The Health Care Bill Dies?
The AP reports that “after weeks of secretive talks, a bipartisan group in the Senate edged closer Monday to a health care compromise that omits two key Democratic priorities but incorporates provisions to slow the explosive rise in medical costs.” The deal was likely to “exclude a requirement many congressional Democrats seek for large businesses to offer coverage to their workers” and a “provision for a government insurance option.” The Wall Street Journal says that “individuals familiar with the negotiations suggested” Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus “would like to unveil a deal later this week. But unclear Monday was whether” ranking Republican Sen. Charles Grassley “would sign onto the deal and pave the way for committee action next week.”
Well, as the French would say… Quelle surprise!
It’s funny, earlier this summer I was watching the Federer-Roddick Wimbledon Final. Great match in a way, final set was 30 games long, one of the all-time epic battles. And yet, as I watched it, I thought to myself, “This has to be the least suspenseful epic sporting event of all time.” Because there was never any doubt in my mind that Federer was going to win the match. I simply could not envision a scenario where anything else than a Federer victory could happen. I think I even turned it off at 7-7 in the final set, figuring I could catch Federer’s award ceremony later on.
It’s the same with this health care bill. Who among us did not know this would happen? It’s been clear from the start that the Democrats would make a great show of doing something real, then they would fold prematurely, ram through some piece-of-shit bill with some incremental/worthless change in it, and then in the end blame everything on Max Baucus and Bill Nelson, saying, “By golly, we tried our best!”
Make no mistake, this has nothing to do with Max Baucus, Ben Nelson, or anyone else. If the Obama administration wanted to pass a real health care bill, they would do what George Bush and Tom DeLay did in the first six-odd years of this decade whenever they wanted to pass some nightmare piece of legislation (ie the Prescription Drug Bill or CAFTA): they would take the recalcitrant legislators blocking their path into a back room at the Capitol, and beat them with rubber hoses until they changed their minds.
The reason a real health-care bill is not going to get passed is simple: because nobody in Washington really wants it. There is insufficient political will to get it done. It doesn’t matter that it’s an urgent national calamity, that it is plainly obvious to anyone with an IQ over 8 that our system could not possibly be worse and needs to be fixed very soon, and that, moreover, the only people opposing a real reform bill are a pitifully small number of executives in the insurance industry who stand to lose the chance for a fifth summer house if this thing passes.
It won’t get done, because that’s not the way our government works. Our government doesn’t exist to protect voters from interests, it exists to protect interests from voters. The situation we have here is an angry and desperate population that at long last has voted in a majority that it believes should be able to pass a health care bill. It expects something to be done. The task of the lawmakers on the Hill, at least as they see things, is to create the appearance of having done something. And that’s what they’re doing. Personally, I think they’re doing a lousy job even of that. I lauded Roddick for playing out the string with heart, and giving a good show. But these Democrats aren’t even pretending to give a shit, not really. I mean, they’re not even willing to give up their vacations.
This whole business, it was a litmus test for whether or not we even have a functioning government. Here we had a political majority in congress and a popular president armed with oodles of political capital and backed by the overwhelming sentiment of perhaps 150 million Americans, and this government could not bring itself to offend ten thousand insurance men in order to pass a bill that addresses an urgent emergency. What’s left? Third-party politics?
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
That’s one way to look at it. Another way is to realize there is not as much political will for this thing as you guys in the DC-NYC corridor think, and that this is especially the case after Bush-Paulsen-Bernanke-Geithner have blown trillions in the past year alone.
I’d add that Clinton’s losing his health care battle was key to his winning a second term, and that this may apply as well to Obama. Also, if we ever get a national health care program passed in the US, it is more likely to happen incrementally and with a Republican in the White House (such as when Bush got prescription drug coverage passed in 2004).
Not that I’d think this would be a good thing by any means. The only reason this effort has support now is because the babyboomers are nearing retirement, they and haven’t saved, their pensions have shrinked, and they want a standard of living in retirement that they convinced themselves they deserved 10 years ago. So they are trying to push the costs on to the younger generations. In this sense, they are like Wall Street writ large, trying to live large while socializing the costs. I hope your sense that they are being thwarted right now is right.
“What’s left? Third-party politics?”
Yes. It’s like several fronts are gradually converging to form a perfect storm for a viable third party populist uprising.
My concern is that when this uprising occurs, antisemitism will be coming along for the ride.
Jebus on a stick… can we have a new corollary to Godwin’s law, where the knucklehead who first uses the antisemitism canard is the object of forum-wide ridicule?
I am tired of anti-”white forty-something-Freemason”-ism (we get blamed for EVERYTHING – even ‘the Protocols’), but you don’t hear me going on about it.
And not for nothing, but Semites are quite tan and don’t have blue eyes… you might mean anti-Ashkenazism.
Cheerio
GT
In response to another comment. See in context »You know, I truly cannot decide if it is good to be you or if it sucks.
Personally, I would think that going through life already knowing what is going to happen would take some of the fun out of it. But then, I can hardly imagine a life where one is so perceptive, so smart, so all-knowing that one could not even enjoy an epic tennis battle because they already knew how it was going to turn out.
And the very thought that one would turn the TV off mid-battle because it was just a bore to watch a back-and-forth when the result was already firmly known to you! Yeah, it must suck being you. You have my profound sympathies. It simply must be one hell of a cross to bear, knowing when the world will end and all that. No surprises…no plot twists or turns…bummer.
But since you would appear to have this omnipotence, I was kind of wondering if you could tell me where the market will close this year? I realize that you may only use your God-like talents for the good of all mankind, but I swear that I don’t have so much as one share of Goldman in my portfolio so am I not at least a bit deserving of your seerlike talents?
Wow, getting called out by Rick Ungar. Kind of like getting called out by … well, it’s sort of irrelevant. Who the fuck is Rick Ungar?
I guess Rick’s got his insurance, screw the rest of you guys.
In response to another comment. See in context »Nomar5-
While I enjoyed the “who the fuck is Rick Ungar’ comment, you might take a few minutes to read my posts on True/Slant (where, from what I’m told, I am a contributing editor on health care and politics.) After reading, you will, no doubt, still not give a crap about who Rick Ungar is, but you may see the stupidity in your comment that I have my insurance so why should I care about anyone else.
As for my calling out Matt, I think Matt knows full well that I am a big fan of his writing. In fact, I think he is one of the best out there. But really – at the point where any writer tells us that he is so omniscient that the outcome of a great tennis match wasn’t worth watching because he is so sure of the result… well….
I think it’s very nice that you jumped to Matt’s defense although he certainly knows full well how to defend himself. But the way you do so does kind of reinforce my point. You “believe” in Matt – therefore you really didn’t feel the need to take the time to understand what you were talking about. You don’t see a bit of a problem with that? I think Matt’s good enough that he doesn’t mind getting “called out” every know and then.
In response to another comment. See in context »“you might take a few minutes to read my posts on True/Slant”
These two posts are the first things I’ve ever read by you. And the last I’ll purposely read. Because you’re a dick.
“…from what I’m told, I am a contributing editor…”
I mean, not just a dick, but an incredible dick. Dick.
In response to another comment. See in context »Actually…I prefer “Rick” over “Dick”.
In response to another comment. See in context »Well gosh golly! If you’ve made it all the way to contributing editor at some site with circa 10% of Politico’s traffic, or maybe 0.5% of the traffic of a major newspaper, then you must be important enough to throw the discussion entirely off track. Bravo, big man!
When I scroll down from reading an article, I like to see some actual discussion, some interesting material on the topic that brought me here. Instead, 8 of 11 comments displayed are by somebody I’ve never heard of off on a tear and subsequent forum fight about an entirely forgettable minor rhetorical misstep on Taibbi’s part.
