Tuesday, March 9, 2010


In a report on health care tonight on Special Report with Bret Baier, they played a clip of Nancy Pelosi speaking at the National Association of Counties today about the legislation.  She said:

"We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it - away from the fog of the controversy."

After the clip, Baier said "You have to pass the bill to find out what's in it?"  To which the reporter, Jim Engle, replied (with a laugh) "Yea, I just report it, I didn't say it."

Whatever happened to that whole thing about transparency and bills being online for the public to view for at least 72 hours before a vote?

With all of the "controversy" over the bills and the way they are ramming them through, no one has really focused on what bill exactly we are talking about.  It is generally acknowledged that we are talking about the Senate bill, but, really, is it?

Obama himself apparently has a "proposal" out there, for what it's worth.  When he talks about the legislation, it seems like he is talking about his proposal.  But when the pundits speak about the situation, they are talking about the Senate bill.  Pelosi is just using the generic term "legislation" at this point.  Perhaps she thinks the Senate will miraculously pass her bill. 

What, exactly, is the point of Obama's "Proposal"?  It seems like it is just a blind behind which the democrats are hiding.  Sure, the proposal claims a lot of things, but, really, what does it matter?  It isn't going to get voted on, the items in it are not being included in the legislation, so what is the deal?  To me, it seems like its entire purpose is to act as cover when a democrat is asked if something is in the Senate bill that isn't.  "Sure, yeah, that's in the proposal".  Remember, these are lawyers we're talking about.  They aren't lying, because it probably is in the proposal - but that doesn't mean it's in the legislation

The Tonight Show had a hilarious spot about Pelosi talking health care while playing a shell game.  How apt.  One can assume the three cups are the House plan, the Senate plan and Obama's proposal.  God only knows what piece of garbage is going to emerge out from under all of this, but it's safe to assume that the country is being played, and the game is bait and switch.

Meanwhile, Robert Gibbs is starting to walk back his March 18th deadline.  Is it just me, or does it seem like this bill is like one of those nightmares that you think you have woken up from but find out you are still in - over and over and over again?

During the round table discussion, Charles Krauthammer opined that Rep. Stupak will probably vote yes on the bill:

"I predict Stupak will accept a compromise because I think he does not want to carry the mark of Cain all his life as the man who sank historic health care reform."

I have no doubt whatsoever that that is exactly how Pelosi is pressuring him (along with making plenty of hollow promises, bribes and threats).  What he really needs to think about, however, is the other side of that coin.

This bill is flawed - it doesn't matter which bill we're talking about, because all of the democrat health care offerings are flawed.  So although I can understand him not wanting to be blamed by his own party for killing health care, I wonder if he is prepared to be blamed by anywhere from 57 - 81% of the country as the man who cast the vote that forced this nightmare on the people.



  © Blogger templates The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP