[paraclete]

Yes Clete ,the President needs to be there to sign whatever concoction and bast@rdization of the bill reaches his desk .

This weekend the House is contemplating a blatantly unconstitutional remedy to break the impass. Effectively they may try to submit the Senate version of the bill to the President without actually voting on it themselves(a clear violation of article 7 sec 2).

There will be immediate court challenges to this of course ;but the Dems will declare victory and go home to their constituents and tell them "well no....I did not actually vote for it ".

Don't put your hopes up in the President doing anything useful in Australia . As he has demonstrated ,he is willing to damage our relationships with the English speak nations .

Give me a break, Tom, like it couldn't wait a day once it is passed. If he does something sneaky to get the bill passed we don't want him here, we have enough politicians already, what we want to hear from is statesmen

[tomder55]

That's not the half of it. Congress was held hostage in DC town this weekend under the lame excuse that they needed to pass an anti-algae bill.But the real reason is that Pelosi and Obama's henchman Rham Emanuel needed more time to twist arms of their caucus. They don't have the votes ;but they will resort to any brutish and unconstitutional means to get it done. The president's whole domestic agenda is at stake ;and yes,in his mind that trumps any international relations obligations .

[speechlesstx]

The president's whole domestic agenda is at stake ;and yes,in his mind that trumps any international relations obligations .

Right, and if the Messiah loses this battle it would relegate him to the status of ordinary and that's unacceptable. This is the man whose goal goes far beyond any domestic agenda, he wants to remake the world.

"We are the hope of the future," sayeth Obama. We can "remake this world as it should be." Believe in me and I shall redeem not just you but your country -- nay, we can become "a hymn that will heal this nation, repair this world, and make this time different than all the rest."

[speechlesstx]

It appears the most transparent, ethical Congress ever is for the first time in US history, about to pass a bill they haven't voted on. Yes, the Dems are going to "Slaughter" the constitution:

It’s crunch time on health care. The Budget Committee will meet Monday to start marking up a shell of a Reconciliation Bill. The Rules Committee will then meet as early as Wednesday to hollow out whatever the Budget Committee passed and then insert a new bill from Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) office. The Majority is still planning to use the “Slaughter Rule” that would allow the House to pass the Senate health care bill without voting on it. Final votes are expected to stretch into the weekend.

Say you what you will about Bush and Republicans, but you'd be hard pressed to come up with a more despicable, shameless, underhanded, slimy, unconstitutional act than what this Congress is planning.

[excon]

Say you what you will about Bush and Republicans, but you'd be hard pressed to come up with a more despicable, shameless, underhanded, slimy, unconstitutional act than what this Congress is planning.

Hello again, Steve:

Boy, if they did it all legal like, THAT should piss you off. But, it should make you HAPPY that they're violating the Constitution. It'll make your job of repealing the law that much easier.

By the way, I'm not hard pressed at all.

Excib

[speechlesstx]

Ex, it will piss me off if it passes no matter the procedure to get there - this congress has absolute contempt for the wishes of the American people, their employers.

This is not about providing health care for those without, it's all about the agenda. Tom showed that by Pelosi's comments. The administration revealed that last year when they suggested Dems pass anything so they could declare victory and move on. And Obama revealed it by telling the Hispanic caucus he needed this to save his presidency.

“Win one for Barry.” Yeah, that's reason enough for the government to take over health care.

[excon]

Hello again, Steve:

You're a victim of your own propaganda. This bill is NOT a government takeover (your favorite phrase), and it IS what the American people want, no matter how many times FOX news tells you they don't.

Elections have consequences. Torture is one I had to put up with. Helping Americans with access to health care is yours. Bummer for you.

excon

[tomder55]

It'll make your job of repealing the law that much easier.

It will be impossible to repeal because of the veto . This has to be stopped now or by court challenge or it will become another permanent "entitlement " .

I know that court challenges are being prepared to address the process of "pass and deem" .There are also State Att Generals being authorized to challenge it on 9th and 10th amendment issues . There will be challenges related to the mandate . I suspect there are some in SCOTUS who think the application of the 'commerce clause ' has become too broad and abusive and would be more than happy to rule to limit it.

But I think this can be nipped in the bud still.
ABC's last whip count had it 208 yes and 209 no with 14 undecided .216 is the magic number .

Now that something resembling a reconciliation bill is public(and I have no intention of reading it) ,and the CBO gave a fuzzy math thumbs up ,I expect that Pelosi will manage to twist enough arms to get it through the House .

Senate Republicans however are going over the bill and will find anything that violates the 'Byrd rule' about reconcilliation and will raise challenges(points of order) . They can stop it if anything in the language of the bill is not directly related to budgettary issues.

Suffice it to say that POTUS expects this will not get done this weekend .If he did ,he would not have cancelled his trip to Australia and Indonesia until June.

[excon]

It will be impossible to repeal because of the veto . This has to be stopped now or by court challenge or it will become another permanent "entitlement " .

Hello again, tom:

Sorry, I don't understand... If it's SO unpopular, and SO illegal, certainly the Democrats will be swept out of office. Clearly, the Republican congress can repeal it, and President Palin can sign it.

I agree with you, though. It WILL become another permanent entitlement, just like your entitlement to police and fire protection is.

excon

[speechlesstx]

You're a victim of your own propaganda. This bill is NOT a government takeover (your favorite phrase), and it IS what the American people want, no matter how many times FOX news tells you they don't.

I don't need Fox News propaganda, the Democrats have made my point all on their own. They've made their intentions clear. They know this legislation is not what Americans want. From Claire McCaskill in the article I linked to:

“The first risk [of a health care defeat] is that he loses the reelect,” she said. “I think the risk to Congress is that his approval rating goes so low, he does not have enough heft to lift other important things we want to work on.. . So this is a gut check. He’s got so much to lose by continuing to push for something that’s not going to be immediately popular. It’s not going to be popular by November; it’s not going to be popular by November of 2012. It’ll be popular 10 years from now.”

Americans' have made it clear their concern is for jobs, and Obama continues to push for something they assume will be popular "10 years from now" instead. Ten years from now another congress will be trying to fix what this congress screwed up, and the statist solution we'll be pressed with then will be single-payer government health care.

Elections have consequences. Torture is one I had to put up with. Helping Americans with access to health care is yours. Bummer for you.

I don't recall your being tortured, and contrary to your continued portrayal of me I'm all for Americans having health care, so let's address those without insurance. Both sides agree to that, so if that were the issue the Dems would have backed down long ago and worked to resolve that.

[tomder55]

Silly me . And here I thought my local village provided fire service through volunteers ;and that my village /township/county and state provided the police protection. Perhaps the Obots are planning on nationalizing those services also ?

Of course that brings us to the philosphical question about health care being a "right" .

But if I have the right to someone else's services then I also have a right to them whether I pay for them or not... and if that person also has a right to be paid for their services then the government is presuming that they can take money from someone else to pay for the services provided to me .

True rights are not the rights the government can provide for me .Rights are instead things that if I exercise them will not diminish the rights of others .I can't impose my rights at the expense of someone else. I have a right to behavior .I do not have a right to rewards from other people.

And if I have a right to government guaranteed health care then why do I not also have the right to consume someone else's food ,or live in a house paid for by someone else ? Or conversely why aren't my rights violated when I am compelled by the government to pay for someone else's "rights" ?

[tomder55]

Clete

Just to update... the President needed to postpone his very important junket to Australia and Indonesia again .

Mark Stein notes that perhaps the President can just "deem " that he made the trip because
"passage of the health insurance reform is of paramount importance." Whereas Australia isn't.

But ,being a friend of the US under the Obots is not exactly the best seat on the bus these days. In fact ;our best friends find themselves under the bus.

So as Stein says ,perhaps it would be better if the President pared back to a minimum— a quick refueling stop in Canberra, with a speech to Parliament and a grip'n'greet with the Governor-General and Prime Minister. Maybe the administration could simply "deem" the visit to have occurred, photoshop a souvenir snapshot and stick it in the mail to their eminences.
Investors.com - What Democrats Have 'Deemed': Remorseless, Ever-Faster Decline

[speechlesstx]

Just think of all the opportunities "Demon pass" opens up for the Dems. They can deem the economy rescued, deem unemployment solved, deem the planet healed and deem the war in Afghanistan won for starters. Bush's "mission accomplished" was so yesterday.

P.S. They'll start with deeming the "public option" into law.

[tomder55]

And Sanders believes him ? Interesting ;I'm beginning to see the argument being floated that once the House "deems " the Senate bill passed ,it will be signed within minutes by the President as the law of the land... and any other effort at reconilliation or amendment will be at best half hearted as the President and Pelosi moves on to other pressing statists agendas .

[excon]

Hello Snivelers:

Wassa matta? You going to lose?? I deem it so.

excon

[speechlesstx]

Hello Snivelers:

Wassa matta?? You gonna lose???? I deem it so.

If the Dems succeed in passing this legislation - especially with all their tricks, deals, fiscal sleight of hand and outright lies - America loses. We've made it clear that reform is needed, but not this way.

[excon]

Hello again, Steve:

Like I said before, if "deem and pass" is illegal, that's the BEST thing for you guys AND the country, no? But, if it's a political ploy, that the right wing itself has used countless times (and it has), and is perfectly LEGAL, then you're just sniveling...

I still don't know what you have against 35 million people getting insurance. I don't know what's wrong with ENDING the insurance company's ability to declare your illness to be a pre-existing condition... I don't know what's wrong with closing the doughnut hole. I also don't know what's wrong with REDUCING the deficit...

These are the things the bill will do. It will NOT kill Grandma. Like I said earlier, you are a victim of your own propaganda. You ought to get out more.

excon

[speechlesstx]

And you are a propagator of your own propaganda, I've said repeatedly that I'm all for everyone having health care. Everyone knows "deem and pass" has been used before but never for anything so massive in scope. I've been honest and all for making changes, but you really should listen to yourself before mentioning propaganda.

[excon]

Everyone knows "deem and pass" has been used before but never for anything so massive in scope.

Hello again, Steve:

Is there a law or a rule that says "deem and pass" cannot be used for "massive" legislation? NO?? Then it's LEGAL. It's not almost legal. It's not kind of legal. It's not close to being legal. It's absolutely 100% LEGAL! Of course, you call it a trick. I'll bet the Dems called it a trick when YOU used it.

excon

[tomder55]

Well I guess it will be up to SCOTUS to decide. My guess is that they will hold the Presentment Clause of the Constitution to be the law of the land and not the whims of Madame Mimi.

But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House

Article 1 Sec 7 clauses 2 and 3