wingnut honesty, ladies and gents.

Sen. Conrad: Public option a ‘wasted effort’
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/sen.-conrad-public-option-a-wasted-effort-2009-08-16.html

A public health insurance option took more hits Sunday as [Democrat] Sen. Kent Conrad described its pursuit as a “wasted effort” and an administration official said it is not an “essential” part of reform.

Conrad (D-N.D.), who supports setting up health insurance co-operatives with government seed money to compete with private insurers, described the public option as all but a lost cause…

“To continue to chase that rabbit is, I think, a wasted effort,” Conrad said.

Looks more and more like the ‘public option’ will bite the dust.

Gosh, I thought this was such a great proposal! Dang it.

White House appears ready to drop ‘public option’
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090816/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_health_care_overhaul

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama’s administration signaled on Sunday it is ready to abandon the idea of giving Americans the option of government-run health insurance as part of his ambitious health care proposal.

Oops again.

Conservatives and insurance companies in Switzerland were against health care reform too. At least in Switzerland they now admit they were mistaken.

And that’s not what happened. The legislation, whether one thinks the content was wonderful, mediocre, or horrific and murderous, was passed. And the right moved on to the next great struggle and got louder and dumber each time.

I think the rightist moment on health care peaked last week and didn’t really help them a great deal. I think Obama and the Democrats haven’t even yet begun pushing for health care reform legislation to pass.

And though I’m not magic and I know Democratic Congresses can screw up a victory if they’re handed the football while they’re standing on the goal line if a Republican or lobbyist asks them to take a step back, I think this health care reform will pass, nevermind all the declarations that “I’M AS MAD AS HELL AND I’M NOT MAKING SENSE ANYMORE!!!”

A lot of conservatives and Republicans are making strange and bizarrely triumphalist claims again — perhaps just overexcited that they seem to have any impact whatsoever on the national agenda — and I just don’t think it’s justified and I don’t think they’re going to win this fight.

Cid, answer the question.

What question? No question was asked. Address my post!

SaveFarris: Not in the Senate anyway. In the House, it’s a different story.

WTF are you talkin’ about, boy?

There was nothing, ever, that in any way even suggested the kind of “death panels” that Palin is claiming would be set up to watch her kid die. From either house.

You’re just blatantly bullshitting.

And before you start crowing that the legislation in question was being mis-represented by Palin, then why did they take it out unless there was some truth in what she was saying?

Do you ever read your own links? It says:

And before you start crowing that the legislation in question was being mis-represented by Palin, then why did they take it out unless there was some truth in what she was saying?

Do you ever read your own links? It says:

In a widely quoted Facebook posting, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin charged that federal bureaucrats would play God, ruling on whether ailing seniors or children with Down syndrome — such as Palin’s son Trig — are worthy of health care. Palin called the proposal “downright evil.”

Many news organizations — including The Associated Press — DEBUNKED PALIN’S CLAIM.

[emphasis added since I know Farris really needs to have these things pointed out to him very clearly.]

Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski said this week that Palin and other critics were not helping the GOP by throwing out false claims.

“Quite honestly, I’m so offended at that terminology, because it absolutely isn’t” in the bill, Murkowski said. “There is no reason to gin up fear in the American public by saying things that are not included in the bill.”

Georgia Sen. Johnny Isakson, a Republican who co-sponsored a similar measure in the Senate, said it was “nuts” to claim the bill encourages euthanasia.

“You’re putting the authority in the individual rather than the government,” Isakson said. “I don’t know how that got so mixed up.”

The section has been removed because the Democrats are (typically) cowards who would rather let blatant liars mislead folks than put up a fight.

And if you think it’s removal is any sort of proof at all that Palin’s comments were anything other than bald, intentional lies then you simply showing how incapable you are of thought.

Cid, answer the question. Because nobody’s ever deliberately misinterpreted something for cheap political gain. Certainly not underqualified demagogues who tend to appeal to emotions rather than actually address the issues at hand. And surely nobody but the most willfully ignorant of pinheads would entertain such a notion.

Clearly I agree that the stimulus should have been much, much larger and less focused on tax cuts and more on jobs.

Can’t.
Imagine.
Why.

Why? Because mentally ill Republicans think that’s a death panel.

Not in the Senate anyway. In the House, it’s a different story.

And before you start crowing that the legislation in question was being mis-represented by Palin, then why did they take it out unless there was some truth in what she was saying?

You mean perhaps the part where she said “the provision in the pending health care bill that authorizes end-of-life consultations” is “disturbing”?

Where she deliberately lied about the section by claiming “The “end-of-life” consultations authorized in Section 1233 of HR 3200 were an obvious and heavy handed attempt at pressuring people to reduce the financial burden on the system by minimizing their own care. Worst still, it actually provided a financial incentive to doctors to initiate these consultations.”?

Yeah, she’s dialed back on referring to “death panels” in the last couple of days but, when responding to the plan, that is what she said was going to happen.

So what’s your point? You trying to claim she didn’t?

some guy: Source?

Well, one analysis of different polling groups shows pollsters don’t think much of Rasmussen’s results.