For me, at least, this isn’t idol worship; I think Taibbi’s stuff often has issues, especially when his undeniably impressive and delightful ability to rip somebody a new one leads him to see a situation as more polarized than I believe it to be. But I think he’s worth reading because he actually addresses issues, and he does so with vigor and a doggedness lacking in a most of what passes for journalism today.
So given that I come here only because somebody’s actually writing about issues, it’s especially irritating to find that most of the discussion is about trivia. If I wanted to see forum drama, I’d pick random pages on LiveJournal. If you want to give your fellow writers feedback, try an email and stop wasting the audience’s time. That you’re an editor here makes your derailing of the discussion worse, not better.
In response to another comment. See in context »Ungar seems to read Matt’s pieces literally (about the tennis match) even when Matt is merely drawing an analogy and highlighting the point that really we all knew that, in America, where the insurance industry has been God for a very long time, it will take more than a mere majority and a popular president to change things. This is more like the small shop owner trying to get out of paying the Mafia for protection. I thought Matt made the point and I think it is just a big waste of time to go off on his use of the Federer – Roddick battle as an example of when we all fairly knew the outcome in advance. Are you related to Roddick? I loved his come back style at Wimbledon and would have loved for him to win but I also thought his winning was more than a long shot just as I have thought about the big look-busy job of our government putting on a dog and pony show to make the American people believe that they are fighting for their best interests – we all know that is not the truth. They’re all enjoying their high standard of living and wondering somewhere deep in their psyches if they have one, are they, the people, ever going to get it? And Matt is a strong voice trying to wake up the anesthetized citizenry of this sadly, declining country. I hope he doesn’t change a thing about his writing style so they can – he’s brilliant!
In response to another comment. See in context »Do you have a Ph.D. in being a douche or something?
Anyone with a single working neuron knows that Roddick ALWAYS loses to Federer. At this point it’s almost a law of tennis. Maybe you should be criticizing your own lack of awareness in the area being discussed instead of Matt’s GENERAL KNOWLEDGE.
In response to another comment. See in context »“Anyone with a single working neuron knows that Roddick ALWAYS loses to Federer”
Exactly right…except, of course, for the Sony tournament in April 2008 where Roddick beat Federer and that time in 2003. Other than that Federer ALWAYS beats Roddick. Oh wait…can you say ALWAYS when it actually isn’t always? I suppose someone with your grasp of “general knowledge” can…despiite the fact that you’re “general knowledge” is wrong.
As for the invectives, I’ll leave that alone. This site prefers reasonable conversation without the foul language.
In response to another comment. See in context »Settle down, poindexter.
In response to another comment. See in context »“As for the invectives, I’ll leave that alone. This site prefers reasonable conversation without the foul language.”
Right. You certainly brought reasonable conversation without foul language with your opening dickish comment:
“You know, I truly cannot decide if it is good to be you or if it sucks.”
What a dick.
In response to another comment. See in context »dude… your sarcasm isn’t the least bit funny. it has nothing at all to do with being all knowing, omnipotent, etc. having myself read Matt’s thorough and straight forward accounting of how completely corrupt and broken (read: fucked) Congress is (remember Tom Delay getting a slap on the hand for selling breaks to that Kansas energy company back in 2003, as *one* example?) his line of reasoning is little more than following a progression of events to its logical conclusion.
I never in a million years thought health care reform would actually happen, but there was this tiny little scintilla of hope that the great Obama might be able to turn this SuperTanker of a doomed country around in a new direction. Like Matt said, this was the litmus test. And they are proving, by failing the American People on this bill (with a democratic majority!), that it’s still a broken, corrupt system.
Really fucking funny… i lose my job as it is now, and dont know how im going to get my medicine. Wish i could afford your flippance on this subject.
In response to another comment. See in context »flippance on the subject, eh???
You know, I can certainly take the shots. To be honest, as everyone at True/Slant knows, I kind of enjoy it. But I can never understand how people are willing to commit their thoughts to writing without having so much as a clue as to what they are talking about. Do you have any idea as to my involvement in the health care policy debate? Do you have any idea what my positions are? Do you have any idea that I have done more in the past three hours in the effort to protect you form being screwed should you loose your job than I suspect you have done in your entire life?? And you know how I’ve done this? By understanding that nobody knows everything and that there is almost always two sides to the story.
So, tell me, what have you done to try and help? What have you done to battle corrupt health insurance companies? Why not check out my record (it is readily available) and then tell me about how flippant I am on the subject.
You make assumptions because I had the temerity to point out that someone suggesting that they know all may not be the best way to go. And the simple fact is that you have no idea what you’re talking about.
Is this really how you want to represent yourself in writing? If you want to fire away at me because I played around with Matt, knock yourself out. But don’t make yourself look silly in personal attacks that simply make no sense. I assure you that the very people whom you support in the battle for health care reform are finding your comments amusing and revealing.
In response to another comment. See in context »wow… rock on rocker.. toot your horn. no i don’t know your record. i also have a day job, which as you know i need to keep so buh-bye.
In response to another comment. See in context »Andygeiger – now there’s an intelligent response! You attack and when I defend, you call it “tooting my own horn.” Interesting debating style you’ve got there.
But, alas, I too have a day job. It mostly involves going after health insurance companies who deny the coverage they’ve promised to people when those people actually need it-often for clients who cannot afford to pay because they have lost their jobs so I’m sure your day job is better than mine. They say I’m pretty good at it, but I shouldn’t go into that because I don’t want to “toot my own horn.”
As unpleasant and obnoxious as I might find you, I would never wish my clients’ experiences on you or your family so I hope you never loose that job. However, should you someday have to face such a problem, I hope you’ll show a little more respect for those who are out there prepared to help you. Now I completely expect that you’ll come back with some snappy remark about how you wouldn’t want me handling your case because….well, that just kind of seems to be who you are. And that’s fine. But I will still say that it wouldn’t kill you to know a little bit more about who you’re shooting at before deciding who is the enemy and who is not.
In response to another comment. See in context »I’m sorry Rick! I read your initial post and at first it looked like a glib potshot at my current hero. So i threw an egg of indignation at you. That’s all. I didnt think you were talking about tennis, i thought you were denying corruption is the law of washington, and it pissed me off. I’m not a literary what the hell ever. i could give two fucks what anyone on this planet thinks of the impression im making here, so the endless ‘debate’ is really time you could be using to champion that wonderful cause of yours that i admire. im just a dude, that’s trying to make sense of it all. So please, breath. that’s it… drink a glass of water; you’ll be just fine.
In response to another comment. See in context »Stop nerd-on-nerd violence.
In response to another comment. See in context »Clearly, Matt Taibbi made the tennis comment as a small, light-hearted, hyperbolic lead-in. You know that. And we know that you know that.
So why exactly have you thrust yourself into our lives?
In response to another comment. See in context »crus- of course you’re right. I don’t know what I was thinking. Must a been a brain hemorrhage or something that led me to momentarily believe that I might be able to comment just as you are. I’ll try not to let it happen again. Nah..who am I kidding? I’m still going to comment when I feel like it. But you should probably just try to skip over it as I would hate to live with the idea that I am “thrusting myself into your life.”
In response to another comment. See in context »Rick, don’t listen to what the other people are stating about your comments. You are a good troll. Instead of picking apart Matt’s points, you completely avoided them and instead focused on irrelevant crap such as Matt’s prediction of the Federer vs Roddick match.
Great job. We’re all much more informed as a result of your insightful analysis.
In response to another comment. See in context »harrynads- I admit I may have been a bit obtuse – but I was mostly tweaking Matt a little with no idea it would set off a firestorm amongst the true believers. By the time I could have corrected this an made the point more clearly, I was too busy deflecting all the “dick” accusations. Besides, I really thought that people who read Matt Taibbi would be clever enough to “get it.” Guess I got that wrong, eh?
My real point was that this type of cynicism is completely counter- productive to a very important fight – health care reform. Matt’s declaration that the fight was over and that he always knew it was never going to happen, makes Matt look smart I suppose – but damages the opportunity to still win this fight. And you will notice how his readers reacted. Instead of thinking about the relative value – or lack thereof- of cynicism, in the face of so important an issue, they just attacked. Again, not useful.
If you read the post I put up tonight on my own page, you will have an opportunity to see precisely what my point was intended to be. I have no intention of writing the obituary for health care reform, ’cause it ain’t over ’till its over. Writers who would tell us they always knew it wouldn’t work in order to show us how smart they are may end up being right as the American public continues to suffer. I never saw much value in cynicism when there is still an opportunity to do something positive. And after being called every name in the book in these comments, i still don’t.
My fondest wish would be to see a quality health care program make it through Congress. I’ve worked on it for years and I’m not about to stop because Matt Taibbi, or anyone else, has pronounced it “over”.
Matt’s cynicism more often than not, leads to some really good
journalism. I think his Goldman story will, and should, win some big time awards because it was absolutely fantastic. And it might just have an impact on changing something that really needs changing.
Can you tell me what this piece does to change anything? Can you tell me what value hero-worshipping readers serve when all they want to do is chime in their agreement with their idol rather than think about what this piece might do to hurt the very thing they claim to be so passionate about?
It’s a little weird when one cannot so much as post a fairly innocuous comment of disagreement without this type of reaction. I really wonder if Matt approves. It’s great to have people believe and follow one’s writing but Matt’s an awfully smart guy and can’t much enjoy the level of discourse my comment set off.
In response to another comment. See in context »“Can you tell me what this piece does to change anything?”
Well, hopefully, for those people who ever thought (or hoped) that the Democrats were one iota better than the Republicans when it came to issues like healthcare (or war or torture or wiretapping or energy or Social Security or global warming or bailouts etc.) this will help wake them the ‘f’ up.
The two party system is a joke and until we can get a majority of Americans to understand that our only hope is with third party candidates this country will remain the bought and paid for property of the corporations and their lobbyists.
So go ahead and watch the match to the bitter end Rick but if you honestly believe there is any chance for a different ending you must not have been paying much attention during the other million times this game has been played.
PS: Don’t shoot the messenger but hope is not a viable strategy.
In response to another comment. See in context »First off, I won’t be “watching” the match – I will continue to participate in it and try to do something about it. I’ve never been big on telling everyone what’s wrong without trying to do something to fix it. How about you? What have you done to make the point that Americans shoujld be looking to a third party to solve our problems? Or are you just content to wallow in cynicism and just bitch about how bad it is rather than lift a finger to change it??
In response to another comment. See in context »Those who try to do something don’t always win. But I can tell you that the view of the game is a whole lot better than the cheap seats.
“Can you tell me what this piece does to change anything? Can you tell me what value hero-worshipping readers serve when all they want to do is chime in their agreement with their idol…?”
In response to another comment. See in context »this is so far unrelated to Matt’s post anymore that its absurd for you to suggest it is. It’s about you; it has been from the beginning. I wonder if Matt approves too… Knowing what an incredibly perceptive guy he is, my gut tells me he had you pegged after your first post this morning, that you were here to do little more than fan forum flames and get exposure to whore your book because this blog gets about a gazillion times as much traffic as yours. what a nozzle…
then you should turn up here more often. If you did, you would find that I often comment on Matt’s blog, usually in agreement oddly enough. I don’t recall ever commenting on a health care issue because I don’t believe Matt has blogged on a health care issue before.
What I did not realize is that he attracted such incredibly angry people! I went back and reviewed all of your comments this day and I could not find one thing that you added of substance. It was all about taking nasty shots. So, if it was somehow “all about me”, as you claim, (which is kind of weird as I don’t think I’ve ever commented on someone’s blog thinking that this could, somehow, make it all about me, you sure as hell made it so. All I did was comment on an article of Matt’s that I didn’t like. I had no idea that this was some capital offense. Do you attack everyone who sees something differently than you might with such intense disdain? I didn’t realize that the commentary here was actually a fan club. Feel free to take the last shot and call me some additional awful names. I won’t be returning the comment as I’m pretty much done with this. Besides, I have a life- you should try getting one.
In response to another comment. See in context »good you have a life douche. You’re right, i don’t. i’m one of the oppressed common surfs of this state, and you better fucking believe that i’m angry. i’ve come to realize over the last several years, that the president can shred the consitution, the congress can sell legislation to the highest bidder and the people can be held face to the pavement by underpaid, napoleonic, limp-dick little men with badges. we are a step or two removed from a fascist state. it’s only a matter of time before we have thought police and then i’m fucked. i sincerely didn’t want to continue this utter nonsense, but cannot believe the ignorance you showed about Taibbi’s general subject matters to say outright that you can’t believe that he attracts angry people.
In response to another comment. See in context »Rick, you claim that Matt was trying to make himself look smart, but aren’t you doing the same by claiming that his readers didn’t understand your comments? Isn’t that implying that you were too smart for them?
I suggest that you take a more direct approach when taking a swipe at someone, or at the very least mix in your swipes with meaningful arguments.
Regarding cynicism, I think it’s important to be cynical when there’s just cause. As you know, there are many forces who are preventing health care reform from transpiring. I think Matt was just shining a light on this issue. While it’s good to be optimistic at times, there’s also a time to be cynical.
Also, I don’t think this article intended to stifle any further discussion about health care reform. I’m not sure why you’re taking a defiant stance and claiming that you’ll keep writing about this issue despite Matt’s claim that it won’t happen.
I agree that this article doesn’t change anything but what type of change has occurred as a result of your recent article about health care reform? Matt is not a magician, he can’t snap his fingers while saying, “HEALTH CARE REFORM!” and change anything. In a way, he just stated the obvious and provided a bit of a back story about this issue.
While I don’t think Matt is a hero, I think his articles are informative, to the point and packed with facts. In my opinion, the only agenda he has is exposing the truth and for that reason alone, he deserves a little hero worship now and then.
In response to another comment. See in context »What a big bag of nasty wind you are. Sorry pal, you suck.
In response to another comment. See in context »Exactly. Change we can believe in, my ass. Obama is just another corrupt Chicago pol.
“Here we had a political majority in congress and a popular president armed with oodles of political capital and backed by the overwhelming sentiment of perhaps 150 million Americans, and this government could not bring itself to offend ten thousand insurance men in order to pass a bill that addresses an urgent emergency.”
Even when the Democrats are in perfect position to do something meaningful, they can’t find their balls.
John Heilemann made this point in very blatant terms on “Real Time with Bill Maher” last Friday, that the Democrats have failed to get their shit together. Matt, you hit the nail on the head at the end of this piece: how can the Democrats, who have unstoppable majorities in both houses, and a popular president in the White House, not get anything done? At some point, they need to abandon bipartisanship. The American people are going to get watered-down versions of these important (some say “historic”) bills, because the Democrats refuse to tell the Republicans to fuck off. The GOP is politically irrelevant at this point, but the Dems refuse to capitalize on this opportunity. As Bill Maher declared in his “New Rules” a few weeks ago, Obama needs to have the unwavering confidence that George W. Bush had, and be willing to stand by radical changes in the system, the “change” he campaigned for so effectively, and get this stuff done. If not, even his supporters will grow impatient.
This really isn’t a matter of Balls or lack of leadership, it ’s boils down to a single word: corruption. Just for the sake of conversation, imagine the democrats ( or the GOP) making policy without the helpful hands of K street’s for Profit lobbyists. If there ever was a dog whistle it was when Obama blamed the lobbyists when he campaigned for President. The lobbyists don’t exist without the open and reaching clawing greedy hands of elected officials and their staff. That’s as far as he could go without pointing to his one time colleagues and say “crooks”.
Many have suggested that a “throw the bums out” solution would suffice. Putting aside the fact that the powers that be have so neatly divided Americans, it doesn’t take into account the permanent staff in both houses who stay year in and year out until they get their 20 or 30 years in, draw 50-75% of their final pay as retirement and provided they networked properly, join for Profit Lobbyists on K street . In 2005, one for profit firm complained staffers were running $300,000 a year up from $200,000 a year just a few years previous to that. Imagine what it is today : 350,000 -450,000?
As one who has seen this up close and personal , I don’t think people understand how far K Street’s reach extends into govt . The reach includes Govt employees who implement the policies made by the officials. The people who decide who gets the money allocated for their dept. Their payment is in jobs with the contractors they help. Think back to the Boeing Tanker lease scandal or Haliburton with a 5 year no bid single source contract for Iraq.
None of this has stopped because of a change in management. If anything it has intensified as the Dems feel it’s their due to make up for lost time. Certainly there are many dedicated , selfless people at all levels but their silence is complicity or in the world outside DC it can also be classed as an accessory to a crime.
No crimes here though as the lawmakers themselves have assured themselves that there will be no More Abscams or Keating Five’s. Even when caught red handed for over reaching the boundaries that have already been changed to establish a certain amount of restraint in the gold grab so it not be seen as sickening as it is, the rule breakers are rewarded with lucrative outside positions in think tanks or as registered lobbyist if not an out right contract for some service where there are no deliverables but it does involve hundreds of millions of dollars.
A few last thoughts to ponder. When asked what the first priority of the democrats would be after the 2006 election, Pelosi said ” Clean out the swamp”.
Anybody recall one ethics investigation since those famous words were uttered? Just a little one would do. I’m coming up empty here in more ways than one.
Anyone recall just one piece of legislation that would be a net positive for All Americans , not just the selected few who finance all the corruption? I’m coming up empty here too.
I’m not defending Obama as much as I am just saying that what we have is a organized money machine that feeds off the taxpayers and the countries that loan us money and when that isn’t enough, they start printing it.
It doesn’t matter who is in there much anymore,. If your wondering why the GOP is so publicly upset and have suddenly and inexplicably found religion when it comes to fiscal discipline. Think packaging, as in marketing, along with a rabid desire to get back into power because the minority party really only collects table scraps.
The real bucks come when one party is successful at convincing a very gullible country that they would be the best “this time” to run the country- just that much further into the ground.
This is the real third rail of politics. Not so much becuase of vote discontent but becuase of the obvious demoralizing effect it would have on these people who see DC as a means to wealth they could have never acheived on their own. Even if they fail in the real world, they taxpayers have their backs with genereous pensions and Helath Benefits that most Americans can only dream about.
How this realtes to Helath care then is simple: it was never going to happen. This all merely theatre for the voters. It’s also a singular oppotunity for people in all areas of the govt to enrich themselves. So yes, this was a “debate” they desperately wanted becuase they need these high stakes debates becuase that’s where the real money is at.
Obama has surrounded himslf with people that have benefit enourmeously from this system. Wh
In response to another comment. See in context »You correct except that you need to be clear the Obama has surrounded himself by the people who forked over the dough to get him elected.
It’s merely payback. And we’ll be paying for it for a very long time.
In response to another comment. See in context »“What’s left? Third-party politics?”
That’s all that’s been left for some twenty years now. Anyone who thinks that either party is going to give them the changes they desire is simply living in some alternate universe. One where the majority of people in congress are truly working in the best interests of the the voters. It’s insane! They have no incentive to change when they have such a small chance of being replaced.
(And anyone, Rick, who didn’t see this, and other gutless cave-ins, coming from a mile away is either too slavishly wedded to a party, or too delusional to notice the pattern.)
The ONLY way to send a message to those in power is by withholding from them the one thing they need from you – your vote. All the insider money in the world can’t put someone in office if they don’t get the votes! It’s obvious from the long record of little/no substantive change that public pressure in the form of emails, demonstrations, and the like, have no effect on outcomes if votes are not withheld.
But 2012 will come. And with it will be an endless stream of nonsense about how the D’s are not as bad as the R’s, and vice versa. Let’s face it, if the only thing you can say about a candidate is that he’s “not as bad as the other guy” we have truly reached the bottom. Let’s hope we find a way up from here.
Rick, while you are right in saying that nomar5’s response to your post can hardly be considered as a good argument, you yourself do not even go into the topic of this post. Sure, the analogy with this year’s Wimbledon final may be a bit odd, but the general point he’s making about Democrats seems about right (mind you, I’m following this all from the Netherlands, I’m not American myself).
Even though I despise quite alot of the policies the Republicans stand for, at least they seem to have clear goals and ideals. When they are in power, they ram through their agenda, no matter who’s in their way. The Democrats on the other hand, continue to be held hostage by their own party. They don’t even need the Republicans to fail at promoting their agenda…
richardf- you are absolutely right that Matt’s point is completely right. If you find a moment, take a look at my many posts on The Policy Page here at True/Slant on this topic and you will see that I have a long history of making the very same point. I was just having a little fun “tweaking” Matt for his approach. None of us know everything that is going to happen. And, as I’ve noted, I often agree with Matt – although I sometimes disagree with him. Not because I don’t think he has a valuable point of view, because he clearly does. As I have also mentioned, he really is one of my favorite writers. However, there is something about saying that one seems to always know how situations are going to turn out that pushes my buttons. I’ve lived long enough to know that there is almost always another side to just about every story.
In response to another comment. See in context »Don’t you find it curious that commenters would jump to Matt’s defense in such a vindictive manner? I didn’t attack anyone’s God (or did I?), I just had some fun with a flesh and bones writer.
I think it’s great that Matt has such dedicated followers but I wonder if Matt, as a journalist and a man with a very good mind, would defend this type of devotion? Non-questioning belief and the lack of sense of humor to appreciate an occasional shot at someone or something, is precisely what Matt Taibbi is not about. His value comes in his willingness to take a shot at anything that he believes deserves the treatment. Surely he can take the occasional tongue in cheek tweak. Actually, I know he can.
“Don’t you find it curious that commenters would jump to Matt’s defense in such a vindictive manner? I didn’t attack anyone’s God (or did I?), I just had some fun…”
Uh huh. “Why is everyone so sensitive. Always imagining I’m attacking. What’s wrong with their sense of humor? Gosh. Can’t they take a joke? We always kid like this. This is how our relationship works. They know I only do it because they need it. They can take it. We never had a problem with it before, right? Clearly I’m the victim here.”
I’ve done a lot of emotional abuse counseling. I know the all-too-familiar pattern I’m seeing. If you have a family, you narcisisstic, threatened, resentful, vindictive, jealous, imperious dick, I feel a great deal of sympathy for them right now.
Let’s look again at what Matt wrote that you say pushed your buttons:
“[There] was never any doubt in my mind that Federer was going to win the match. I simply could not envision a scenario where anything else than a Federer victory could happen. I think I even turned it off at 7-7 in the final set, figuring I could catch Federer’s award ceremony later on.”
There is no doubt in my mind that the many problems with Washington will not be fixed, because the system has gone insular and bad. Runaway hubris and greed among the entrenched occupants has made correction from within impossible. I cannot imagine a scenario where the current two parties and the crazy-mad-rich lobbying system surrounding them will self correct. I can walk away right now with confidence these two parties aren’t going to fix it themselves. Things will only start shaking up when and if the pressure of a successful outsider populist third party starts shocking them into action. When they wake up one day and find that a bunch of House seats are actually held by a new, angry and outspoken third party (and maybe, tragically, an antisemitic one), shit’s going to start happening. And all it will take for this to happen is for stuff to go from bad to worse because the current two parties are looking out for the entrenched, wealthy lobbying interests instead of the public. And I am convinced that’s where all this is headed.
So does that push your buttons? Do you think I’m claiming God-like powers too?
I can’t speak for Matt, but I certainly am not claiming infallibility. I don’t believe for a minute he was either. Matt was describing what he was feeling, what he believed, what his gut was telling him. I am describing what I am feeling, what I believe, and what my gut is telling me.
Whether you like it or not, we both have a right to do that.
Now why would something like that push your buttons?
It’s pretty clear your reaction is much more about being a jealous, controlling, suppressing, resentful dick than you, in priestly fashion, rushing to protect the Almighty from supposed megalomaniac pretenders to His throne.
Or maybe it was that something Matt said is, you fear, right, and you don’t want to face it or allow it to be spoken without lashing out.
Whatever you motives, your dickish intrusion into this thread derailed it from the get go. Mission accomplished. So get going back to your overlooked and ignored corner of this site. Please.
If you think I am being a little harsh and your feelings are hurt, well gosh, why is everyone so sensitive. I was just having a little fun. Surely you can take an occasional tongue-in-cheek tweak.
In response to another comment. See in context »“I’ve done a lot of emotional abuse counseling. I know the all-too-familiar pattern I’m seeing. If you have a family, you narcisisstic, threatened, resentful, vindictive, jealous, imperious dick, I feel a great deal of sympathy for them right now.”
You’re an emotional abuse counselor?!? You must do well calling your patients “narcisisstic, threatened, resentful, vindictive, jealous, imperious dick.” I mean, where do I sign up to get the help you seem to think i need?
And I will be sure to pass your sympathies along to my family. I know there have absolutely been times (especially when the kids were growing up) when they would certainly have agreed with you! In fact, I’ve sent them your comment as i know they will enjoy it and will no doubt remind me of it whenever I piss them off! Now, all you have to do is start your own blog and they can engage in hero-worship with you.
As for your hurting my feelings…are you serious? I tweak Matt a little bit and you are moved to rather extreme and extraordinary verbal abuse…and you’re the emotional abuse counselor?? I think we’ve certainly identified one problem with our health care system if you are what passes for an “emotional abuse counselor.” Sorry. No offense but I can’t really imagine you hurting my feelings. But if you want to cuss at me a little more, you might come up with something.
In response to another comment. See in context »I work with abuse victims. Not abusers.
Not surprising you assumed it would be about you. In your mind, clearly you are the victim here.
In response to another comment. See in context »“Republicans are corrupt, the Democratsjust less so…” Ravi Batra: The New Golden Age
The problem is the 10s of thousands of lobbyists and special interests that insulate and influence any substantial legislation. The Republicans represent the Insurance companies and doctors, while the Democrats represent lawyers and bureaucracy. I agree with Matt in the sense that all of this entrenchment will lead to an inevitable wasteful system to enrich party constitencies rather than to serve the public at large. It has always annoyed me how you left wing types seem to glorify personal injury lawyers (John Edwards, etc), who enrich themselves pocketing 40% of the elevated reward for another individual’s personal tragedy. This has to be part of the picture. This is a substantial part of the cost picture. TORT reform is just as important as minimizing other costs. All the leeches, not part of health care delivery, trying to latch on to a national system need to be kept at bay. The focus needs to be on prevention and quality of health care at the location of delivery. All other costs need to be minimized. I just don’t see that happenening.
Obama has been clear all along that he views overcoming the polarization in politics as the meta-issue of his presidency. I think that he would give up any specific issue in any debate if it meant that “we could all get along”. While I don’t think he’d appreciate being called the Rodney King of DC, he’s absolutely right in that our country can not survive as two armed camps. Look at what’s happening in California; even in a meltdown, the 2 sides can’t come together enough to govern. And I’m afraid most people on True/Slant are part of the problem – when was the last time anybody urged compromise and mutual respect in the comments?
Matt’s right: I watched Federer – Roddick to the bitter end but there was never a doubt as to who would end up holding the trophy. That is why I am a huge fan of Rafael Nadal, who has the arrogant Federer’s number and is in his head big-time. If it had been Rafa out there playing Federer the feeling would have been reversed: I would have expected Rafa to find a way to win, as he has done so many times.
The bums always lose, Lebowski!
I suggest you do what your parents did, get a job, sir!
In response to another comment. See in context »As sharkdb pointed out, the real problem, in any legislation, are the special interests in DC. One wonders how much of the bailout would’ve happened if the financial services had not been able to donate tens of millions to campaigns on both sides. Same for pharma and insurance corporations. There are plenty of excellent examples of national health care systems being run effectively that we could copy from and adapt to the US but we fail to do so.
I also agree that the Democrats and Obama need to grow a pair and push the Repubs aside. They’re both part of the oligarchy that is but I’m sure there must be a few untainted people willing to stick up for people somewhere in those halls.
I also have to agree with the conclusion of haroldr’s last paragraph: the boomers are coming online and they have no qualms about screwing up future generations for their own gain. I think there will come some real anger sometime from Gen Y against the excesses and overindulgence of the Boomers. I think Obama is the start of that where he represent someone not old and somewhat dynamic (if in speech and not action).
Matt, can I be your agent? I think the populists need a new hero and it has got to be someone with your gift for narrative prose.
Maybe some MT action figures? Another book, maybe “The Great Vampire Squids.” “Meet the Gonzo Journalists” tv show. And I am very glad you are on the healthcare beat now–if anyone can fuel change…
Oy, with the debate over the tennis match.
I would think it’s pretty clear the intent of the story. Apparently not for some..
As for the health care issue, I had a feeling we’d get screwed, but I kept hoping for the best.
In this world of sound bytes and selfishness, no one is really paying attention. And no one really seems to give a shit. Like they say, I guess they (and unfortunately the rest of us) get the country they deserve..
Uh… kinda shocked the tennis thing started an argument. It was sort of a joke, as a sports fan would probably know. Trying to guess the outcome of a Roddick-Federer final is sort of like guessing the outcome of a Cubs playoff series. This is more a question of understanding basic cosmic truths than being good at picking sports winners.
In response to another comment. See in context »I was thinking the same thing.
In response to another comment. See in context »Cubs fans get what they deserve, too..
I don’t know, I guess working people in this country have become so used to getting kicked in the balls, that now they actually request it.
If you have a look at the Christian right web sites, you see their true agenda. They wrap their arguments against single payer in wedge issues. As in we’ll be killing more babies and old people. So some dumb hick sitting in a trailer that can’t get a booster shot because he’s laid off cheers that “obamacare” or so-called socialized medicine gets beat down..
Fucking dumbasses..
I don’t quite get that either Mike. If you look at the base of the party, the majority are probably in rural /semi-rural areas with high medical costs and probably closer to the poverty line than a lot of folks. But they will believe whatever their Red Saints say even if its against their own best interests. Maybe it’s the subservient nature of Christian doctrine (“bow before God”, etc) but you’d think this would be an issue that most could get behind. There is a great Fear out in the land that a lot of these folks feed off of. I think Matt touched on it a bit in The Great Derangement.
In response to another comment. See in context »More than anything, I believe in freedom. However, am I out of bounds by saying that we cannot completely marginalize the christian right and their base quick enough? I mean, I guess everyone has a right to “be heard” or whatever, but should people that are so obviously whacked out of their skulls be given any kind of public pulpit (as it were) to vent?
In response to another comment. See in context »Part of it is the trainwreck the media likes to show, no matter the subject. But when people come from a perspective where they think the universe is 6000 years old and the end of world is upon us, can’t they just finally be considered nuts??
We’ve (pretty much) marginalized racists/bigots in this country for their insanity. Is it not time for religious crazies??
Exactly… ‘whoever figured out how to get laid-off midwestern factory workers to cheer for Republicana free trade by plastering the airwaves with men french kissing deserves a medal… like the Triple Order if Satan’ ROFLMAO
In response to another comment. See in context »Correct… and I was just having a little fun with you. While some of your readers are certainly devoted -which is great- they seem to react with the kind of dogmatic belief and idol worship that kind of scares me. While I too think you’re one of the best we’ve got, I think you can handle an occasional tweak.
In response to another comment. See in context »In any event, I now know where to go when I feel like getting into a fight!
like I said, the populists are aching for a hero (since Obama has begun to disappoint). A smart dashing hero who can say it better than they can. He gives them a supralocal sense of collective identity. Note the “I love Matt Taibbi” facebook page.
In response to another comment. See in context »FOOD FIGHT!!!1!1!
In response to another comment. See in context »You know Rick, you HAVE managed to make the comments section mostly about you. Deep breath. Let it go…This is Matt’s sandbox.
In response to another comment. See in context »I’m not surprised either. There is a lot of money out there at stake and special interests are way more organized with more access to Congress. People in this country are just generally stupid I’m afraid. They believe everything they are told (birthers is a good example). People dont take the time to think for themselves (anyone heard of the internet???) I only know that if you have a chronic condition and need expensive medication, dont you dare get a job without benefits and pay taxes (even if you can work), because you will be S.O.L. You either have to be super poor or super rich or you’re just fucked. I dont have the answers, but letting insurance companies ration care (because thats what they do) is only going to make things worse for a vast number of people who are not getting the basic care they need to stay healthy and productive
[...] Mancur Olson, Matt Taibbi, Third Parties by Will Chamberlain Matt Taibbi has an AHA! moment on health care reform: The reason a real health-care bill is not going to get passed is simple…because that’s not [...]
FOOD FIGHT!!!1!!
[...] taibbi: It’s been clear from the start that the Democrats would make a great show of doing something [...]
The fix was in from the beginning by failing to draft a single payer plan the CBO could score, from which objective comparisons could be made.
That made the “public plan” the default “liberal” (i.e. radical) position, embolding “centerists” to demonstrate their independence by opposing or watering it down. It’s intentionally giving away half a loaf and negotiating down to the crust of the heel in the spirit of “bipartisan” compromise with people who hate bread.
The public is overwhelmingly receptive to or in support of radical reform. THAT is the bipartisan position. Republicans in congress represent 23% of the electorate–everyone’s definition of a “fringe group”–consisting largely old white southerners. They apparently don’t believe or can’t admit that the president is a citizen of the US.
Why would anyone want to negotiate with people who are either crazy or dishonest? Because it perpetuates the pretense that they are working to enact reform while ensuring the inclusion/exclusions of policies to prevent it. “We did the best we could but the Republicans were adamant.”
Democrats can plausibly argue to their big donors that the bill would have been much worse (more effective, fairer, etc) without their guidance–while ensuring an uninterrupted stream of contributions continues as the process moves forward.
Don’t blame Democrats, blame the way we finance elections. We need to demand a complete ban on incumbent fundraising. It won’t solve everything but it will break their death grip they now have on their office. That’s a start.
“That made the “public plan” the default “liberal” (i.e. radical) position…”
Bingo. That is exactly what I was thinking, and why, as soon as Obama proposed the feeble “public option” plan, I thought, “Well, this is over.” Surely, an immensely skilled negotiator like Obama knows that you have to start with some kind of (possibly overly-optimistic) solid position if you’re going to negotiate toward compromise, and surely he knows the “public option” was hardly a strong position to start from.
What’s particularly depressing about this is that he was going to get basically the same amount of pushback/accusations of “socialism” from the insurance industry, their minions at Fox, and their sympathizers at NPR, regardless of what he proposed. How about starting with “abolish all private health insurance companies,” then negotiate toward robust, public/private universal coverage (ie: the Dutch system)? But no, as you said, the fix was in, and we are getting nothing at all.
In response to another comment. See in context »FOOD FIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!1
I actually held out hope the public option would succeed. If not now, when? Never, I am coming to realize. Gut-wrenching doesn’t cut it. For the first time in my life, I’m considering not voting.
As for Wimbledon, maybe I knew the outcome in that final set before it was finished. But it was still something to see. Give Roddick credit for that. You should have watched, Matt!
Not vote? That’s exactly what the bastards want… vote them out! You still have a voice. When you don’t vote you let the rest of us down.
In response to another comment. See in context »[...] For Matt Taibbi, we have now arrived at the beginning of the end, an utterly predictable development: “Who among us did not know this would happen?” [...]
Rick, of course people who act clairvoyant can get one one’s nerves, but saying you called the Democrats pussying out on a big initiative like health care can hardly be called a fortune teller. All you need for that prediction is the barest of knowledge of the two major parties in the United States…
Richardf – for the most part, I agree. My only point was that sometimes when one thinks they know everything, things get missed. I prefer to keep my eye on what is happening rather than pre-supposing the result. By the way, while it is not looking good at this moment for the public health option, it isn’t over yet. Keep an eye on what happens during the month of August and how well (or poorly) the administration does at bringing people around. At the end of the day, Americans really do not get the health care debate. It is incredibly complicated. We see it in the cable news ratings. As soon as they start talking about health care, the viewership falls off a cliff. That means that Obama has to find a way to get this across in a way the public can understand.
In response to another comment. See in context »So Rick, since you’re a contributing editor on health care and politics, how about you spend a little more time explaining the “incredibly complicated” health care debate to the American people. And maybe a little less time with the dickish posts and subsequent insipid, juvenile flame wars on Taibbi’s comments section. After all, health care is kinda important.
In response to another comment. See in context »Ulty=
In response to another comment. See in context »If you read my blog on True/Slant you might be surprised to find that I do precisely that. Further, if you would like to read my book, “The Jack and Jill Guide to the Health Care Debate”, which – wait for it – endeavors to explain the complex issues of health care in a way people will,hopefully understand and benefit from, it would be my pleasure to send you a copy. However, the word “dick” or “dickish” never pops up in the book, or my blog, so not sure how much you’d like it. I’m not quite sure if you are seeking to make some point by highlighting “incredibly complicated” but if you think it’s not, not sure what to say about that. I do realize that you are unlikely to have any respect for someone who has spent years studying it in an effort to contribute towards making it better. As for my continuing with comment chain, don’t I get to have a little fun? I mean, so many of you have called me so many names….how can I possibly resist?
Ya know, if the above douchebags cared an iota for all the people out there that suffer terribly due to the current health care system they probably wouldn’t be retard-a-blogging Matt’s piece. Sorry for the commentary but the intense pain I suffer daily, dealing with being crippled by my doctor and not getting health care while being reduced to a S.S. income has ruined my sense of humor about the government’s lack of concern for it’s people and health care for them. I for one am sick of politico’s ignoring the important things while lining their pockets.
Taibbi’s sporting error — yes it was wrong to turn off that match!!! i mean how can you be a sports fan when you don’t care to see the process of the struggle — notwithstanding, this comment thread essentially proves his basic point: no one cares about healthcare. We rather talk about tennis.
Also I just have to say to Rick Ungar: you need to get into more comment sections. Your comments are hilarious.
I can’t believe you founded Access Hollywood.
Ali- Yeah…that was another life! I have some other pretty strange things in my past too!
Now i spend most of my time as a lawyer going after insurance companies who screw people who have the nerve to actually ask the health insurance companies to pay up when these people get sick! Go figure that people would expect such a thing. I also spend a lot of time as a consultant to some of the very politicians who are driving a more liberal agenda in health care – although you certainly wouldn’t know it by reading this comment chain!!
I have to take a little issue with your earlier comment. There are indeed people who care about health care. If you read my page here at True/Slant I think you might come to the conclusion that I am one of them. Indeed, if you read the post I just put up, you’ll understand why I took at shot at Matt today. I really haven’t bothered to explain it in these comments because people were being such idiots i thought it would be more fun to keep them going. The fact is that too many writers are now giving us their obituary on health care reform. The cynics and “know-it-alls” (and you know who you are) are ready to show us how prescient they are now that the legislation is in some trouble. And, most certainly, it is in trouble. This cynicism does us no good whatsoever. There is a nasty fight that has to happen in the month of August if meaningful health care reform is to be saved in any measure. Having the geniuses tell us how they knew all along that it could never happen is of absolutely no value – particularly when their idol worshipping followers are all too ready to jump in with “yeah…I knew it too.” This is certainly not helpful if one actually gives a shit about saving this legislation.
In response to another comment. See in context »There is time to have an impact on this. The most difficult thing is to get people to understand the real issues as they really are complicated. But people are going to have to be made to get it if this is going to work. So, I really do take exception to those who claim to support health care reform and then use their influence by focusing on how smart they are rather than doing something to help.
Rick, it was obvious to me what you were trying to say by being sarcastic in your first post. But, I can also see how other people who don’t know you could have gotten the wrong impression simply because what you wrote assumed a reader would know what you are talking about. Sarcasm and irony in writing can be difficult to get away with because so much background info is needed.
As for your points about cynicism vis-à-vis health care reform:
If you want to cure a sick person you first need to make the correct diagnosis. What is the ailment affecting health care in America? Countless people are unable to afford health care. How do you cure that ailment? You need to deal with the cause and not just the symptoms. If you have an infection in your foot and can’t walk to work, you can get painkillers, crutches, and make it to work. But that won’t heal your foot. Why are people unable to get health care? It’s because of the influence of investors in health care corporations over the political process who care more about making money than what is good for the common person. How can they be stopped? First we need to know that they are actually the cause — that is what Matt was saying. He was making the correct diagnosis — and he shouldn’t be faulted for that.
What else do we need to know? Who are those investors with political influence and why do they have influence. The real truth is that the biggest investors have the most power. The biggest investors in the major health related corporations are government (city, county, state, federal) investment funds. In fact government run investment funds control around 65% of wealth in America. For example California claims to be broke. But really they are only counting a small percentage of the wealth they control. This is how they break down their wealth in their CAFR (Comprehensive Annual Financial Report)
1. Governmental Funds
2. Propriety Funds
3. Fiduciary Funds
4. Component Units
The budget they talk about is Governmental funds, which is mostly from taxes every year. The real big money is in those others funds, which are for-profit investment funds which have been going on for years and years and years getting bigger and bigger and bigger, and which do not contribute to the people of the state, except for state employee pension funds, which is less then one half of the funds, and which only have to pay out a small percentage of their value because they are so huge.
California is cutting millions in social programs while they have a huge amount of money invested in Wall Street and banks that just sits there growing and growing.
It’s estimated that current various government investment funds for the entire USA account for over $100 trillion dollars. They are the biggest shareholders by far in the most profitable corporations, which include health insurance and pharmaceuticals.
In response to another comment. See in context »SHiva-
In response to another comment. See in context »There is hope after all!
I hadn’t really tuned into this comment chain for a few days. I’d had enough. But I’d thought I would drop by today to see how far it went. And, to my amazement, I found some examples of reason!
You are absolutely right. All I was doing was having a bit of fun with Matt whom I really do admire as a writer but who does sometimes cross into what I feel is a “know it all” vibe. That was all it was meant to be. A little tweak. I was absolutely amazed to see the response. I actually would have appreciated people standing up for Matt, but all vile anger truly stunned…and then interested me. Aside from being called every name in the book for what was a pretty innocuous comment, one person went on to say that all I was doing was “whoring” for my book. If you look at that comment, the first time I mentioned by book was at about 8:15pm after a full day of the nonsense. So, if I was whoring, I wasn’t very good at it!
Any how, your substantive points raised in your comment are right on. If you ever find youself wandering around True/Slant, have a look at my page as I discuss these issues often.
Rick–
Please understand, I read your posts, I find them interesting, and I have nothing but respect for the work you do (well, except maybe Access Hollywood). If your argument is “Taibbi’s groupies paint with too broad a brush,” though, you don’t help yourself by, well, painting with such a broad brush.
So, as one of those unthinking nihilists you were aiming at, I would very much like your take on what’s going on; specifically, your take on how much of the Democratic leadership actually wants reform. I was genuinely heartbroken to see them put Max Baucus, of all people, at the head of this thing. To me, that really did send a loud and clear signal: “we want to do nothing.” As a point of comparison, whenever Arlen Specter raised even the most timid objection to the Bush agenda, he got smacked down hard – yet he waited until his party was out of power to jump ship. If this example is at all typical, it illustrates that careerism will always trump ideals (or even donor loyalty) in Congress, and I can’t imagine Baucus responding any differently to a severe White House reprimand (indeed, Baucus is a perfect inversion of Specter: a guy holding in to a state where his party isn’t dominant. The difference is, Bush called Specter’s bluff, while the Democrats seem to be under the illusion that Baucus is valuable simply because he’s a “blue dog” in a “red state”).
Bottom line: intimidation works. So where is it? You clearly know about what’s going on, and I would love to hear your take on it.
In response to another comment. See in context »Kramer-
In response to another comment. See in context »I don’t think you are one of those “unthinking nihilist” I was talking about because (a) you managed to get through an entire comment without once using the word “dick” or “douche” and (b) you make a great deal of sense in your points. I feel a bit awkward discussing your points here, as so many have already suggested that I’ve tried to make this about “me”. And, frankly, there aren’t a whole lot of commenters here who would give a damn about what I think. But what I will do is write on this subject over at my page as the issue you’ve raised because it really is a good one.
Well thanks, that’s very cool. I’ve certainly had my share of internet-based explosions; the web really lends itself to that stuff.
[I was just kidding with the Access Hollywood comment...and I edited the pilot of a similar show years ago, so I'm in a glass house there.]
In response to another comment. See in context »[...] Posted in Business, Congress, Daily life, Government, Obama administration at 2:32 pm by LeisureGuy Matt Taibbi: [...]
If the Democrats can’t pass healthcare, then what good are they for? Seriously.
Game over. We the people lose. Long live the kings.
Today I changed my registration from the Democratic Party to the Working Families Party. At least in NY, there is an option.
An honest question here. I sometimes get the impression that Americans have somewhat of a ‘fuck you, I got mine’ mentality, at least more so than where I live.
Here in the Netherlands, we consider it normal that people with alot of money pay quite a bit more to help take care of the poorer people in society. The prime example being healthcare.
Any thoughts on this from Americans?
If this is wrong, and my cynical view is based purely on the verbal diohrea coming out of the politicians’ mouths, I apologize.
richard – Every American believe it’s their right to have ‘low taxes’. I think most don’t understand that their money will get gone one way or another. My argument for government having a larger hand in public health care is “Why not pay money to an entity that is beholden to you rather than private corporations that see you as a piece of their profit?” There is usually a lot of talk (by everyone) of a healthy distrust of the government that is nearly institutionalized in the modern US. There is also some back-handed talk about “small town values” but no one every backs that up with real ideas about social responsibility like there are in Europe.
In response to another comment. See in context »[...] of the best writers out there writing about the crash of our economy and the resulting recession, has a pretty pessimistic post today about the health care reform situation. And while I hope and pray that he is wrong, I fear that he is right… The monied [...]
ummm – my last comment awaiting moderation? The links in it are to the U. S. Senate and congress to find your reps and write them, so I hope that ain’t an issue.
Gypsysister,
Put the links in parenthesis. It will let you post without moderation if you do that.
In response to another comment. See in context »Gracias.
So ladies and gents, jesters and causticians,
Here we all are on the internet talking about health care and a poke over Wimbledon. The web can be so great at connecting us with those who have great ideas, but it sometimes prevents us from taking action to solve the issue.
In lieu of a riot or 2 – and sometimes I’m amazed we don’t have them over things like our FUBAR health care system and robber baron investment bankers and uber-corrupt legislators and others in leadership positions – we can barrage our reps with mail.
Here’s a link to the U. S. Senate listing:
(http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm)
and here ya go for the house:
(http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.shtml)
Have at it, y’all. Tis obvious you like to write, you have passion, and you’re up for a fight.
booyah!
In response to another comment. See in context »Reply to this »
[...] is dead. It may pass in some form, but it won’t be the same thing… Matt Taibi, for one, isn’t surprised. Here’s a clip from a column that he released today. …It’s the same with this health [...]
[...] read this piece by Matt Taibbi, but you won’t be happy afterwards. It’s entitled “The Health Care Bill Dies?,” and he doesn’t need the question mark. Here’s the last paragraph: This whole [...]
[...] Matt Taibbi mourns the death of ObamacareIf you search my blog for posts o Matt Taibbi, you’ll see that I’m not a big fan. He’s got a piece today on his blog (not on Rolling Stone) about the death of the current health care bill. [...]
[...] The Health Bill Dies? [...]
Jeez, sheeple, Taibbi’s been making pretty much the same point for about two years, that I know of. It happens to be about health care now, but it’s pretty much still the same point and it utterly mystyfies me why people don’t get it. It’s really simple: We stopped living in a democracy about a decade or so ago. We now live in an upfront oligarchy, just like Russia, most of Africa, all of Asia, and a lot of South America. Our owners and their compradores in various places (e.g., Congress and the White House) don’t think this health care stuff we’re howling about is actually going to be useful in managing us. Anymore than it would be useful to provide us with an unrigged stock market, or full employment, or decent public education, or clean water, or habeus corpus, or a domestic constabulary who don’t feel entitled to tase and kick the living shit out of whomever they please whenever they please. So they’re not going to give us any of those things.
Rick, some of your comments really annoy me. I don’t hero worship, Matt, and I am not sure others do as well. Those of us who read Matt, listen to Bill Maher, and read in the blogosphere do so because we are sick and tired of the PC BS that passes these days for news.
My God, our president can’t even use the word “stupidly” when the police stupidly arrest someone.
I don’t think Matt is throwing in the towel as much as dumping on the Dems and pols in general. By shaming them, he is hoping maybe they grow a pair.
In 2006 and 2007, the Dems blamed their inability to cut funding in Iraq on not having a 60 seat majority in the Senate and the executive branch.
The whole Democrat-Republican “fight” was a sideshow to distract from the real issue. It was always about the have and have nots. However, there was a hope that the Dems weren’t as bad as the Republicans. Now it is pretty clear to all but the most naive that there really was no difference.
What drives government these days has nothing to do with the public good. It is whoring one’s self out while in public office to later cash in on a big private paycheck. See Billy Tauzin, Phil Gramm, Larry Summers, and Robert Rubin.
And as long as that happens Democracy is broken. While you may lament Matt’s “giving up”, the real story is cynics like myself gave up a long time ago. We were actually hoping that with s super majority in the Senate and Obama as president, things might change. That business as usual reigns on an issue with such popular support as health care demonstrates nothing has changed.
One has to wonder how al-qaeda picked its Washington targets. I can almost see Osama hearing of the plan to attack targets in DC and being told said targets were Congress and the White House and saying, “No, you fools, we want to destroy America not save it. Leave Congress alone. Go after the Pentagon instead.”
[...] Matt Tabbi sees the health care debate as proof of how bad our government is: It won’t get done, because that’s not the way our government works. Our government doesn’t exist to protect voters from interests, it exists to protect interests from voters. The situation we have here is an angry and desperate population that at long last has voted in a majority that it believes should be able to pass a health care bill. It expects something to be done. The task of the lawmakers on the Hill, at least as they see things, is to create the appearance of having done something. And that’s what they’re doing. Personally, I think they’re doing a lousy job even of that. I lauded Roddick for playing out the string with heart, and giving a good show. But these Democrats aren’t even pretending to give a shit, not really. I mean, they’re not even willing to give up their vacations. [...]
[...] Matt Taibbi – The Health Care Bill Dies? Well, as the French would say… Quelle surprise! [...]
[...] …it exists to protect interests from voters. Matt Taibbi: “Our government doesn’t exist to protect voters from interests, it exists to protect interests from….” [...]
One more question. As I understand it, the road to health care reform runs through several committees, both in the House and the Senate. Now that the public option is being dropped in the Senate (it was there, in the Finance committee, right?), is it completely and utterly dead? Or is it still possible to somehow get that public option back in there through one of the other committees that are involved here?
No, a public plan isn’t “dead”. The Health, Education, Labor & Pensions (HELP, get it?) Committee will report out their version that will almost certainly have a public plan, as does the current House legislation–which will have to be reconciled with whatever passes in the Senate, then voted on again in both chambers. There’s a long, long way to go before there’ll be anything for Obama to sign.
The point I was making much earlier was it is fantasy to believe a public plan (if it is included in the bill) will somehow eventually morph into a single payer plan. Enrollment will be strictly limited and pricing will be comparable but subsidized. That may provide some modest and probably temporary price restraint but even that is questionable.
In response to another comment. See in context »[...] Matt Taibbi eulogizes real healthcare reform. [...]
[...] Matt Taibi nails it: The reason a real health-care bill is not going to get passed is simple: because nobody in Washington really wants it. … [...]
Screw healthcare. I, for one, am happy to finally be reading a comprehensive comments-discussion on Rick Ungar and Andy Roddick. It’s about time.
[...] Matt Taibbi | True/Slant [...]
[...] you haven’t read his epic takedown of Goldman Sachs do so immediately, so when he gives his opinion on health care reform he takes no prisoners: This whole business, it was a litmus test for whether or not we even have a [...]
Really, truly, honestly — it was always going to be about actually for-realz breaking up the two party system. Not sexy, not fun, not simple enough, but minus an actual systemic (seismic) shift in the very way American runs its democracy, the cloistered power in Washington (well, really, anywhere were the two sides of the same problem work to keep a hold of that power at any cost) well continue on its merry way, fucking us whenever the opportunity rises.
So, yeah, “third-party” politics, i.e. a systemic challenge to power, is kinda the only way.