by voting against it.

    Bullshit. If you're a Democrat in Congress, voting against it might cost you your seat in a primary challenge.

    This bill is a reminder that a successful politician can and should ignore most of their opponent's base, and concentrate on getting 50.1% of what's left -- meaning stuff with support approaching 25% among the broad electorate can still pass.

  • ||

    I wanted to inform you libertarians that "Obamacare" will not lead us to single payer universal healthcare. Rather it is an insurance mandate. We'll all have to purchase insurance, but the cost artificially lowered by the government. If you choose not to buy insurance, you will pay a fee and even sent to jail.

    Thank you. I hope you found this informative.

  • ||

    Er, yes, libertarians hate mandates almost more than single payer.

  • Marc||

    Shit, I didn't know that! What the hell are we worried about?

  • anonymous||

    What it is and what it will lead to are completely different questions. Obviously, it's a distinction lost on those without the capacity for forethought, such as most statists.

  • ||

    I found more informative comments on sticky notes I write while blotto drunk.

    That said, thank you for being more informative than most newspapers combined.

  • Michael Ejercito||

    I wanted to inform you libertarians that "Obamacare" will not lead us to single payer universal healthcare. Rather it is an insurance mandate. We'll all have to purchase insurance, but the cost artificially lowered by the government. If you choose not to buy insurance, you will pay a fee and even sent to jail.

    Thank you. I hope you found this informative.


    It should be noted that Hawaii, which has one of the highest per-capita wealth in the nation, tried offering single-payer universal health care to a subset of its population.

    It was a failure.

  • ||

    Well D'uh.

    Didn't the Bush years teach you anything? Gubment does what Gubment wants, regardless of what the people say.

  • Tom Degan||

    These so-called "Christian" politicians (and one "observant" Jew) have done everything humanly possible to see to it that the lives of the American people will be held hostage by the big insurance and pharmaceutical companies forever - or until a revolution comes along. Not much is going to change in the meantime - and it will be a very mean time, I assure you. We will continue to die two years younger than they do in Europe. We will continue to have one of the highest infant mortality rates in the industrialized world. Have yourselves a merry little Christmas.

    We celebrate the birth of the Prince of Peace while waging two senseless wars at such a safe distance from our shores, most of us don't even bother to pay attention to them. We will continue to throw away our national treasure on the military industrial complex while the well being of our children is gambled away in the plutocracy's crap game. We are a nation addicted to weapons of war. Let's face it, that's never going to change. If tomorrow our armaments industry ceased to be, the entire American economy would implode before sundown. So much hypocrisy. So little space. Santa Claus is coming to town.

    "Blessed are the peacemakers.
    for they shall be called sons of God."

    Jesus of Nazareth

    Oh, and did I mention that I hate Santa Claus? I really do, you know. I say this without any fear of coal in my stocking. You see, I haven't received a thing from the hideous old freak since 1966. That was the year I spiked his hot cocoa with a generous portion of Old Granddad. Santa, although a rather large person, doesn't hold his alcohol too well. I found this out the hard way. After leaving our presents under the tree, he took off from the roof or our home and crashed into the Finkle house across the street. Two reindeer were killed. Horrible carnage.

    To boil it down to the unpleasant essentials, although I love the story of the nativity and the true meaning of Christmas, I'm beginning to despise the Christmas holiday - but that's just me. This year I am afflicted with Grinch Syndrome. Or might you call it, "Scrooge Disorder"? The problem is that I am - and always have been - at heart, an angry person. I try to cover up that rage with a facade of silliness, but that's basically who I am. As Frank Sinatra once sang in the very last recording he made for Columbia Records in 1952, "Don't try to change me now."

    http://www.tomdegan.blogspot.com

    Tom Degan

  • Michael Ejercito||

    These so-called "Christian" politicians (and one "observant" Jew) have done everything humanly possible to see to it that the lives of the American people will be held hostage by the big insurance and pharmaceutical companies forever - or until a revolution comes along. Not much is going to change in the meantime - and it will be a very mean time, I assure you. We will continue to die two years younger than they do in Europe. We will continue to have one of the highest infant mortality rates in the industrialized world. Have yourselves a merry little Christmas.


    It would have been much less costly to simply impose price controls on health care, making it cheaper for all.

    Instead, they repeat the failed experiments in Massachussetts, Tennessee, and Maine.

  • TallDave||

    "We will continue to die two years younger than they do in Europe."

    This has nothing to do with healthcare.

    "We will continue to have one of the highest infant mortality rates in the industrialized world."

    This is a leftist lie. We have the best IM in the world. The reason other countries report better IM numbers is because they don't consider low birthweight infants live births. In fact, the often let them die untreated whereas we make huge efforts to save them. It's frankly perverse.

  • Mary Stack||

    Interesting story but you never received a gift you wanted and it ruined you appreciation of Christmas. Hell, I never did get my easy bake oven but I got over it when Santa brought their easy bake ovens. The truth is the joy is in giving and anyone who quotes Christ ought to know it. Get over your "Scrooge Disorder" by volunteering toute suite.

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    The passage of health care reform is not a Christmas present, Mary. A gift is something that is given, not taken from you and then presented AS a gift.

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    What about the separation of church and state, Tom?

  • TallDave||

    It could still die in conference.

    Let us pray.

  • TallDave||

  • KDA||

    Every time one of these bat shit ideas pass the House, Senate, or gets our presidents' signatures, I donate another $100 to Reason, Cato, or one of the great school choice charities that are out there. Even though, it's really not cost--effective, whatever I can do to minimize my taxable income is just a very little bonus.

    Healing in this country will begin only if we fix the institutions (media, schools, etc) that are making our citizens dumb.

  • KDA||

    Of course... it's starting to get expensive, and I'm about to cry uncle.

    /Shrug.

  • Henry Massingale||

    2/2/2010
    As this fight grows and the issues of the Bill come to light for people to read, so it is true that the moral building block is lost to the value of the $100 Trillion dollar Health Care Forum that Government Officials wish to Force Pay and also tax that system. Oooops, is this the first time this amount was brought up, $100,Trillion Dollars that the States fight over.
    You see Government Officials do not have a clue of what the people intend to do, the phone call I got yesterday, there is a Boycott about to take place and as of now it is over 45 million people strong. This Bill has failed because it lack a moral foundation.
    My My My, To build a United Health Care Forum you must unite all the people as one. I once wrote to President Obama and stated to take the words of 250 million people of what Health Care should do for them, and place this before all on tv, remove this force pay concept, the pick and choose the best and dump the rest, all issues that are not of a moral building block of Bill To Law.
    But to do this you must step out side of the Artificial Intelligence within Government of what the dollar is next to the needs of a people. It must be known that the tax against the health care system is because it is a $100 trillion dollar package.
    Henry Massingale
    FASC Concepts in and for Pay it forward
    To bring all the issues under one web site
    on google www.fascmovement.mysite.com

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement