I told you so on healthcare reform

Back during the 2008 campaign, I laughed at Hillary Clinton supporters who were pushing her healthcare reform plan.  I said that healthcare reform was simply not possible and that they should simply find another issue to vote for Hillary Clinton.  

In fact, I actually commended the Obama campaign for not offering anything on healthcare during the primaries, because I saw him as being a realist.  

Unfortunately, I was right.  Healthcare reform is NOT possible in this country.  Anytime Democrats try to change the system, they will hit a brick wall.  

President Obama was stupid even to bring up this issue.  Now, that the genie is out of the bottle, he has to either put up or shut up.  If he fails on this, we sure as hell better get a primary challenger against him.  We are not going to go to the back of the line again on this.  

Tags: healthcare reform (all tags)



Can you please provide the link where

you laughed at HRC supporters? I want to read the full context before commenting.

by louisprandtl 2009-09-29 10:57PM | 0 recs
Re: I told you so on healthcare reform

You assume HRC supporters only voted for her for health reform?


How old are you?  Thought "I told you so" was reserved for juveniles and not thoughtful adults on a political site.

by FilbertSF 2009-09-30 12:05AM | 0 recs
Re: the "I told you so" option

 There MUST be an ITYS option. Without an ITYS option, then what really is the point, after all? Now, I agree that there should be a trigger - namely, the person exercising the ITYS option must prove that in fact they did tell us so, and provide full-form documentation. No undocumented (or 'illegal') ITYSoing should be allowed.

by QTG 2009-09-30 06:14AM | 0 recs
with this diary

and the collected works of Kent (aka UpstateDem), I am convinced that Kent is working on his 12th grade Social Studies project.

by Khun David 2009-09-30 12:25AM | 0 recs
Re: with this diary

If so I think we need to have a serious look at our education system.

by Shaun Appleby 2009-09-30 12:51AM | 0 recs
Thanks for another Open Thread!!!

Who do you like for the World Series?

by Strummerson 2009-09-30 03:09AM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks for another Open Thread!!!

As a eternal optimist I hoping the Red Sox can do it again.

by jsfox 2009-09-30 04:29AM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks for another Open Thread!!!

I say Yanks and Phils, going to a game 7.  But 5 game series are crapshoots, so I only think "educated" guesses are valid once it's down to four.  If the ALCS comes down to Yanks and Sox, I take NY (as a team, a city, a culture, and a concept).  In the NL, I'd be happy with the Dodgers, Cards, or Phillies, though the Dodgers only because of their Brooklyn roots.

by Strummerson 2009-09-30 11:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks for another Open Thread!!!

Yanks are on cruise-control.  I'm not sure I can bear an ALCS loss to the RedSox.

by fogiv 2009-09-30 06:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks for another Open Thread!!!

Short of my Rox pulling off another miracle post season, I would like to see the Cards and the Yanks. My money would be on the Cards embarrassing the Yanks in 5.

But this could be a crazy post season. A lot of fracking great teams bringing a lot of momentum.

by JerryColorado23 2009-09-30 10:28AM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks for another Open Thread!!!

I don't see the Yanks going down in 5 in a 7 game series.  Too many strikeouts among the starters, too solid a bullpen, and too balanced on offense.  Possible, but it would require a comprehensive collapse.  I don't wish such things on any fan base and I think they are bad for the game.  But Yankee haters will be Yankee haters.  Perhaps we should ask small market owners why they, too, consistently oppose a salary cap...

In a 5 game series, however, a AAA team could bounce someone.  I hate 5 game LDSs (no swipe at Mormons there, as long as they stay away from my doorbell).  

I like my Yanks this year.  I like them every year.  But this year it seems to be supportable by logic for a change.

by Strummerson 2009-09-30 11:13AM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks for another Open Thread!!!

As a young man in Seattle in the mid 90's watching the Cleveland Indians inexplicable own the M's series after series I said to my dad one time, "God I HATE the Indians. I don't know what it is about them, but I truly hate them," and my dad said, "You don't ever need a reason to hate a baseball team."

No truer words were ever spoken.

I was always agnostic on the Yanks until 2001 when the M's totally collapsed in the ALCS in a manner you spoke of above at the hands of the Yanks. I don't hate the Yanks, but I definately root against them whenever I can and avoid Yankee/BoSox matchups all together.

