Could the house fix the loop hole this time arround? I realize that the Senate would have to pass it again, leaving the possiblity of a republican change requiring the house to approve again. I too would like to see things finished but since we have the senate bill and the house can always approve the last thing approved by the Senate (assuming the votes are there). I say close the loophole and add the public option.
States regulate the kinds of products and services that are sold in them from out of state all the time. I fail to see why an insurance company in Alabama can't be able to sell policies in California but at the same time be required to only sell policies that meet California guidlines to California citizens. I think its good to get rid of the insurance monopoly in states but I agree that states should decide what policies must offer inorder to be sold to their citizens regarless of where the company is located.
Unfortunately, I imagine Congress will wait until after the 2010 elections. Not saying that's wrong or right, smart or dumb. Just saying that is probably the way it will be and it is a shame for American workers to have to continue waiting.
One thing to remember is that Time says their "Person of the Year" is about importance and influence, not about deserving it. It is neither an honor nor a censor. Putin won it sometime in the last few years because like it or not he influenced global politics to a significant degree for an individual. In this economy it makes sense to me they would chose someone who in theory is in charge of the largest economy in the world's strategy to end the recession. Now maybe Time should know better that the title and the office may not actually deliver. But the point is that Time's naming him to Person of the Year is not an endorsement of his performance or priorities.
I live in Columbus, Ohio and this scares the sh*t out of me. But to be fair I'd like to see all the footage they took. I agree that many conservatives simply regurgitate fox news without thinking, and I am not equatiting Obama to Palin, but I guarantee if I was a conservative with a camera and I asked similar questions to a large group of Obama supporters I could make 10 minutes of equally embarrassing footage. There would also be lots of footage with well thought out, logical answers to why people support Obama. But the fact remains that America as a population is largely uniformed and thinks whatever those most like them seem to think. You cannot limit this to the right side of the aisle.
sounds like Gilibrand better raise her profile post haste. shaking hands, kissing babies, maybe trying to become a spokes person for health care reform. unless she makes the calculation to run right in response.
I find the so called "risks" of nuclear power are antiquatied notions that fail to take into acount the advances in waste containment that have been made. We have very reliable methods for containing radioactive waste in such a way that all we truely have to worry about is someone breaking into the facility where its kept and some how stealling one of the giant concrete(among other materials) ball it is stored in. The fear of nuclear energy is a throw back from the hippy, nature is like Bambi movement and a fear of the rejection of this natural mystic philosophy.
Ask any physicist or engineer. Even a staunch liberal, progressive, tree-hugging, outdoorsman physicist will agree. Nuclear power, for the near term at least, is the answer.
Are there no issues with nuclear power? Of course not, there will still be political considerations of where we mine for uranium, how environmentally friendly the mining process is, who is profitting from the plants. But all this pales in comparison to the corruption and destructive nature of the current oil and coal driven energy policies we currently have.
The GOP is to regimented and Authoritarian to nominate a Presidential Candidate out of nowhere. THey will select a vice Presidential candiadate out of nowhere as we all saw with Palin so maybe their grass roots activists combined with the teabaggers will be able to change the party's way of doing business. But every modern GOP nominee has run before, and run for Presidential nomination, not vice. They are very invested in the "line of succession" as I call it and I think the only thing that could change that in 2012 is Palin's celebrity status and the possibility that due to McCain's age some of the GOP saw the McCain/Palin ticket as the "Palin with a trigger" ticket, thus making her the "heir apparent". Just my two cents, but I think the 2012 GOP nominee will be a known quantity.
I think we should hold a vote to call him on his statements. If he votes no, revoke his chairmanship and send the passed house bill through reconcillation to the senate. maybe we can get 50 votes for it and get a better bill than we would have trying to get 60 votes for cloture. Plus we will teach the rethugs a lesson. If they hadn't been so stubborn they could have diluted healthcare more but since they pushed us too far we passed a stronger bill with only 50 votes. Plus Biden obviously.
AL-7 seems like the least definsible, non-protest vote to me. The Congressman is a self described moderate so I doubt he thought the bill didn't go far enough. It's a D+18 minority majority district and that wasn't been won by McCain or even been in Republican hands recently. He's also not a freshman so that elliminates another "vulnerability" excuse.
The house votes electronically, there is no such thing as "last vote". But you can see a tally of the votes so far and change your vote till the last second. It was looking like it would be 219 for the bill for a while before voting ended. So they could tell that their votes weren't needed, although i hope their hands were glued to whatever they use to cast their votes in case of a last mnute loss of backbone among a couple of blue dogs.
Can someone explain the details of Tancredo's defferal? Is it believed he wasn't clinically depressed and paid a psychiatrist to say he was? Unless there is some support for this theory I'm not sure I can get behind a member of Team Blue ridiculing a person for having a mental problem like depression at some point in their life. I admit that either way it is presumptious of someone who has never served to think they can tell a vetran about military life and it should be called out but I'm not sure I can support Markos's insinuation without some reason to believe that Tancredo bought his way out of service. If it is true however, good for Markos. That kind of hypocrisy should be revealed and used to shame such a person to no end.
I have no familiarity with Tancredo's past so I'd appreciate some opinions.
While I agree with you that many people are using covers for their racism and using words or complaints that ooze racism. Shooting a monkey and saying someone else will have to right the stimulis bill now in a cartoon the most glaring example i've seen. I think you are reaching a bit far. Yes Obama is black, and yes a common negative stereotype of black people is that they are lazy.
But every single criticism of Obama is not some well disguised or psycological slip indicating internal racism. Is a lot of racism sublimated as ridiculous critiscism, yes absolutely. But its loose reaching like this that makes our legitimate complaints about the racist attacks on Obama and Democrates fall on deaf ears among moderates and the few liberal republicans left. There is plenty of racism out there to call out, lets not do it in here amongst our own.
In all fairness, if u made what ur mother made and ur kid went to stanford you'd recieve a lot of financial aid. I myself went to a college that costs the same as stanford, between $200,000 and $250,000, and all I ever paid was $400 to reserve my spot and another $1000 for summer school one year. I did also earn over $10,000 in private scholarships. All in all with no help, I would have paid less than $25,000 to go to a top 20 school. Not argueing that its ridiculous how much reagan economics has made life hard for those in the bottom 99%, just asking for some perspective. Many on the other side would say that financial aid is the primary reason tuition has gone up so much, and we should prolly be able to counter that argument.
It is crazy that it costs so much to go to private high school, that a decent education can be so difficult to obtain, and that the same quality of lifestyle once enjoyed by so many is now for a priviledged few. How exactly do we plan on reversing all of this?