First off, why is John McCain even at today's health care summit organized by President Obama? He sat there looking smug and childish throughout the first section of the discussion. Then when given a chance to talk in the second section he dropped all pretense of being there to work towards a solution in health care. He was there simply to play partisan games like a spoiled brat angry that he didn't win Miss Congeniality at the prom.
I give President Obama credit for largely ignoring McCain's schoolyard ploy, acknowledging that McCain was merely venting talking points with no attempt at serious legislating, and moved on to have Secretary Sebelius. Obama is an adult, I'm sorry to say that Senator McCain, whom I once held in high regard, has proven to be immature and, frankly, an embarrassment to his colleagues.
Okay, let's get beyond Senator McCain and talk about the people who are actually there to accomplish something. Needless to say, there has been a great deal of reading talking points by both parties so far in this summit. But I have been impressed that many of the participants have actually offered substantive and legitimate discussion of the issues. Sure, there are mischaracterizations and parsing of wording to push positions, but there have also been some honest presentations of key issues.
Will there be solutions found that will cause the Republicans to vote significantly for a revised bill rather than merely voting no as a matter of political calculus? Actually, I doubt it. I think the Republicans have decided that voting against all bills, even ones that substantively include their major ideas, gives them a better chance of gaining seats than actually working toward a solution that is best for the American people.
In fact, Minority Whip Cantor just played his political hand and President Obama called his bluff. The point is that there is a difference between finding solutions to problems we all agree on and simply reading your talking points off a 3x5 card.
And by the way, from what I've seen, the Republicans have been given a disproportionate amount of time relative to their Democratic colleagues (though to be honest, Obama seems to be the most knowledgeable and persuasive Democratic representative present, and is answering a lot of questions).
My hope for the remainder of the day is that both sides get over themselves, stop trying to push their talking points, and start hashing out actual proposals. Obama keeps trying to bring the discussion back to specific points, and I have to say he has largely done a good job at dragging the political gamesmanship back to the goal of solving the health care crisis, but clearly more has to be done.
Okay, they just broke for lunch and so House members could rush back for a vote. Should be an interesting afternoon.
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 105
I'd have had to slug someone by now using the antics of McCain and Cantor!
So the result will be those on either end of the spectrum will hear what they want to hear. But for Independents, they are likely to spend a little more time listening and watching and hopefully will come away with a clearer picture. And that is what Obama wants. He knows this will solidify the base of both parties. But he wants the middle.
We'll see.
But it does show the process of people talking and at least looking like they are trying to reach agreement. I think the American people will benefit from seeing that process.
The rub (aye, there's always a rub) is that most people won't see it. They will see the spun sound bites coming from the two ends of the spectrum (say, the Fox News version and the MSNBC version), will ignore anything that falls outside their personal narrative, and reinforce their own previous biases.
Which, of course, is why this country is so intellectual deprived.
Guess where a significant portion of those profits are going? To ensure people like the Republicans who are blocking reform get back into office. The American voter is totally for sale - the GOP knows that if they keep hammering at them with fear and lies and stupid words like 'socialism', 'communism', 'facism' and any other stupid combination of those, they will be able to lock in not only big bucks for re-election, they will have nice cushy jobs on insurance and big pharma boards when they leave DC.
He is not at all sincere. He is out for himself and his party plus a big liar.
Yes, I saw Chuck. He's so going down in the next election.
He did mention that he has had dozens of town hall meetings with his constituents this year (I assume he means 2009).
I guess he is up for reelection this year. This will be a Republican year so what makes you think he will lose? Seems he is up double digits in the latest polls against possible challengers.
Wonder if he claims his fake tan as a medical expense?
On the other hand, did everyone in the room just laugh at him, including his Republican colleagues?
Snap. Obama called him on his talking points.
Dick Durbin just reiterated this point and provided figures.
Seems like the trial lawyers ought to buy themselves some Republicans. :) Maybe they think it would be a bad investment.
Funny how it looks completely different from this side
And to say your impressed, he clearly hasn't any idea whats in the bill
Obama did a fantastic job, speaking with a vast knowledge of the Reforms presented. I was very impressed. Also, I thought for the most part the Repubs presented their side rather well.
The presidents closing remarks were spot on. Time to quit talking and start doing!
For the Republicans it is a choice of whether to stake a claim on voting No as a block as they have been doing, or to have enough of them negotiate a few changes to get just enough votes to get it passed. Snowe, Collins and I think Brown will be yes votes if the Republican leadership lets it happen.
