United States Healthcare Reform

[Tankero]

Unnoticed? Hell, they’d look at him funny if he wasn’t receiving some form of government assistance.

[zengonzo]

An 18-year old porking his 16-year old girlfriend is both a rapist (statuatory rape) and a pedopile (sex with a minor).

Assuming an incorrect definition of pedophile, sure.

[Houngan]

Pedopile, Gonzo. That’s a hundred-legged pedophile, completely different insect.

H.

[extarbags]

Assuming an incorrect definition of pedophile, sure.

That’s the definition used by sex offender registries and grandstanding politicians, so it’s relevant to this discussion.

[unbongwah]

In today’s column, Bruce Bartlett says health care reform passed thanks to three Republicans: Newt Gingrich, Scott Brown, and Mitt Romney.

The tl;dr version: in `95 Gingrich gutted the committee system and centralized power under the House Speaker, which Pelosi used to push thru HCR; Brown’s victory in MA meant the GOP could now filibuster any HCR bill in the Senate, which meant House Democrats had to either accept the Senate’s already-passed bill or give up on HCR this year, whereas if Brown had lost the lefter House Dems might’ve tried holding out for a more liberal bill; and the final bill is closer to Mitt Romney’s HCR bill in MA than anything liberals really wanted. Indeed, he seems to be suggesting that if the GOP had negotiated rather than playing hardball, it would’ve been a net win for them: they could’ve gotten a HCR bill more to their liking and still bragged to their constituents about how they “saved” HCR from being too liberal.

[zengonzo]

Pedopile, Gonzo. That’s a hundred-legged pedophile, completely different insect.

And think how much Viagra such a multi-groined beast would require … The impact to the budget would be disastrous.

Perhaps it’s time to rethink my position on enforced sexual assault after all.

[Papageno]

Hoist by their own petard, eh, ubongwah (especially Gingrich)? Sweet irony.

[Dejin]

From the Los Angeles Times:

Lawsuits from 14 states challenging the constitutionality of the new national healthcare law face an uphill battle, largely due to a far-reaching Supreme Court ruling in 2005 that upheld federal restrictions on home-grown marijuana in California.

…

Conservative Justices Antonin Scalia and Anthony M. Kennedy joined a 6-3 ruling that said Congress could regulate marijuana that was neither bought nor sold on the market but rather grown at home legally for sick patients.

They said the Constitution gave Congress nearly unlimited power to regulate the marketplace as part of its authority “to regulate commerce.”

Even “noneconomic local activity” can come under federal regulation if it is “a necessary part of a more general regulation of interstate commerce,” Scalia wrote.

The decision throws up a significant hurdle for the lawsuit filed last week in federal court by 13 state attorneys

[Sebmojo]

[INDENT]Democrats: “We need health care reform”
Republicans: “Liberal fascists! Give us a majority and we’ll do it better”
Democrats: “Done, you have majority of both houses”
[INDENT]12 years later, health care is irrefutably worse in every respect for every single person in the United States
[/INDENT] Democrats: “We need health care reform”
Republicans: “Liberal fascists! Americans are tired of partisan politics!”
Democrats: “OK, let’s compromise”
Republicans: “OK, get rid of half your ideas”
Democrats: “Done”
Republicans: “Too liberal, get rid of half your ideas”
Democrats: “Done”
Republicans: “Too liberal, get rid of half your ideas”
Democrats: “Done”
Republicans: “Too liberal, get rid of half your ideas”
Democrats: “Done”
Republicans: “Too liberal, get rid of half your ideas”
Democrats: “Done. Time to end debate”
Republicans: “Too liberal, we need more debate, we will filibuster to prevent you from voting”
Democrats: “OK, we’ll vote–sorry guys, debate is ended. It’s time to vote on the bill”
Republicans: “Too liberal, we vote no”
Democrats: “OK, it passed anyway–sorry guys.”
[INDENT]One month later
[/INDENT] Republicans: “Wait–wait, OK, we have less of a minority now so we can filibuster forever.”
Democrats: “Sorry, the bill already passed, we need it to pass the House now”
Republicans: “But we have enough to filibuster”
Democrats: “Sorry, the bill already passed, we need it to pass the House now”
Republicans: “Liberal fascists! You haven’t listened to our ideas! You’ve shut us out of this whole process!”
Democrats: “Sorry, show us your proposal”
Republicans: “Smaller government”
Democrats: “That’s not very specific”
Republicans: “OK, here’s our detailed proposal–It’s our common-sense ideas we spent 12 years not enacting”
Democrats: “OK, we’ll add a bunch more of your ideas”
Republicans: “Liberal fascists! You included all these back-room deals”
Democrats: “OK, we’ll get rid of the back-room deals”
Republicans: “Liberal fascists! You’re using obscure procedural tricks to eliminate the back-room deals!”
Democrats: “No, we’re using reconciliation, which both parties have used dozens of times for much larger bills”
Republicans: “Liberal fascists! You’re pressuring Congressmen to vote for your bill! Scandal!”
Democrats: “It’s called ‘whipping’, it’s been done since 1789”
Republicans: “Liberal fascists! Can’t you see the American people don’t want this?”
Democrats: “This bill is mildly unpopular (40-50%), doing nothing (your proposal) is extraordinarily unpopular (4-6%)”
Republicans: “We need to start over! We need to start over!”
Democrats: “We should really consider voting–”
Republicans: “Liberal fascists! Start over! Clean slate! Common-sense! America!”

I quite liked this.

[/INDENT]

[Dave_Perkins]

The fact that these churches can go for years while missing passages such as these proves that they are not focused on education and study of the text, but rather a backwards backwards formula of having conclusions and working backwards through texts to find selective justifications for the pre-ordained conclusions.

I am probably guilty of this myself.

Yesterday, I listened to a sermon podcast about two stories from Luke: a leper throws himself at Jesus’ feet and begs for healing, and Jesus touches him (leprosy was believed to be contagious by touch); a woman ill for 12 years with constant bleeding (possibly menstruation, therefore making her under Jewish law a 12-year untouchable) touches Jesus in a crowd, and he speaks to her kindly. He heals them both. His physical contact with them makes him unclean by the law of the day.

I seek those stories because I bring to the Bible my belief that it is a call to be compassionate, forgiving, and uplifting of those considered “lowly”. I want to read a thoughtful, caring response to the HCR bill written by someone who believes that ultimately the bill will not lead to the general betterment of this country’s people, especially the lowly.

[Calistas]

That’s gonna be tricky. Will you settle for someone who throws dollar bills at a disabled person while shouting at them? I think it is called “tough love”.

[jeffd]

Dave: as far as I can tell, there isn’t one to be had - at least not from the right. You can get that sort of thing from the left (bill doesn’t go far enough, etc etc) but from the right you basically get nothing. This is, I believe, due to two things:

1. General intellectual bankruptcy of the conservative movement in America. Seriously Jonah Goldberg is what passes for a great mind amongst hacks like Andy Bates and brettmcd. It’s pathetic.
2. The bill that passed was, fundamentally, a conservative bill. There’s just no room to really criticize it from the right.

You’ll see folks like Reihan Salam and Megan McCardle make a game attempt at providing such a criticism, but you can tell that their heart isn’t in it. Fundamentally, if you want to provide universal coverage while preserving the private insurance & delivery system you need an individual mandate. If you have an individual mandate, you need subsidies. VOILA the bill that President Obama just signed into law.

Hilariously, for all that conservatives are crying about this shit now - none of this was controversial with them a few years ago. The main reason they’re up in arms about HCR is, frankly, is because there’s a Democrat in the White House.

[Anders_Hallin]

And the intellectual bankruptcy is quite clear to see in, for example, Frum’s firing from the AEI.

[thrasymedes]

Dave, I share your desire to engage with the intellectual, sincere part of the right wing movement on this issue (and others). But there’s a general paucity of such people in the movement as it presently stands; see for example this.

In the meantime, I’d say, read something by Hayek. He’s a touchstone for many right-wingers, has thoughtful and intelligent things to say, and even if you think his every opinion to be flawed and wrong, he will actually make you think… unlike today’s Beckians, who will only make you fume.

[Woolen_Horde]

Daniel Larison over at The American Conservative is pretty thoughtful, too. He pretty much operates on thought and reason, as opposed to ideological reflexology.

The American Conservative

And Dave, if this was a truly liberal bill it’d have been single-payer or there would have been a public option. What is now law was originally proposed by conservatives as a response to Hillarycare.

[JeffL]

Yeah, the mandates were a big Republican idea for years. All of this is just same old-same old: if a Republican proposes something, Democrats have to proclaim it evil; if a Democrat proposes something, Republicans have to proclaim it evil; and both sides have to proclaim that, yeah, but in OUR case we’re right.

Of course, in this case the Republicans are purely wrong. My conservative friends get very pissed off when I try to get them to read various summaries of the bill’s pluses and minuses, or ask them which specifics in the bill they would like to cut out.

[Dave_Perkins]

Thanks for the links (and your thoughts)! I’ll read.

[Houngan]

I seek those stories because I bring to the Bible my belief that it is a call to be compassionate, forgiving, and uplifting of those considered “lowly”.

I’ve never understood how it (the new testament, at least) could be interpreted otherwise, frankly. Which is why I think there are about as many Christians as there are atheists, if we’re using strict definitions.

H.

[frank_austin]

What the health care law means for you

Here’s the best calculator I’ve seen yet. It does further reinforce that I won’t be able to afford insurance even after this reform.

[Jason_McCullough]

Hrm, it passing helped the polling numbers and the enthusiasm gap a significant amount.