I have to say, Olympia Snowe is a Republican with really good ideas.

The trigger is a lame suggestion. It's a reverse sunset that will never get activated and most likely sundered in some obscure resolution in some quiet boring legislation. I'm surprised more Republicans didn't vote the Baucus bill out of committee, especially Grassley and Enzi, they worked on the thing. So now they have been showing how harddddddd they worked, all just to stall and obstruct something they moaned and toiled over. riiiiiight. Seems like a fabulous waste of time, especially if you used it to take the spotlight. Grassley is getting a lot of pressure as is Snowe in their respective states. Both Maine and Iowa are over 2/3 in favor of the public option. Snowe and Collins are Republicans in a vast sea of nothing but regional Democrats. Maine isn't dense like the rest of the region, but they have the highest per capita Mercedes Benz and you know what that means.......elitest liberals......with health food and vacation homes.......a more educated crowd...although the cross section on this board might not suggest that.....xotoxi represents though.

I agree about the trigger. I mean, Medicare Part D has one too.
 
Because the CBO estimate includes items that go beyond questionable, like paring back Medicare costs 25%. That aint gonna happen because it's never happened. A more realistic scoring suggests it will cost over $1T.

So, the CBO estimates are fine when they go against the Democrats, like when they showed record deficit numbers, but if they favor the Democrats they're wrong?

Well, that's an interesting way to look at things.

It's called a double standard.
 
The trigger is a lame suggestion. It's a reverse sunset that will never get activated and most likely sundered in some obscure resolution in some quiet boring legislation. I'm surprised more Republicans didn't vote the Baucus bill out of committee, especially Grassley and Enzi, they worked on the thing. So now they have been showing how harddddddd they worked, all just to stall and obstruct something they moaned and toiled over. riiiiiight. Seems like a fabulous waste of time, especially if you used it to take the spotlight. Grassley is getting a lot of pressure as is Snowe in their respective states. Both Maine and Iowa are over 2/3 in favor of the public option. Snowe and Collins are Republicans in a vast sea of nothing but regional Democrats. Maine isn't dense like the rest of the region, but they have the highest per capita Mercedes Benz and you know what that means.......elitest liberals......with health food and vacation homes.......a more educated crowd...although the cross section on this board might not suggest that.....xotoxi represents though.

I agree about the trigger. I mean, Medicare Part D has one too.

Snowe mentioned the medicare trigger tonight on Hardball, saying the drug companies came around :doubt: and it was never utilized. She's full of it. Her vote doesn't amount to a hill of beans in the ongoing scheme of things.
 
On this issue, she's more liberal than a lot of Senate Democrats.


Not really. She'll bail if someone even mentions public option. She's making a show to the Mainers.

So will Max Baucus.

Montana and Maine are two states with relatively small populations where the tax base is small and reform presents problems with reimbursements. But they both have problems with monopolistic grip of insurance companies, so they cater to where their campaign money comes from.......not to their constituents.
 
Why are we giving this woman's vote so much power? Screw bi partisanship....they wouldnt care if things were reversed.
 
Yes, yes, yes.....

Anyone and everyone who caves in to the leftist moonbats is a "good" republican.

Of course, any democratic who plays ball with the republicans is persona non grata. See: Joe Lieberman.

are you suggesting that democrats in connecticut do not have the right to choose who runs for the US Senate from their party?

No, dipshit. He's suggesting that when Lieberman didn't cave to the moonbats on the left of his party the Democrats threw him over and supported the challenger in the primaries.

so what did the democrats of connecticut do that was so wrong and so outside of their right to do? Do you honestly think that Lieberman was fully representing the interests of the party that put his name in nomination? And if not, don't that have the right.... no, more than the right, the DUTY to nominate someone that DOES more fully represent those interests?

dipshit?
 
and I have always liked the fact that Maine has produced some of the nation's best moderate republican senators.... from Maggie Smith and Bill Cohen to Oly Snowe and Susan Collins.... we like 'em smart up here in Maine, and we like 'em not so partisan that they get to loving their party more than they do their country.

How does bankrupting the nation equate with "loving" their country?

Maggie Smith, Bill Cohen, Oly Snowe and Susan Collings have bankrupted their country?

I am gonna need a link for that.
 
Yes, yes, yes.....

Anyone and everyone who caves in to the leftist moonbats is a "good" republican.

Of course, any democratic who plays ball with the republicans is persona non grata. See: Joe Lieberman.

well.....he does have a point....but then thats todays politics....
 
Yes, yes, yes.....

Anyone and everyone who caves in to the leftist moonbats is a "good" republican.

Of course, any democratic who plays ball with the republicans is persona non grata. See: Joe Lieberman.

are you suggesting that democrats in connecticut do not have the right to choose who runs for the US Senate from their party?

i dont believe he was suggesting that....how did you get that out of what was said??
 
Yes, yes, yes.....

Anyone and everyone who caves in to the leftist moonbats is a "good" republican.

Of course, any democratic who plays ball with the republicans is persona non grata. See: Joe Lieberman.

are you suggesting that democrats in connecticut do not have the right to choose who runs for the US Senate from their party?

i dont believe he was suggesting that....how did you get that out of what was said??

how did you miss it?
 
No, see there you go again.
They are not "ripping off" anyone. That is false. If it were true, people wouldn't buy health insurance.
They are not making money at the expense of anyone. Not anymore than say Brittany Spears or Keith Olbermann. See, this is called "capitalism." It means that people can make as much money as they are able to.
They are providing a valuable service to people. Thus they get paid well for it. Like anyone in computers, entertainment, etc etc.

People buy health insurance because they are FORCED to buy health insurance or face the prospect of going bankrupt if something should happen to them.

And they are often forced to choose between a limited number of monopolistic corporations, that fix prices, and screw them when they actually get sick.

Peoplel can live without a computer, or entertainment, but they cannot live without health insurance without the fear of losing eveything they own at any given moment.

No one is forced to buy health insurance. No one is forced to buy nursing home insurance or disability insurance either, even though an adverse event in both cases would also bankrupt them.
In any case, most people get their insurance through their employer. The reason they have limited choices is because state governments license and mandate the type of coverage that can be written. If anyone could buy insurance in any state, all that would go away. But the Dums won't allow that.
No one gets screwed when they actually get sick, except the insurance companies.
 
Because the CBO estimate includes items that go beyond questionable, like paring back Medicare costs 25%. That aint gonna happen because it's never happened. A more realistic scoring suggests it will cost over $1T.

So, the CBO estimates are fine when they go against the Democrats, like when they showed record deficit numbers, but if they favor the Democrats they're wrong?

Well, that's an interesting way to look at things.

When CBO estimates go against Democrats it tells you the Democrats are really really pushing bullshit. When they go for the Democrats, it tells you the Dems are probably pushing bullshit.
In any case the CBO could nto score the Baucus bill because there is no Baucus bill. There is no legislative language at all. They did not vote on a bill because there is no bill. There is a memo with concepts on it. AN actual bill contains language that will make big differences one way or another depending on how its worded. In the absence the CBO is simply guessing.
 
are you suggesting that democrats in connecticut do not have the right to choose who runs for the US Senate from their party?

i dont believe he was suggesting that....how did you get that out of what was said??

how did you miss it?

how the hell did you miss what Dude was saying?.....he wasnt talking about the voters in Conn. dumbass....he was talking about how the parties will say this rep is being "rational" because he/she agrees with us,while throwing a disagreeing rep under the bus for being "rational" while agreeing with the other side.....
 
Now that the democrats scratched out one republican so they can call it bipartisan, there are no republicans in the closed door meetings. Sounds like she was the token. The bill that was passed is only going to be a shell by the time it is actually written on a piece of paper. Everyone talking about the cost being well below a trillion dollars....well that is going to be a little pipe dream by the time it's written. One more thing....just how much pork is going to be in this bill to buy Senate votes to get the number that they need? Yeah, the government really does have our best interests at heart, and if you believe that, I have some good swamp property to sell you. I'll send pictures.
Sounds like obama isn't going to be so transparent as he promised.

Ah yes..."Hope and Change"....my ass
 
Last edited:
i dont believe he was suggesting that....how did you get that out of what was said??

how did you miss it?

how the hell did you miss what Dude was saying?.....he wasnt talking about the voters in Conn. dumbass....he was talking about how the parties will say this rep is being "rational" because he/she agrees with us,while throwing a disagreeing rep under the bus for being "rational" while agreeing with the other side.....

Actually I was pointing (like it matters) that the national Democratic party threw its support behind Lieberman's challenger in the primary, forcing him to run as an independent. It has little to do with voters in CT.
 

Forum List

Back
Top