A GREAT ARTICLE....but...

[Guest]

I hope Peggy Noonan's advice is taken.

"Health care as a subject is extraordinarily sticky, messy and confusing. It's inherently complicated, and it's personal. There are land mines all over the place. Don't make the mistake the Clintons made and create a plan that gets picked apart, shot down, and injures the standing of the president. Instead, push it off on Congress. Let them come up with a dozen plans. It will keep them busy. It will convince them yet again of their importance and autonomy. It will allow them to vent, and perhaps even exhaust, their animal spirits. Various items and elements within each bill will get picked off by the public. Fine, that's to be expected. The bills may in fact yield a target-rich environment. Fine again. Maybe health care's foes will get lost in the din and run out of ammo. Maybe they'll exhaust their animal spirits, too."

"These things are clear. I understand them. You understand them. The president's health-care plan is not clear, and I mean that not only in the sense of "he hasn't told us his plan." I mean it in terms of the voodoo phrases, this gobbledygook, this secret language of government that no one understands—"single payer," "public option," "insurance marketplace exchange." No one understands what this stuff means, nobody normal."

I simply hope that this President does not sign a bill into law that is...what one poster, I think VK called....."Rube Goldberg" and call it his legacy and then we have future congress's try to sort things out.

Will he veto any health care bill ? Or does it matter the details..just that we get a bill ?

"Right now Mr. Obama's gift is his curse, a Congress dominated by his party. While the country worries about the economy and two wars, the Democrats of Congress are preoccupied with the idea that this is their moment, now is their time, health care now, "Never let a good crisis go to waste," the only blazingly memorable phrase to be uttered in the new era."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204884404574362971349563340.html

[Guest]

...I simply hope that this President does not sign a bill into law that is...."Rube Goldberg" and call it his legacy and then we have future congress's try to sort things out...."Right now Mr. Obama's gift is his curse, a Congress dominated by his party....Do I hope President Obama vetoes a bill that is a Rube Goldberg assemblage of ideas of different political factions and demands by the special interest lobbyists? You betcha'. Do I think there's much of a chance that's going to happen? Unfortunately, no.

[Guest]

in between is in fact due to lack of understanding exactly what the proposals will or will not do. The commentary about simplicity and lack of clarity are right on the money.
It is the reason why there is so much discussion and consternation. It is why the WH (whoever that is?) and Obama can fade back and forth, flip flop, with what ever direction the wind is blowing on any given day/hour.

I personally believe Obama does not care about the details of what Pelosi and her teams write as long as he can claim he kept his promise to pass health care reform. Words without specificity and lack of clarity allow him to continue to pontificate without accountability.

I also believe, it is why he used to as a Senator, and many others who do the same, vote present instead of yes or no. It does allow stating they voted.
It has as much value as a food product claiming it has been government inspected.......upon examination only to find it either failed or was rejected....those are just details.

Simple and to the point....understandable by all....what a novel concept.
To get something like that out of congress they would have to figure what is in it for them to do that. We certainly see why it is to their advantage to continue to not do it.

Again....good article...hopefully stimulates thinking...plus or minus.

btk

[Guest]

...It is the reason why there is so much discussion and consternation. It is why the WH (whoever that is?) and Obama can fade back and forth, flip flop, with what ever direction the wind is blowing on any given day/hour....I won't defend his communications completely, sometimes he's providing answers that clearly he's not certain of. But there probably is a good reason for his lack of specificity.

It's pretty widely accepted that Obama opted not to follow the same process that lead to the failure of healthcare reforms during the Clinton administration. Back then, the White House presented "their" bill to Congress for passage--and after lots of bickering, nothing got passed. This time around, the President outlined the major objectives he said he wanted to see met by legislation, when he wanted it passed, and then left it up to Congress to come up with the detailed bill. There really isn't any White House-designed "Obamacare" as is being claimed by the entertainers on TV.

So when the POTUS waffles on specific questions, I'm guessing it's because he doesn't have the detailed answers because the various factions in the Congress--of course there's lots more than just two--are still arguing, bickering, and negotiating, both in public and behind closed doors. Is the WH trying to stay on top of what's going on? I'm sure they are. But I'm equally certain that keeping the WH and the POTUS completely up-to-speed on what's happening in the smoke-filled-rooms isn't exactly on top of the agenda of the 435 and the "advisors" they have from K Street.

[Guest]

:agree::agree:

btk

[Guest]

Do I hope President Obama vetoes a bill that is a Rube Goldberg assemblage of ideas of different political factions and demands by the special interest lobbyists? You betcha'. Do I think there's much of a chance that's going to happen? Unfortunately, no.

I will say this very quietly VK because I know I annoy you with this, BUT your assumption about a bill getting signed no matter what is precisely why I have been saying this President is not even close to the man he presented himself as !

[Guest]

I will say this very quietly...We may have our different reasons for the way we may vote in the 2012 Presidential election, Bucco, but the solution is...NEVER VOTE FOR AN INCUMBENT!

Ginny Brown-Waite and Barack Obama have both performed in elected office pretty well as far as I'm concerned. Both have done some good things, as they have both occasionally disappointed me in their votes and conduct. Probably neither has performed badly enough to justify "retiring" them in upcoming elections based on performance alone. But as far as I'm concerned, I will vote to replace them both. I believe strongly that the American people have to do what those elected to Congress refuse to do--break the cycle of polarized, partisan politics and subservience to moneyed special interests--by replacing them all as regularly as our scheduled elections permit.