HCR’s vulnerability
David Brooks speaks of the “striking” vulnerability of HCR to challenges, “some of them scarcely discussed before passage.”
Scarcely discussed? I guess the supposedly-conservative Brooks didn’t have the time to check out blogs or periodicals on the right, because he would have read a great many discussions of just these points long before the bill’s passage. Perhaps he means that the people who matter—the Democrats in the previous Congress, his fellow colleagues in the MSM, and those who attend their cocktail parties or wear pants with tellingly wonderful creases—never discussed or anticipated them.
But here they are: court challenges, false projections for human behavior, employee dumping, health care service provider mergings, and (most surprising of all; how can it be?) public hostility.
Brooks can never get over being the doofus that everyone picked on in grade school. However, with NoBama’s creased pants, he found a way to be one of the “cool” guys.
Could never get a date for the prom or earn a letterman’s sweater, but now he gets to hang with the elite and talk about “goin’ to his crib” and “bein’ right on” and all that.
Comes from being a steer. Looks neat-o, but lacks what it takes to be a bull.
Tears on your pillow, Mr. Brooks. That cheerleader still ain’t goin’ to the sock-hop with you. Oh, the humanity!
ho hum.
Can somebody take this guy’s microphone?
Well, that’s the usual progression of events isn’t it?
1. Liberals solve purported problem.
2. Problem gets worse.
3. Blame conservatives.
4. Assert that not enough money was thrown at problem.
5. Solve problem created by the solution of the first problem.
6. Repeat.
I say “ditto”, Don!
Don,
You remember sock hops too? How about Spin and Marty?
Take it easy on Creases neo. Being a “smart conservative” does create some blind spots to ones perspective…
Especially when you get to label yourself as a conservative just because you are slightly to the right of everyone else on the NYT editorial staff.
“But here they are: court challenges, false projections for human behavior, employee dumping, health care service provider mergings, and (most surprising of all; how can it be?) public hostility.”
And let’s not forget the “biggie”, projections gamed to exclude the “Doc Fix” as a savings, which was passed as a seperate amendment after the HCR bill was passed.
Also consider the CBO’s savings were also projected to figure health costs as static going forward (Never happened in the history of the world), which is laughable considering as soon as the HCR was signed, insurance premuims skyrocketed around the country.
expat: Spin and Marty? Oh, heck yeah. Always will remember the butler who went to the ranch with Marty and called him “Master Martin.” Was a short on the MM Club.
Can’t recall the name of the ranch. Keep thinking “Melody Ranch,” but that’s where Gene Autrey hung out and didn’t want to be “fenced in.”
M-I-C, See ya real soon, K-E-Y, Why? Because we like you, M-O-U-S-EEEE!
Thanks for the memory, expat.
Cubs_Fan: Karl Marx, Frederich Engels and Lenin were also slightly to the right of everyone else on the NYT editorial staff.
Here’s more:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin_and_Marty
DVDs are available. It would be interesting to see how today’s 8-10 year olds react to them.
expat, check out how old looney tunes cartoons have been censored for today’s kids.
I always thought that if the left really believed that Obamacare would save x billions of dollars, why not enact Obamacare times 100 and save 100x billions of dollars? We could wipeout our entire national debt with the stroke of a pen.
Brooks is largely on target – liberals are going to argue that the problem was the law didn’t go far enough. Liberals as it is believe that the law does not represent a significant expansion of government.
And, conservatives will have to go beyond just saying they want to repeal it. A lot more attention will be focused on this as we approach the election – it’s likely to be a major issue especially if we see more doctors come out against it and increasing numbers of businesses decide/announce they’re going to throw their employees into the government system.
I think it should be done in two stages -nearly simultaneously since neither will likely happen until after Obama is out. First is the repeal. And the second is the bill / plan based on market principles that the Republicans want to put in place. Going back to status quo won’t fly.
There is a possible scenario in which Obama – reelected narrowly by a somewhat improving economy (thanks to the restraining hand of the House), but chastened by large Republican majorities in both House and Senate, negotiates seriously to replace the current law. It might be dressed up as an amending process to save (hhis) face, but would (hopefully) in substance repeal those thousands of pages of ill considered &*&^&$^.