• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Feingold: No Health Care Ere Christmas

T

The Prof

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
12,828
Reaction score
1,808
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
1. Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold, hardly a Bluedog, declared last week before a head-hungry townhall---"nobody is going to bring a [health care] bill before Christmas"

2. Indeed, added Feingold, reform may not even happen then

3. It may now NEVER occur, the senator surmised

3. Quite a concession from this leading liberal from the president's own compressed camp, spanked now to a deep purple over the disputatious topic

4. He's not happy about this, Feingold offers, he's clearly bowing to the resounding realities of Realpolitik

5. Bulging debt is blipping, hell-bent, a beeline to the center of America's radar screen of concerns

6. The White House's admission last Friday to TWO TRILLION dollars of error, its readjustment of cumulative DEBT to $10 trillion over the next decade, is clearly coming into expensive political play

7. Feingold, fully aware of the peril the president has put him in, cravenly covenants with Wisconsinites---he'll consult with constituents before ok'ing ANYTHING

8. Let's experiment with a state-by-state strategy, the senator interestingly suggests, let Tennessee try single payer, let Delaware dabble with co ops...

9. The polar opposite of the universalist, one-size-fits-all approach pushed by our incompetent president

10. Abortion is also becoming a definite deal breaker---Feingold affirms, "there's no way we're changing this to offer public funding of abortion"

11. "Nobody wants to open up that issue in the middle of this"

12. Of course, it's TOO LATE for anyone to TELL THAT to Pelosi/Obama

13. Whether congresspeople would agree to gulp the same pills they'd make the rest of us swallow is also a serious concern

14. Feingold was pinched pretty hard as well to repudiate the cruel descriptions tossed around by Reid, Pelosi and Gibbs, disparaging the first-amendment-armed critics of Obamacare, whom even Feingold can no longer finesse

15. No more stimuli, continued Feingold, Plan Pelosi was only an emergency, he caviled---excuses, excuses

16. He's nervous now about deepening debt and the resultant "hyperinflation"

17. He repeatedly, roundly and rigorously reproved cap and trade

18. The Global Warming Protection Act, he explained, isn't worth even a crummy carbon credit, since there's no way to enforce foreigners following suit

19. Meanwhile, Obama underwrites oil drilling offshore IN BRAZIL

20. Feingold opposes gun "registration," he wants you to know

21. It's amazing, really---health care, deficits, states rights, abortion, stimuli, cap and trade, gun control---exactly WHEN did Russ Feingold morph into the Cheesehead version of NEWT GINGRICH?

22. Finally, the kicker, as significant a sentence as has yet been said inside DC this season---Feingold affirmed before his fired-up flock: "I AM THE DEMOCRAT WHO HAS VOTED LEAST OFTEN WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA"

Wow!

Denied:1up! Software ()

U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold told a large crowd gathered for a listening session in Iron County last week there would likely be no health care bill before the end of the year - and perhaps not at all.

It was an assessment Feingold said he didn't like, but the prospect of no health care legislation brought a burst of applause from a packed house of nearly 150 citizens at the Mercer Community Center.

"Nobody is going to bring a bill before Christmas, and maybe not even then, if this ever happens," Feingold said. "The divisions are so deep. I never seen anything like that."

Feingold reiterated his appraisal a bit later.

"We're headed in the direction of doing absolutely nothing, and I think that's unfortunate," he said when asked about the plight of uninsured Americans.

The Mercer session was spirited but civil - as Feingold himself accurately described it - with most people focused squarely on the health care issue, followed by the deficit as a runner-up concern.

During the discussion, Feingold said he could not declare whether he would support a health reform bill until he has actually seen one, and he said he would then seek out the opinions of Wisconsinites. The Senate recessed in late July with a deadlocked Senate Finance Committee unable to finish work on a bill.

"When I get a proposal I can look at it and decide whether I will support it," he said. "I will let the people of the entire state talk to me."

The senator, a declared proponent of health care reform in principle, nonetheless did not seem too concerned about a potential failure of the Obama administration's effort. He said there was merit to the idea of trying a variety of proposals in various states first.

"Lindsay Graham and I sponsored legislation to have pilot programs in five states," Feingold told the audience. "Maybe we should try some different things. There might be a single-payer state. There might be a co-op state. Let's get some evidence on the ground. This thing right now is not going in the right direction. We might be in a situation where there won't be a bill worth passing."

In 2007, Feingold and Graham, a South Carolina Republican, introduced the State-Based Health Care Reform Act, which would have allowed states to decide how to achieve insurance coverage.

The senator said again last week he did not think a "one-size-fits-all" approach would work as well as giving states program flexibility.

At the listening session, Feingold did allay some expressed concern about federally-funded abortions being included as part of a health-care reform package. An amendment removed that provision from the House version of the bill, he said, and a Senate bill won't reintroduce it.

"There's no way we're changing this to offer public funding of abortions," Feingold said. "Nobody wants to open up that issue in the middle of this. That's one thing you won't have to worry about."

One audience member pointed to the generous health benefits federal lawmakers enjoy and wondered if Feingold would pledge to take the same health insurance that Congress "will make the rest of us take."

"I will support a law that will bring us under it," he said. "If I am eligible, I will join it. If I can be part of the system, I will be."

However, he observed, that might not be possible if a government plan is means-tested because his income would no doubt disqualify him.

Finally, Feingold repudiated Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's remarks calling vocal critics of health care reform at town hall meetings "evil mongers."

Feingold called Reid's remarks unfortunate and inappropriate.

The nation's growing deficit was a major topic, too, and Feingold repeatedly cited his credentials as a balanced-budget type of senator.

"I ran for the U.S. Senate on a platform to balance the budget," he said. "In 1992, we had one of the largest deficits in history and we balanced the budget. I led the charge in 1992 to get rid of the federal deficit, and when Bill Clinton left office, there was no federal deficit."

Feingold said he supported the stimulus package earlier this year because of the recession, but he said he would not guarantee his vote for a second stimulus if one was proposed.

"This was an emergency situation to get the economy going," Feingold said. "And I have told the administration not to count on me for another stimulus package. You can't just keep doing this because it creates hyperinflation."

Feingold also said he has not been a supporter of so-called cap-and-trade proposals, and he compared the issue to global warming, at least with respect to gaining cooperation from other nations.

"You know, the other countries won't play ball," he said of his attempts to get the international community to work together on global warming. "Maybe we should impose tariffs. We should put some pressure on them. They cannot be given a free pass, and we cannot do cap-and-trade alone."

Feingold said his lack of support for cap-and-trade and his votes to cut spending have sometimes put him at odds with the Obama administration.

"There's a survey that shows that I am the Democrat who has least voted with President Obama," he said.

Actually, according to CQ Politics, Feingold and Arlen Specter, who recently switched to the Democratic Party from the GOP, are the two least likely Democrats in the U.S. Senate to vote with the president, with both having supported Obama 86 percent of the time. By contrast, Democratic Sen. Herb Kohl has voted with the president 97 percent of the time.

On another issue, Feingold said he opposed legislation to require gun registration, and he said such legislation would die a quick death in the Senate.

"I have opposed gun registration all my life, and I will continue to oppose it," he said. "We've got the votes in the Senate to kill that."
Click to expand...


The Prof
 
Last edited:
The Prof said:
Finally, the kicker, as significant a sentence as has yet been said inside DC this season---Feingold affirmed before his fired-up flock: "I AM THE DEMOCRAT WHO HAS VOTED LEAST OFTEN WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA"
Click to expand...

:lol: The Dalai Bama is turning into Bush already.
 
The longer the health care battle rages on, the better for the Obama administration's hopes for a public option.

The White House has one advantage, they control the agenda.

Now, the one aspect the right should, and most likley is very cognizant of, is it may have gotten too hot too quickly.

The longer the war over health drags on, the worse it is for those hoping to crush the public option.

The answer is obvious and simple.

Americans, like everyone else in the rest of the world, develop an insensitivity to repeated stimuli.

Ever hear a song or watch a movie a million times? You hear it so much, that one day, that song or movie doesn't have the same affect as it did before.

It works the same way with media and politics.

Cue the footage of the town hall protesters screaming their heads off. Play it over and over and over again.

Eventually the clips get old, the story tired and the American people lose interest.

Time to move onto the next trivial topic.

The point is, the GOP has a very limited window to kill health reform before the Democratic party's overwhelming reources start to grind down the Republican effort.

If the democrats turn this into a battle of attrition, the GOP loses.

The Grand Old Party has about two, maybe three weeks to squash it. If the war drags on longer, Obama will have his victory.
 
Last edited:
limit, you don't know what you're talking about

i'd be flattered by your constant attentions if they weren't so stupid

you read a thread about RUSS FEINGOLD of WISCONSIN morphing into CHEESEHEAD NEWT

gun REGISTRATION (LOL!), states rights, abortion, stimlus, cap and trade, health care, deficits, the townhallers, etc

and you come back at ME with some inanity about SONGS GETTING STUCK IN YOUR HEAD, or something

LOLOLOL!

here's one for you (to the tune of barney the purple dinosaur, the most GLUE-LIKE adhesive of all ditties)---

i love you, you love me
health care's a fatality...

there, HUM on THAT

if the public option is so VIABLE, limit, then why is BILL CLINTON working so hard to prepare his LEFT to accept life WITHOUT IT?

Party leaders prepare liberals to accept a health care reform deal - Chris Frates and Carrie Budoff Brown - POLITICO.com

why does kent conrad repeat at every opportunity that he just doesn't have the votes?

TheHill.com - Conrad: Votes lacking to pass public-option healthcare

why is howard dean throwing TANTRUMS over its LOSS?

Health concession fuels blowback - Mike Allen - POLITICO.com

why is the WHIP durbin OPEN to CUTTING it?

Another Blow To Public Option: Durbin Open To Dropping It

why does bigears HIMSELF call it just a SLIVER?

Another Blow To Public Option: Durbin Open To Dropping It

why did hhs sebelius float the BALLOON that it's all pure passe?

Sebelius: Public insurance option not essential - Yahoo! News

somehow, limit, i get the IMPRESSION that you don't quite appreciate the role of, umm, WHIP

LOL!

or WISCONSIN

i mean, down here in the LOWER 48

i don't PERCEIVE you poring thru COMMITTEE proceedings as punctiliously perhaps as The perpetually prepared Prof

nor with proportional perspicacity

war of attrition---LOLOL!

trivial topic---LOLOL!

the longer the war drags on---it's been OVER for months, ever since baucus bawled back to the drawing board, every since elmendorf testified in the gateway, ever since daschle said the public option was dead, ever since bigears primed his emergency presser and declared he'd serendipitously discovered TWO THIRDS of the money required in some magic box poor passed away ted kennedy was obviously too stupid to find

you want links?

5 minutes

yet still not worth my time

grow up
 
So a thought just occurred to me while looking at this and other recent posts...Am I the only one who notices the similarities between the prof's and the limt's post formatting and style? (long listing style posts) and the fact that in most every post they are responding to one another? I mean absolutely no offense, and if I am the only one, I will shut up, but the whole thing seems a little fishy to me!
 
fishy?

quick! send it to flag@whitehouse.gov

LOL!
 
Don't Tase Me Bro said:
:lol: The Dalai Bama is turning into Bush already.
Click to expand...
It's easy to be a libertarian isn't it, when you have no dog in fight? Reminds me of the way Canada is, sitting on the sidelines of foreign policy pointing fingers. I wish there was a libertarian candidate so we could kick HIM/HER in the balls all day long.
 
The Prof said:
limit, you don't know what you're talking about

i'd be flattered by your constant attentions if they weren't so stupid


the longer the war drags on---it's been OVER for months,
Click to expand...

Sometimes I have to give my head a shake. It helps me to remember your record. Here is a guy (the prof) who has admitted he is not an objective observer of politics. He is a poster who has flatly stated his stubborn opposition against Obama and his policies.

When someone so boldly and proudly displays their GOP colours, the obvious conclusion is that said person is not an authoritative force.

Prof, you cannot view the health reform debate without rose coloured glasses, because you are not a serious observer. You are a hyper partisan who posts what he wishes will happen.

A fine example of this, is the Gates story. You postulated that the cop wouldn't show up. You said the beer moment would not happen, that the police officer would make a stand on principle.

Again, you did not make this claim based on the evidence, on sound judgement, or on the facts, you simply wished he would not show up. You simply wished he would make a stand.

Of course, we all know what happened. The police officer did show up, the police officer did have a beer, and the police officer was there for the photo op.

The problem with you is the same it has always been - too biased, too optimistic, too quick to make a wacky prediction based on a hasty tendency to call the game for your "team."

Last I checked, a health bill has not been voted on by the Senate or the House.

Yet, you "think" its over.

The facts don't agree.

But then again, facts have never really concerned you.

Theres a big difference bewteen us, prof. For me, the facts dictate the conclusion.

For you, the facts are forced to fit your bizarre and usually awkward conclusions.
 
Last edited:
Midwest Lib said:
So a thought just occurred to me while looking at this and other recent posts...Am I the only one who notices the similarities between the prof's and the limt's post formatting and style? (long listing style posts) and the fact that in most every post they are responding to one another? I mean absolutely no offense, and if I am the only one, I will shut up, but the whole thing seems a little fishy to me!
Click to expand...

We are not the same person.
 
American said:
It's easy to be a libertarian isn't it, when you have no dog in fight? Reminds me of the way Canada is, sitting on the sidelines of foreign policy pointing fingers. I wish there was a libertarian candidate so we could kick HIM/HER in the balls all day long.
Click to expand...

If a Libertarian was President you'd have nothing to complain about unless it is freedom and liberty that you oppose.
 
Don't Tase Me Bro said:
If a Libertarian was President you'd have nothing to complain about unless it is freedom and liberty that you oppose.
Click to expand...

I think those things can be defined differently by different people. For example, poverty would be rampant in such a system and those people would not be "free" or have "liberty" in a way that allows them to pursue "happiness." Poverty is a cage that works against people on so many levels. The rich would do everything in their power to keep the poor there in order to maintain their access to cheap goods and labor. I think your political point of view is way too utopian and counts on the goodness of people, which isn't there in many cases.
 
You folks fail to mention that he is against parts of the proposed bill on the table RIGHT NOW and is not against health care reform.

It's fine if your against Obama. It's not fine if your against the uninsured people who can't get health care and those who can, but it cuts thier paycheck in half. Why don't we listen to intelligent senators like Feingold and WORK TOWARD A PLAN THAT WORKS, rather than work against health care reform in general.
 
The_Limt said:
Sometimes I have to give my head a shake. It helps me to remember your record. Here is a guy (the prof) who has admitted he is not an objective observer of politics. He is a poster who has flatly stated his stubborn opposition against Obama and his policies.

When someone so boldly and proudly displays their GOP colours, the obvious conclusion is that said person is not an authoritative force.

Prof, you cannot view the health reform debate without rose coloured glasses, because you are not a serious observer. You are a hyper partisan who posts what he wishes will happen.

A fine example of this, is the Gates story. You postulated that the cop wouldn't show up. You said the beer moment would not happen, that the police officer would make a stand on principle.

Again, you did not make this claim based on the evidence, on sound judgement, or on the facts, you simply wished he would not show up. You simply wished he would make a stand.

Of course, we all know what happened. The police officer did show up, the police officer did have a beer, and the police officer was there for the photo op.

The problem with you is the same it has always been - too biased, too optimistic, too quick to make a wacky prediction based on a hasty tendency to call the game for your "team."

Last I checked, a health bill has not been voted on by the Senate or the House.

Yet, you "think" its over.

The facts don't agree.

But then again, facts have never really concerned you.

Theres a big difference bewteen us, prof. For me, the facts dictate the conclusion.

For you, the facts are forced to fit your bizarre and usually awkward conclusions.
Click to expand...

he's talking about ME again

LOLOL!
 
nah, the limit avoids issues

the limit is pure PERSONALITY WHORE

issues:

what's a WHIP, limit?

what STATE is durbin from?

what's his RELATIONSHIP to the president?

what committee belongs to BAUCUS?

what exactly is BAUCUS' role?

what did cbo/elmendorf TESTIFY to, questioned by mr conrad, in that GATEWAY cmte on july 16?

WHY is bubba clinton taking the tack he's taking with HIS left?

what happened IN THE HOUSE to cap and trade?

where were the BLUEDOGS on the issue?

what's the precise role of the FRESHMEN relative to obamacare?

what're the blue GOVERNORS' objections?

how do THEY play?

who does HOWARD DEAN represent, what is his precise DISPOSITION, and why is he running ATTACK ADS against dorgan, bayh, lincoln, landrieu, both nelsons, conrad...

who are THE SIX (surely you've heard TONS of talk about the SIX, limit), why are they so IMPORTANT, what have they been DOING the last month?

what're DASCHLE's doings in all this?

what's WISCONSIN's electoral HISTORY?

where does the BADGER STATE stand today?

the point---when it comes to smoking kielbasa sausage, the limit is simply clueless

in other words---get back to me when you have something OF SUBSTANCE to say

or you can persist in expressing how spellbound you are by The poetic Prof's super appealing personality

pridelessly

in public

LOLOLOL!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom