AP sources: Dems reach deal to drop gov't-run plan

Being against the bill isn't the beef against Lieberman. Changing his position every couple weeks just to get on TV some more is the beef.

Just wait, he'll be for the bill again soon. It aint about the bill, it's about Joe.

barfo

 

When he ran for reelection in 2006? And more recently, when he led the Dems to believe he was going to vote for the bill.

barfo

 

Hey, I don't. Maybe I will later, not sure.

barfo

 

I'll see if I can find something. I don't actually remember seeing him explicitly say that he'd support it, my comment was based more on the supposition that he must have privately told them he'd support it, because it seems bizarre that they'd go through weeks of careful negotiations with the various recalcitrant parties and not ever bother to check on his point of view. It seems like, based on their actions, that they were expecting him to support it. Then again, they could be stupid that way, or the actual situation might be more complex than I am making it out to be (for instance, they might have put Lieberman out there as an opponent in order to justify making a concession that the liberal wing is opposed to, but that they need to get someone else on board).

barfo

 

Funniest post ever!

 

http://orient.bowdoin.edu/orient/article.php?date=2009-11-20&section=2&id=5

Joe Lieberman’s gamble on health care reform is rather risky

November 20, 2009

As it stands right now, the House version would never see the light of day in the Senate. The Senate bill will include either or both a "trigger" or an "opt-out," but not if Senator Lieberman (I-CT) has anything to do with it. There is a group of centrist senators—mostly moderate Democrats—who are stalling the progress of health care reform in the Senate. But among these centrists, Joe is the only member of the Democratic Caucus to explicitly state he would filibuster any legislation that included the public option.

 

I don't see how anything Lieberman does can be called risky. He probably isn't going to run for reelection, and even if he does run, he won't win. So he's free to do what he likes, which is get in front of the cameras.

He'd better hurry, though, because likely the Dems will lose a few seats next year, and when that happens, they won't need him for much of anything anymore. At that point he'll get one more round of publicity by switching to the R party, and then after that it is reality shows and getting naked in public.

barfo

 

If you read the article at the link, they make it out like he's trying to revitalize the gang of 14 (moderates). Trying to make the legislation more inclusive of votes in both parties.

 

Yeah, I read that, but I don't buy it. I'm not convinced Joe is the type to organize. He's not the type, and who the hell would follow him? You know he'd turn around and fire at his own troops at the first opportunity.

barfo

 

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9CIQA100&show_article=1

While Lieberman drew most of the attention for his comments, Democratic Sens. Claire McCaskill of Missouri and Ben Nelson of Nebraska also expressed concern about the legislation.

"I'm concerned that it's the forerunner of single-payer—the ultimate single-payer plan, maybe even more directly than the public option," Nelson said of the Medicare proposal. By single-payer, he meant national health insurance run by Washington. Unlike Lieberman, Nelson participated in negotiations last week between liberals and moderates that produced the general framework that included the Medicare provision.

Nelson also is seeking stricter abortion restrictions than are currently in the bill.

"The whole reason we're doing this bill is to bring down cost, first for the American people in health care, and secondly for the deficit," said Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri. "So until we get the numbers back from the Congressional Budget Office, we're all on hold."

Asked if she would vote against the bill if it raised health care costs overall, she said, "Absolutely."

In the meantime, only a few moderates have come out against the Medicare plan. But in a legislative struggle that is a game of inches, Democrats need all 60 votes in their caucus, and they don't yet have them.

 

BTW

The bill contains a provision to allow people to buy drugs from canadian sources. They say it will save $80B.

Just wow. $54B is to puny to bother saving, yet $80B is worth it.

Harry Reid is done.

 

Nicely done!

Maybe it needs something like an aborted fetus on the pitchfork tines?

barfo