For the Democrats, the choice is to allow the Republicans a few high profile "wins" in order to get enough votes for passage, or to go the reconciliation route.
My further impression was that Obama is not afraid to go that latter route, but then he isn't up for reelection this year and there are a lot of House members and Senators that have to decide whether they will take the risk.
And my final impression is that Obama can sell this to the public. I actually think Democrats will have a better shot at reelection if they embrace the president's path. He came off looking like someone who knows his stuff, isn't afraid to call anyone's bluff, and wants to find a path forward.
Yes, "moving forward" is the key.
(no tv at my house) and an internet connection that is not speedy.
but I got most of it.
Just for the record, we disagree on that comment as well David.
Apparently neither the senator nor the Canadian do not receive their care on the south side of Chicago, rural Mississippi townships, Appalacia, or my local healthcare center.
The elite's delusion of equal heathcare is a crime of humanity.
The gall of Dems trying to pass legislation in the Senate with less than 60 votes. Yeah, Republican reconciliations happened 16 times in the last 30 years, but it's not okay when Dems try it.
I believe that Obama gave the Republicans a chance and assumed they would do what Boehner did - mime dishonest talking points for political gain.
I give credit for several Republicans who spoke about actual issues. My hope is that those Republicans who spoke about actual issues will remember they were hired to solve problems, not get them themselves reelected. I believe that some Republicans will work with the Democrats to try to solve the problem.
I also believe that Obama and the Democrats believe that MOST of the Republicans would continue to play political games and mischaraterize - ON PURPOSE - the bill so as to score political points with the unthinkinking portion of their base.
I also believe that Obama will call the Republicans out for their hypcocrisy, their anti-Americanism, and their distortions.
Whether the American people will see reality or just reinforce their predetermined biases remains to be seen. But I believe Obama made an honest attempt.
If they Republicans can reelected by being dishonest than I fear for the future of American.
I also believe we get what we deserve. And right now, we deserve the incredible hypocrisy, anti-Americanism, and dishonesty of the Republicans who as a minority are holding Americans hostage.
"First off, why is John McCain even at today's health care summit organized by President Obama?
The answer. McCain was asked by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell to join Senate Republicans at the open-for-cameras health care meeting.
Then you said,
"I give President Obama credit for largely ignoring McCain's schoolyard ploy,..."
Obama hardly ignored McCain when Obama replied:
"We're not campaigning any more. The election is over..."
Now THERE is a most immature and embarrassing statement, and from a sitting president, in his first act of long overdue and long promised transparency !!!
And all because Obama simply couldn't answer McCain's question without harming his position there.
Also, it prompted another comment to remind Obama that there was another election coming.
Obama came off as the most smug and arrogant with his comment that Democrats get more time because, "I'm President, " which included his opening over-lengthy comments, quickly recognized as political posturing.
The only thing accomplished at the summit was Obama threatened reconciliation. More kindergarten type action and responses from this president, and, Oh well, so much for bipartisianship from a self serving president, as well.
I think you'll find that to be an incomplete, if not unsupportable, answer. We all know why McCain was there. He was there because he used his considerable clout to insert himself into the discussion because that is what he does, even when he doesn't have anything to contribute. He has not done anything particularly relevant in the ongoing health care debate, and clearly there were many Republicans there who had been working hard and were well versed. McCain was there because he wanted to be there. Watching his body language he was all smug and condescending throughout, and when given an opportunity to talk offered nothing but petty reminders of his irrelevance during the financial crisis. Sorry, he simply looked childish.
Obama hardly ignored McCain when Obama replied:
"We're not campaigning any more. The election is over..."
Now THERE is a most immature and embarrassing statement, and from a sitting president, in his first act of long overdue and long promised transparency !!!
I believe you have significantly mischaracterized the exchange. Obama replied by telling McCain that his petty critiques were simply rehashing the campaign rhetoric - misrepresentative of reality and not helpful. He then attempted to draw the discussion back to the issue at hand, so that they could work towards solutions. Obama acted appropriately for the situation; McCain clearly did not.
As for transparency, I can't imagine that you could convince any impartial person that previous President's have been more transparent than this one.
And all because Obama simply couldn't answer McCain's question without harming his position there.
The question was gamesmanship and unproductive.
Also, it prompted another comment to remind Obama that there was another election coming.
Actually, it was Obama who said reminded others that the election put the players in the positions they are, and that there will be elections in the future where the American people would decide which direction they wanted to go. Unspoken but obvious is that he feels while he is in office he intends to do the job the American people hired him to do.
Obama came off as the most smug and arrogant with his comment that Democrats get more time because, "I'm President, "
You've mischaracterized his statement again. He said that the time split between Democrats and Republicans seemed uneven because he took up time himself "as President" and also "as moderator." Since he is a Democrat that made it seem that the Democrats had more time.
But if you had watched the entire proceedings (which I did), you would have seen that many of the Republicans spent their time repeating the same talking points. Boehner and McConnell were particularly meaningless as it was clear they had done no homework on the issue and simply repeated the same misrepresentations (e.g., "government-run" health care). On the other hand, several of the Republican members HAD done their homework and made significant points, many of which I'm sure will be included in the final bill. (BTW, remember that bills already passed both houses of Congress, including the Senate bill with 60 votes)
which included his opening over-lengthy comments,
He tends to explain things. Personally, I prefer someone who explains things and shows he understands both the details and the big picture. In contrast, of course, to simply miming bumper sticker talking points that not only misrepresent but intentionally distort.
quickly recognized as political posturing.
How so? He explained his position. He also corrected the attempts of several Republicans to misrepresent reality. He also let those Republicans who chose to offer substantive points make their case. Again, I believe we'll see those points addressed in the final bill.
The only thing accomplished at the summit was Obama threatened reconciliation.
Again, the bills were passed by the majority in the House and a 60-vote majority in the Senate, all while the Republicans had decided up front that they would not vote for ANY bill. And that is even though many of their proposals and amendments have been incorporated in the bills that already passed. There will be more compromises by the majority party so that more minority party viewpoints are included.
More kindergarten type action and responses from this president,
I think that most impartial observers would characterize the President as the most knowledgeable, most inclusive, and most adult person in that room.
Oh well, so much for bipartisianship from a self serving president, as well.
Given that the Republican party made a political decision on the first day of this Congresses session in January 2009 (even before Obama took the oath of office) that they would stonewall every bill, refuse to vote yes on any bill even after working hard to water it down and insert their own amendments, pork, and ideas, and basically refuse to do their jobs, who exactly do you think has made the most effort to be bipartisan?
Again, ANY impartial observer will see that the majority party and President Obama have listened and incorporated the minority party amendments to a rather impressive degree given the outright reticence of the minority to do anything that might solve the countries problems. It's pretty hypocritical to argue that the President hasn't done enough to fix the problems he inherited while refusing to support any attempts to do so.
I told you because he was invited. Since you obviously did not know that, you then added your own personal opinion about why he was there. Meaningless, and bias... everyone has an opinion on that.
2. You said Obama ignored McCain.
I said: Obama hardly ignored McCain when Obama replied:
"We're not campaigning any more. The election is over..."
This comment from Obama was nothing more than an attempt to personally and publicly insult McCain, with no relevance to the purpose for which they were there, even though he chastised others for this.
3. You said: "As for transparency, I can't imagine that you could convince any impartial person that previous President's have been more transparent than this one."
We are talking about THIS president, without examining all previous presidents' transparency record. The point is that Obama made a huge issue about previous lack of transparency and made promises, throughout his two years of campaigning, that there would be transparency in his administation. He lied.
4. You said: " The question (McCain's) was gamesmanship and unproductive."
Aaahhh, how interesting you would single out that political ploy, and apply it to McCain, at this moment in time, when it is one that ALL politicians use, and the most guilty, and the most frequent user of this is Obama. For example, was it gamesmanship for Obama to question publicly if Senator Cantor just brought a paper "prop?" It was, after all, Obama's 2400 page health care document which was what the summit was about.
4. You said, "Also, it prompted another comment to remind Obama that there was another election coming."
You're speaking of the 2010 mid term elections. The other reference was to the 2012 Presidential election.
5. You said, "he (Obama) feels while he is in office he intends to do the job the American people hired him to do."
He is NOT doing the job Americans hired him to do. This is shown by his low performance ratings in the polls. 57% of Americans do NOT want his health care plan and he is still trying to push it through.
6. You said, "(BTW, remember that bills already passed both houses of Congress, including the Senate bill with 60 votes)"
Really? The problem with your statement is that those are currently TWO "different" bills. The president can NOT sign a bill into law until "both" houses of Congress have agreed on "one" bill.
PLUS...Most likely, Pelosi has lost some "yes" votes. (Rep. Robert Wexler, Rep. John Murtha, also Rep. Joseph Cao probably won't vote for it again.)
Again, WHY do you think Obama threatened reconciliation? Even this is shaky since some claim reconciliation can only be used on budgetary items.
7. You said, "which included his opening over-lengthy comments, which was quickly recognized as political posturing."
Obama's every word showed what a narcissist he is! He forced those present to address him as "Mr President," while he called them by their first names. Nonetheless, Republicans displayed the way they are intricately involved in this process. No matter how big Obama's ego; ultimately, he cannot govern without the consent of the people, and he doesn't have it. It shows more and more, through a majority of Americans' legitimate anxiety and anger. He will only succeed by listening to the American people, who have come together to tell him what they want and need. He refuses to do that. Additionally, his policies have ventured too far left for a center-right nation.
8. You said, " I think that most impartial observers would characterize the President as the most knowledgeable, most inclusive, and most adult person in that room."
Chuckle...
Finally, Obama expressed his feelings about irreconcilable philosophical beliefs between the two parties, then added the Democrats would move forward on their own, anyway.
Does that strike you as an effort to be bipartisan, or do his words or his actions show an intent to work towards any real, honest bipartisanship? I think not.
My opinion as expressed is supported by the evidence. You disagree. Is your opinion without bias? I stated up front that McConnell invited him, and I suspect I know more about who and how people were invited than you appear to be, so perhaps you might rein in your condescension.
This comment from Obama was nothing more than an attempt to personally and publicly insult McCain, with no relevance to the purpose for which they were there, even though he chastised others for this.
In your words "you then added your own personal opinion about why he was there. Meaningless, and bias... everyone has an opinion on that." Except your opinion seems to ignore the entire context surrounding the exchange.
We are talking about THIS president, without examining all previous presidents' transparency record.
Yes, and THIS president HAS been much more transparent than all previous presidents.
For example, was it gamesmanship for Obama to question publicly if Senator Cantor just brought a paper "prop?" It was, after all, Obama's 2400 page health care document which was what the summit was about.
I agree there was a lot of gamesmanship. Was it gamesmanship for Obama to point out the "props" (i.e., physical talking points). Cantor had no intent to read or use the "props" during the meeting, he just wanted to show the "big Senate plan" versus the "small Obama plan." Cantor played the game and Obama called his talking points.
You're speaking of the 2010 mid term elections. The other reference was to the 2012 Presidential election.
His original reference was to the 2008 presidential campaign because McCain seemed to be trying to continue running that race (or as Jon Stewart said, "perhaps in a last ditch effort to capture North Carolina?). He then noted that that campaign was over and they had been elected to govern. He followed with an acknowledgment that the people can choose however they plan to choose in the next election.
He is NOT doing the job Americans hired him to do. This is shown by his low performance ratings in the polls. 57% of Americans do NOT want his health care plan and he is still trying to push it through.
As has been made clear over and over, the American people are confused by all the rhetoric, in particular by the "death panels" and "government take-over" false talking points of the Republicans. When asked if they want the changes being proposed the majority of the American people clearly say they want them. But when faced with the rhetoric of the "job killing, debt enhancing, death panel laden, government take over" garbage, they of course aren't going to say they want that. This is the power of false rhetoric, something the Republicans are good at. Not sure that is something they should admit to being proud of.
Really? The problem with your statement is that those are currently TWO "different" bills. The president can NOT sign a bill into law until "both" houses of Congress have agreed on "one" bill.
My point was that the majority of both Houses, including the 60 vote majority in the Senate, have voted for the health care bills. Meanwhile, the minority is holding the system hostage. Given that nearly 75% of all the recent reconciliation-passed bills were pushed through by Republicans, their false indignation is transparently hypocritical.
Personally, my hope is that the smarter Republicans will decide to push to get some more of their ideas inserted in the bills and that the final passage will have not only majorities, but the supermajority in the Senate. Otherwise the fall elections will be about Republicans whining hypocritically (just like they were when they voted against the stimulus package and then made sure to take credit for any stimulus money that came to their districts), versus the Democrats running on a "Republicans are the party of NO" platform. That hardly seems to be keeping in mind the American people.
Obama's every word showed what a narcissist he is!
Gee, no bias in that opinion. The rest of that paragraph was just talking points so I'll just skip it.
Chuckle...
And this was not schoolyard level?
Finally, Obama expressed his feelings about irreconcilable philosophical beliefs between the two parties, then added the Democrats would move forward on their own, anyway.
Does that strike you as an effort to be bipartisan, or do his words or his actions show an intent to work towards any real, honest bipartisanship? I think not.
And how exactly would you describe "bipartisanship?" You seem to think it means that the majority party should simply kowtow to the intimidation of the minority party. You seem to think that the minority party can simply hold the rest of the country hostage unless only their ideas are passed. Doesn't that seem contradictory to what the Republican party did when it was the majority?
I'm sorry. But you've devolved into nothing more than talking points.
Have a nice day.
I won't respond to each of the items in your last two comments. Why? Because you, like Obama, don't listen. You disregard points I make and are much too preoccupied with pushing your own agenda, and discrediting everything else. The redeeming factor is most people recognize this and place those people and opinions in the "Ignore" bin.
Proof of YOUR denialism and narcissistic attitude lies in one of your statements:
You said, " ... the American people are confused by all the rhetoric."
This is simply an astounding statement! How could you possibly presume to know if 300+ million Americans are confused? You got the whole country with one sweep of your broad brush. This condescending "know-it-all" manner is annoying, overbearing, and bullying. However, I realize it is much easier for you to label one who disagrees with you as this, or childish and stupid. You must do this because you cannot support, with any degree of credibility, your talking points. It requires much less knowledge and energy for you to just slide into denial of obvious truths, and spew incredulous statements like this one, while ignoring the 800 lb. gorilla in the room.
The fact is that the evidence is piling up like snow on the Canadian ski slopes that the American people do not like Obama, or his policies, or the direction he is attempting to take this country. How long can you and they remain in denial? Will their going down in utter defeat in the next election prove anything?
A recent CNN poll has recorded a 51% disapproval of the Democratic Congress.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/10/26/poll.congress/index.html
A poll, today, shows that 57% of independent voters have a negative view of Obama's job performance, 47% of voters said Obama has fallen below their expectations as president, 38% said Obama is changing the country for the worse, and 53%, said Obama hasn't met their expectations,
http://www.bloombergutv.com/news/latest-business-news-us/44467/obama-job-performance-rating-drops.htm
These opinions are not borne out of confusion.
Denialists attempt to discredit polls showing American's disapproval of Obama, his policies and administation, manufacture another poll, or twist and turn these results to another meaning, and call these polls bias. So, have at it, I will leave the last word for you, and have a nice day!
Here are some interesting quotes from it:
"But members of the opposition party may not have fully understood that they were stepping into Prof. Obama's classroom, and that they were to be treated like his undisciplined pupils."
How very sad.
"Obama controlled the microphone and the clock."
How very sad.
"...it's not entirely clear that Obama was even trying to forge a compromise."
How very sad.
"...the summit served more as a moment for the president to tell Republicans, with the cameras rolling, why they're wrong and he's (Obama) right.
How very sad.
"and, less flatteringly, his tendency to act like the smartest guy in the room."
How very sad.
"After each talked, Obama would determine whether the speaker's point was a "legitimate argument."
How very sad.
"While each of them had to call him "Mr. President," Obama, often waving an index finger, made sure to refer to each of them by their first name"
How very sad.
"After several such moments, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell ((R-Ky.) spoke up. "Republicans have used 24 minutes; the Democrats, 52 minutes," he said.
"Obama made McConnell look small in his chair. "You're right, there was an imbalance on the opening statements," he said, "because I'm the president."
Or he'll go back to writing global warming posts again......
How so? Many Republicans, in particular the leadership and John McCain, acted like whiny schoolkids.
In addition, Obama moderated the event. I've moderated many events and it is up to the moderator to try to control the flow of information. He repeatedly tried to get the Republicans to acknowledge where they agreed so that they could focus on the areas of disagreement. In large part, again especially by the Republican leadership, they played political parlor games instead of anything substantive.
Frankly, I would have liked to see Obama just not waste time listening to the talking points and focused the discussion in on those Republican participants who actually had done their research. Unfortunately, it was the Republican leadership that decided which of their members got to talk in what order and on what issues. Had they been smarter and more intellectually honest they would have done a better job of presenting alternatives. They didn't. They just said they didn't like things. Many alternative ideas that the Republicans have offered were already included in the legislation. The truth is, they just want to vote no.
Look, I'm sorry that Obama clearly is smarter than most of the rest of the people in the room. That isn't his fault.
"After several such moments, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell ((R-Ky.) spoke up. "Republicans have used 24 minutes; the Democrats, 52 minutes," he said.
"Obama made McConnell look small in his chair. "You're right, there was an imbalance on the opening statements," he said, "because I'm the president."
I've already explained the "I'm the President" remark, but apparently you chose to ignore it because you like your version better. Whatever.
As for McConnell's comment about the time difference to that point (about 15% into the more than 7 hour long meeting), this doesn't seem a little childish and immature to you? This is the minority leader in the House of Representatives, not some 10-year old on the schoolyard lot. Obama, as moderator, and yes, as president, gave an extended opening statement. He also took the lead for the Democrats in most of the discussions. He also wasn't about to let Republican talking points that completely mischaracterized the pending legislation go unanswered. I mean, how can you have an honest discussion when false talking points are sitting on the table as the Republican position.
As for Milbank's characterization that "Obama made McConnell look small in his chair," I think a more accurate characterization is that Obama simply acknowledged how small McConnell had made himself look in his chair.
I don't believe Pelosi or Reid when they say this bill will create, 200,000 to 400,000 jobs immediately....While it may create a few jobs, its not going to be enough, and just how many jobs will be lost with the new jobs...... so far the ration of jobs lost to jobs created is about 2:1
Sometimes I just can't help myself.
But what do you expect from McCain, he's on his way out, you know it and I know it, I don't think he will get re-elected plain and simple. The way he's treated members of his own party......
I'm not about a party I'm about Politics, and while Obama made a I won you lost type comment and I felt overly hars towards McCain, I think that he needs to be willing ot start over, and listen to ALL parties, and have ALL parties write the bill.
Sorry but your 'god' Barry Boy isn't being much better than McCain!.
Mooch
I saw some of the televised discussion.
I did see the section when McCain engaged in "politicalspeak" and Obama appropriately, I thought, called him on it.
And I do think that McCain came across as a whiner and a sniveler. But, to give the Senator his due, he did bring up a valid point about how Medicare Advantage, in Florida, was going to be given preferential treatment, by comparison to a similar program, for example, in Arizona. And the President certainly conceded the point.
A more significant point might be to evaluate the the framing of the debate:
As much as I support Obama and Health Care Reform, the President, I think, advanced this legislation forward, too quickly and did not organize and plan for the Bill's complexity and its attendant ramifications.
For a Bill(s), with such controversy and such intricacy, to be executed at such a pace that it goes beyond the ken and/or the reasonable comprehension of some of the Congress, much less a large chunk of the country, is to invite Failure.
Because at least 4 Presidencies, since the Hoover Administration, have tried to carry through similar accomplishments, the President should have used such a degree of difficulty, in the achievement of past success, as a barometer:
He needed to have exercised a great deal more patience, generally, as well as to have implemented a more effective strategy in communication and presentation.
He did not do this--and so I am wondering if starting from scratch might, theoretically, not be a bad idea.
But, at this point, the Democrats would not be able to risk such a decision, politically.
It now might make sense to discuss, in depth, the consequences of Reconciliation.
I still support the President and his administration.
As did I. It was like a grownup speaking with a child.
And I do think that McCain came across as a whiner and a sniveler. But, to give the Senator his due, he did bring up a valid point about how Medicare Advantage, in Florida, was going to be given preferential treatment, by comparison to a similar program, for example, in Arizona. And the President certainly conceded the point.
It was a valid point. Too bad he didn't raise it as a valid point when he had the chance in Congressional debates and discussions. A responsible Senator would have dealt with the issue responsibly...he dealt with it like, well, like a whiner and sniveler.
As I said on the other thread, I don't see how this can be characterized as pushing the legislation "too quickly." We have been debating health care for decades and its been 17 years since the failed effort to fix the problem under Clinton. The bill was debated and dragged on for 14 months. And the Republicans had decided before Obama even took office that they would as a block vote no on any significant legislation purely as a political calculus to muddy the waters and thus presumably enhance their chances of gaining back seats in this mid-term elections. The Republicans had no intention from the beginning to vote for any bill, even though they worked hard to water down every bill and insert their own pet projects and pork into anything they thought would pass anyway. The Republican party cynically and dishonestly fomented stalemate not based on ideology but based purely on personal politics.
Frankly, it steams me to see such anti-Americanism and disdain for the American people.
Also, Obama is smart enough to know that the supermajority in the Senate and the wide majority in the House would not remain beyond this session. With the Republicans dedicated to destroying any pretense of working for the American people, Obama had no choice but to get it done. The Republicans knew this and so made sure to make the process as long and drawn out and painful as possible, hence the death panels and other blatant lies they spewed, and are still spewing.
I'm totally disgusted with the Republicans and am energized to keep them from gaining control of Congress, where they will continue the process of destroying our economy and our integrity like they did for 8 years before.