Yeah, I like small market clubs like my new home team Rockies. We may not dominate, but when we do put a few wins together the town really comes alive.

I wouldn't necesarily call the Rox a AAA team. We may not be a top tier team, but we boast some solid pitching and a few tough bats. The Rockies put on a good show.

by JerryColorado23 2009-09-30 01:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks for another Open Thread!!!

I feel for small market fans, particularly those who love their teams and the game.  As a Yankee fan, I can still understand the frustrations of being so massively outspent.  I am all for some serious restructuring.  But here's the catch, I see NO reason to impose a salary cap and justify obscene profits by owners at the expense of the players.  I think there needs to be some sort of regulation of ticket and concession prices as well as payroll.  And I think there is definitely a way to accommodate differences between local economies.  No reason people in KC should pay NY prices.  SO cap salaries and set up some oversight with regard to ticket and concession prices and I am on board 100%.  In the mean time, I'd rather the Steinbrenners put their massive revenues back on the field.

At the same time, I also think minor league ball is an under-appreciated pleasure.  We attend a few Lansing Lugnuts games every year here in MI (where I live in exile for now).  It's more family friendly (for instance, they generally invite all the kids to run the bases at the end) and the parks are often lovely little gems.

by Strummerson 2009-09-30 02:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks for another Open Thread!!!

Oh hell yeah. In between Seattle and Denver we spent 4 years in Sacramento while my wife finished grad school. Those Sacramento Rivercat games were great. Nice little ballpark, great stuff for the kids to do like picnic on the lawn then hit the bouncy park and other carnival-like attractions. And the older kids can get close to the game in a way they couldn't in a big league game unless you spend some serious change.

Frankly, I'm fine with how baseball is structured and that comes from a tax paying M's fan who got blackmailed in 95 for a new ballpark. Heck, the M's spend over a 100m a year and they haven't had a watchable team in nearly 10 years. Players go to NY because they know they can win. It is a tough market to play though, merciless.

Sure, NY is a perennial contender, but it doesn't guarantee a WS victory. The Rox were in the show a couple years ago (and got moirdered!) and the Marlins, Diamondbacks and the Rays all lit it up this decade. So, just because NY has all that money to spend doesn't mean they'll automatically win it all every year. They still have to execute. Shit, the Yanks haven't won it all since, what 2000?

I suspect the people who loudly boohoo your team's financial windfall typically also say wikkid a lot and eat too much chowder. Everyone else... meh. The source of the broader Yankee hatin' has more to do with rooting for the underdog. It comes with being such a fantastically successful franchise. Fans will want to see the underdog take you down.

Here's to a great post season. Cheers!

by JerryColorado23 2009-09-30 02:53PM | 0 recs
Like most of your diaries

you have told me nothing and certainly not I told you so.  Good grief. The Bill isn't even out of committee on the Senate side, nor have we had the conference between the Senate and the House. I strongly suggest you hold you I told you so's until you actually have something to spout off about.

And if history is any judge even then you'll probably be wrong.

by jsfox 2009-09-30 03:58AM | 0 recs
Re: I told you so on healthcare reform

Let me see if I can boil this diary down to its essential arguments.

1) Healthcare reform is impossible to pass in this country;

2) If Obama fails to pass healthcare reform, which he obviously will since it's impossible, we need to primary him;

3) The hoped-for result will be a new Democratic President who won't accomplish healthcare reform either, but at least will understand that it's impossible and not waste his time.

Some people will say this plan is stupid, and that the consequence would be a hopelessly failed primary challenge at best and a Republican President at worst, but I think they fail to appreciate just how big a slam-bang winner the "I promise to not even try to fix the health-care system" platform will be.  The Republicans might be in such awe they won't even nominate an opponent.

So, did I accurately summarize the argument?

by Steve M 2009-09-30 06:52AM | 0 recs
Re: I told you so on healthcare reform

You left out:

4) The new Democrat candidate for 2012 will hopefully lose, so as not to walk into the GOP's trap by winning the Presidency, thus possibly costing us some seats in 2014 AS well as all the seats we've lost is 2010 which hasn't happened yet.

by Jess81 2009-10-01 03:08PM | 0 recs
Re: I told you so on healthcare reform

It doesn't even matter, because whoever controls redistricting in 2010 gets to magically control the universe for the next 300 years.  See, I've been paying attention.

by Steve M 2009-10-01 04:25PM | 0 recs
But winning Congress in 2014

would be a horrible thing because it means we won't be able to win the Presidency in 2016.

Of coure we can't win the Presidency in 2016 cause it means we'll lose Congress in 2018.

by DTOzone 2009-10-01 06:47PM | 0 recs
Re: I told you so on healthcare reform

Funny, reflecting on today's front page story, it reminds me that UpstateDem is always a day late and a dollar short.

by Khun David 2009-09-30 08:47AM | 0 recs
Re: Flavour violating squark and gluino decays

Finally, we note that in the case of the benchmark point γ we find similar features for
the gluino decays into the two lightest squarks. The fact that the other squarks are heavier
than the gluino has no large impact, in particular their decay modes into the gluino are
small due to the small mass differences between the heavy squarks and the gluino.

http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1174861/fil es/jhep082009087.pdf

by QTG 2009-09-30 05:11PM | 0 recs
Re: I told you so on healthcare reform
  1. No, you didn't.
  2. Yes, he did.
  3. No, it isn't.
  4. Yes, we can!
by lojasmo 2009-09-30 05:56PM | 0 recs
And now for vocabulary:

Main Entry: in·sip·id
Pronunciation: in-ˈsi-pəd\
Function: adjective
Etymology: French & Late Latin; French insipide, from Late Latin insipidus, from Latin in- + sapidus savory, from sapere to taste -- more at sage
Date: 1609

1 : lacking taste or savor : tasteless <insipid food>
2 : lacking in qualities that interest, stimulate, or challenge : dull, flat <insipid prose>

-- in·si·pid·i·ty &#716;in-sə-ˈpi-də-tē ;\ noun

-- in·sip·id·ly in-ˈsi-pəd-lē\ adverb
synonyms insipid, vapid, flat, jejune, banal, inane mean devoid of qualities that make for spirit and character.

by lojasmo 2009-09-30 05:59PM | 0 recs
you ought...

to be ashamed of this diary and those democrats who are blocking meanignful healthcare reform - and btw, obama isn't one of them.

by canadian gal 2009-09-30 06:08PM | 0 recs
this is kind of funny...

...because a fair number of democrats in washington really would have preferred that they did not have to deal with health care at all- it is mostly just a big bother to them.

and many are just generally upset with Obama because he is making them deal with it anyway.  He has sort of boxed them in.

Of course the big issue is whether they are more concerned about making our nation better or just about winning elections.  Some times these goals coincide; some times they do not.  Obama has boxed the fence-sitters in on this now.  If the bill does not pass, they will lose the mid-term election due to poor democratic turnout; if it does pass and the bill is unpopular, they will lose anyway.

The fence-sitters have never even entertained the notion that getting a good bill to pass might be a winning strategy.

by d 2009-10-01 12:16PM | 0 recs
Re: I told you so on healthcare reform

btw - shame rec.  Actually, more like 'lol @ this' rec.

by Jess81 2009-10-01 03:09PM | 0 recs
Re: I told you so on healthcare reform

Why is this diary recommended while the specifics of the health care debate are left off the recommend list. Several key developments happened today as discussed here by McJoan of Daily Kos:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/10/1/ 788736/-When-the-Public-Option-is-Relati ve,-and-other-Senate-Finance-Follies

I think people like these sorts of pointless diaries and pie fights more than they want to really discuss the details of what is happening.

by bruh3 2009-10-01 06:37PM | 0 recs
Gee Kent

I really wished I had listened to you, what was I thinking? Supporting Hillary Clinton - what a doofus I was....afterall the ONLY thing she stood for was HCR....and now - what a fool I was - well we all were...man, how did we all fall for that ole' Obama "I'm gonna get you healthcare reform trick"? Silly us....we should have listened to KENT. He KNEW, he absolutely K-N-E-W why don't we all just go ahead and vote republican next time and save ourselves alot of time and money....afterall, Kent KNEW.

by nikkid 2009-10-01 07:03PM | 0 recs
Might I suggest a moniker change?

Sign me up for "Wet BlanKent" or "NoWeKent".

Any suggestions?

by thatrangeofshadesbetweenredandbluestuff 2009-10-01 09:57PM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads