Quote of the Day: Did Deal just help Democrats with ObamaCare?

“A rumored ethics inquiry, and he leaves the House, putting Pelosi one vote closer to passing Obamacare. Turns out Nathan can’t Deal.”Jim Geraghty, National Review

100 comments

  1. polisavvy says:

    That quote could be very correct and very telling of what’s coming down the pipe. If so, then it really is bad timing, isn’t it?

  2. IndyInjun says:

    I would everyone should devote as much time to defeating Deal as we did Reed, but there is Ox and the prospect of Reed running in the 7th.

    The baddies are ganging up on up this year.

        • polisavvy says:

          I agree with you on that; however, don’t forget that there are probably an equal number of corrupt Democrats. The Republicans don’t have the lock on corruption. Both parties have their fair share.

            • polisavvy says:

              I’m not being snide; but, can you back that statement up? No disrespect meant. Just curious as to how you came to this conclusion.

                • polisavvy says:

                  Probably the same way they can back up there’s, by researching. You know as well as I do that corruption doesn’t know just one party. It’s unfortunately everywhere and on all levels.

                  • benevolus says:

                    Well then, I think I can say with confidence that Republicans are predisposed to corruption. Yes, of course, the odd Democrat gets nabbed in some problem or another from time to time, but those are personal failings not related to party affiliation. Republicans on the other hand, seem to feel like there should be two sets of rules- one for “them” and one for “everybody else”. This tends to create a sense of entitlement; an “above the law” mentality. I mean, Republicans constantly profess their faith, and yet when politicians constantly invoke their faith to justify their actions can anything really be off the table? They’re going to be forgiven for whatever they do and if they have to break a few rules on this plane to serve a higher purpose, then so be it. Sure, Democrats are faithful too, but it’s the other kind of service- service to those less fortunate rather than elevating the “chosen few”.

                    🙂

                    • Icarus says:

                      That’s the beauty of modern politics. There’s no limit to the amount the party in charge can steal so long as their supporters believe it’s the other guys who are corrupt and must be stopped.

                    • benevolus,

                      Want to hear about the largest federal voter fraud case in the history of the United States?

                      It happened in Dodge County, Georgia, in 1992. There were hundreds of sworn statements from people who had sold their votes which were ALL purchased in the Democrat primary. The sole then-current Dodge County Commissioner, the former Dodge County Commissioner and the former Dodge County sheriff all went to federal prison. All were Democrats.

                      The prosecution did not prosecute those who sold their votes, only people who purchased votes. This resulted in 28 Democrats going to prison.

                      Are there corrupt Republicans? Obviously the answer to that is “Yes.” I will also note that a large number of them are “former” Democrats.

                      The systemic theft of public office by a large group of Democrats is not personal failings not related to party affiliation.

                      To assume that Democrats are more naturally moral than Republicans is both ignorant and asinine.

                • I can back up poli’s… she said “probably” which means that it’s not necessarily a fact, but that’s what she thinks. I’ll concede that she probably does think that, and I share her same opinion. 😛

              • georgiahack says:

                The shear number of Republican vs Democrat office holders most likely makes Mad Dog’s statement correct.

                What’s the old saying – power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely – and the Republicans have most of the power in the state. Its just a numbers game.

                  • Mad Dog says:

                    Georgia Hack got it right.

                    There just aren’t enough DEMS to match just the corrupt GOPS.

                    Not meaning that all GOPS are rotten. But that IF every DEM were corrupt, that still won’t be enough to equal partial corruption among current GOPS.

                    That’s the favor of Georgia’s status as a deep red state.

                    If Blue and Red were equally represented, we could have quite the argument about which group earned the most money under the table, had the most sex on the table, and tabled ethics inquiries to cover the above.

                    And, to polisazzy’s point, if one party has power long enough, the eggs will rot from the inside out.

  3. Doug Deal says:

    Deal does care greatly about himself. The 9th District, voters of Georgia, his country? Not so much.

    Can we finally say no to dirty, self absorbed politicans in this state?

    • polisavvy says:

      What a wonderful idea/concept! Could it be accomplished? I just wonder how much damage self-absorbed politicians have done to not only this country, but this State? I’m certain we’ll never know.

    • Kellie says:

      “self absorbed ” – isn’t that the definition of a politician?

      That’s a joke people. 😉

    • Henry Waxman says:

      If Deal was self-absorbed, he would have taken the a job as the CEO of a large health care industry trade group (like the $1.5 million that Greenwood took in ’04 to lead the Biotech Industry Organization or the multimillion dollar deal Tauzin took to lead PhRMA). Unlike Greenwood, who was Chairman of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, Deal has actually been Chairman of the Health Subcommittee.

      • polisavvy says:

        And, you know, Mr. Waxman, we could have all been better off had he done so. I was calling politicians in general “self-absorbed.” If I hit a nerve, then I am sorry; but, it appears more and more each day to me that they are there for themselves, for the most part, and don’t give a tinker’s damn about us, as a whole.

        • Henry Waxman says:

          That’s an interesting statement from a guy who spends several hours on a political blog every week…

          • Mad Dog says:

            Doug,

            I’m never up to speed on your humor. Seeking money is a respectable motivator? Was I supposed to laugh at some satire? Or visualize Al Capone?

            Hunger would be a respectable motivator. Money would be just a goal.

            • Doug Deal says:

              So the guy working for a janitor is doing it for the love of janitorial services and helping his fellow man?

              The farmer providing you with fruits and vegetables is doing this because he cares about your well being and wants to insure you have a balanced diet.

              The cab driver taking you to the hotel from the airport is doing this because your comfort and rest is more important than the gas and car maintenance he has to pay for?

              Yes, money is a respectable motivator.

              To you liberals, you have lost touch of what it represents. It represents man-hours of labor performed by someone. I know you do not value the labor of others, but luckily I and many others do.

              People who seek power, e.g. your heros, instead are looking to have things done for them without the courtesy of paying the provider for their labor. They want what they have because they have commanded it.

              • IndyInjun says:

                And they are diminishing the value of labor through inefficient stimulus, make-work programs (more to come), and other wild spending programs created through “money printing”, which is the ultimate destroyer of the value of labor.

              • Mad Dog says:

                Doug,

                Hunger does motivate behavior, even to the point of making money to buy food.

                Despite your worthless rant, is there a worthwhile rant?, despite your rant, you’re wrong.

                Sex would be the goal from the human motivation to reproduce. A natural drive.

                Seeking money doesn’t happen in nature. So it has nothing to do with natural motivations … common drives … human nature.

                If you’re still rational, think about it.

                If not. Rant on my man.

  4. DMZDave says:

    Someone please tell me why it would be terrible to have someone with Ralph Reed’s intelligence, rhetorical skills and strategic poltical ability in the House of Representatives taking on President Obama and Nancy Pelosi. And as for those who are proud for having devoted their time and effort in the last election cycle toward defeating Ralph Reed, no one, not even Casey Cagle, put in more time and effort toward achieving that goal than the Atlanta Journal and Constitution with their daily innuendo and false accusations and I for one would not be proud of having served as a foot soldier in that Army.

    • Because Ralph Reed is a corrupt demogogue, who would sell his soul and values for money — such as an indian casino — and would create a theocracy that would infringe on our values and freedoms. But 0ther than that, no reason at all! 🙂

      • georgiahack says:

        Yes, while true Progressive Peach that Reed is all those things, he would be like our Cynthia McKinney. Any Dem congressperson or interest group could slap him on a mailer and raise tons of money. And because he is so far out there to the rest of the country, he would never garner any real power.

      • Mozart says:

        Our freedoms and values are already infringed upon due to the neo-con policies of the fake Republicans in Congress and in this state………………so, I’m curious to see what a non-neo-con would do. Can’t possibly be any worse than Obama promising “transparency” and “fairness” and the Democrats demonstrating they do not care about any such concepts.

  5. Pine Knot says:

    If people spent as much time as they do attacking fellow conservatives and going after bitter rumors as they did defeating the Democrats or doing other good things, then we would be much better off. Too many Republicans going after our own. Too many egos and people exploiting rumors, ect.

    • Pine Knot says:

      Not that we do not need a clean group of our own, but I think some people have different motives than that.

    • IndyInjun says:

      “If people spent as much time as they do attacking fellow conservatives ”

      By the definitions established by the REPUBLICAN PARTY the Georgia GOP delegation is neither conservative or republican.

      I did not make these standards.

      Until they are changed I will hold GOP officials to them.

      What is unfair or unreasonable about that?

    • Doug Deal says:

      The opposite is actully the desired situation.

      Democrats are supposed to be doing what we don’t support, they aren’t Republicans. Fight their ideas, sure, but if Democrats want a sullied brand, then let them have it and we will take it up at the polls.

      Every one of the corrupt bunch of a-hole R’s up in Washington (or Atlanta), on the other hand, is pissing on the good name of everyone else in the party and making the R name mudd and basically flushing it down the toilet.

      One corrupt R, like Deal, does much more damage to the Republican brand than a whole slew of Waxmans, Kennedies, Boxers or Pelosi’s.

  6. Harry says:

    Are you saying there are Democrats and others of ill-will trying to stoke the primary fires so as to hurt the GAGOP’s chances in the general?

    • IndyInjun says:

      Speaking for myself, I am attacking GOP office holders using their very own principles, in the hopes that GOP loyalists either 1) Pressure them to resign or 2) Run primary opponents.

      As for the rest of y’all, I am reminding you of what your principles are and bringing forth the dastardly votes against same by the GA GOP delegation.

      Have you changed GOP principles to allow GOP office holders to do the opposite?

      Where are these changes? If there are none, every one of you should be with me. If they exist, I need to find another party.

        • IndyInjun says:

          Oh, I definitely voted L against Saxby.

          The way things look to be heading I will be will with y’all again in November.

          The L’s are closer to the R’s principles than the R’s are.

          • Pine Knot says:

            A lot of the times a vote for the L is a vote for the D. In competative races where the L has no chance per say.

            • IndyInjun says:

              That is vicarious liability.

              I don’t accept that.

              What about personal responsibility (for one’s vote)?

            • There is never a case where the L is a vote for the D. An L is a vote for neither a D nor an R. In the race of Saxby vs. Martin, neither one is anything close to what the GOP has in it’s platform. In that case a vote for the R candidate was also a vote for a D.

              • Doug Deal says:

                David, that is all well and good, and it actually applies in Georgia, but it is a load of bunk almost everywhere else, and never applies to a Presidential race.

                Helping the diametric opposite side because you want to teach the closer one a lesson is pretty much the very definition of useful idiot.

                Learn to live with a shade less than purity, and perhaps you can actually shape the road to the future instead of being hapless road kill.

                • IndyInjun says:

                  Learn to live with a shade less than purity, and perhaps you can actually shape the road to the future instead of being hapless road kill.

                  Voting for Perot in ’92 helped temporarily return both parties to sanity. It shaped the future until 2000.

                  Voting for McCain was ratifying a guy who was one of the Keating 5, led the charge for TARP, and was a leader of amnesty, among other things.

                  REPUBLLICANS need to put up a REPUBLICAN for Potus, don’t you reckon?

                  Don’t blame REPUBLICANs for refusing to vote for a socialist.

                • “it actually applies in Georgia, but it is a load of bunk almost everywhere else”

                  Hrmm… I don’t believe I’ll be voting anywhere but Georgia this year… or next year for that matter.

                  “Helping the diametric opposite side because you want to teach the closer one a lesson is pretty much the very definition of useful idiot.”

                  Right… Republicans are right out in front when it comes to legalizing gambling, Sunday alcohol sales, medical marijuana, etc. I suppose when the R party comes around to actually supporting freedom, not just freedom to be a Christian that might apply. Otherwise, the only part of the R-party that would appeal to a libertarian is their fiscal conservativeness… but I think you and I both know the only difference between Democrats and Republicans is not whether to spend the money… it’s how.

                  “never applies to a Presidential race”

                  Thanks for the laugh!

                  • Doug Deal says:

                    Right… Republicans are right out in front when it comes to legalizing gambling, Sunday alcohol sales, medical marijuana, etc.

                    If these are your priorities when we are spending ourselves to ruin, thank god you guys are nothing but insignificant jokes.

                    Really, this is what you find as the important issues of the day? My God, you have some serious problems with perspective.

                    And this is not coming from someone who disagrees all that much with you on those issues.

                    • No, those certainly aren’t my priorities. But of course you totally ignored the part about where I said I *would* agree with the R-party’s fiscal conservativeness… it they would actually do what they believe. But let’s take a look at one Republican – Sonny Perdue…

                      http://www.ajc.com/news/extras-in-a-lean-337443.html

                      $9M for a horse park expansion
                      $10M for the College Football Hall of Fame
                      $7.7M for UGA to design a new veterinary medical learning center

                      If these are the kinds of priorities our “leaders” (and I use that term very loosely) have, then your god… we do have some serious problems with perspective. I sure am glad we’re not having to resort to things like furloughs for teachers or anything… oh… wait.. that’s right… nevermind…

  7. Henry Waxman says:

    The Democrats cannot pass ObamaCare in the House if Deal and several other Republicans didn’t vote that day. The Democrats passed the bill by 5 votes. Rep. Ahn Cao (the lone R “yes” vote) has already announced that he will be a “no.” Rep. Stupak (D-MI) has announced that he is switching to a “no,” and he says tens of other pro-life Democrats will also vote “no” because of the abortion policy in the Obama proposal. A couple of D “yes” votes are no longer in the House. And on top of all of that 53 “progressive” Democrats signed a letter promising to vote against any health reform proposal that doesn’t include a “robust public option,” and you have to assume that a few of them keep that promise (especially the ones with a primary challenger to their political left).

  8. GOPGeorgia says:

    I am amazed at some of the comments I read on here. If it were raining, there would be talks of flood. If it were not raining, there would be talk of drought. If it were partly could with a chance of rain, it would be Bush’s (or some other politician’s) fault.

      • I think the term these days is “climate change”, as if you look at the research, many scientists say that some areas will warm, while others will cool. They also say that certain weather patterns will continue to change as well. But I’m not a scientist and haven’t read enough research on the subject to form my own opinion, so I’m just a bystander when it comes to that topic. 🙂

    • polisavvy says:

      Maybe it’s just one of those days, GOPGeorgia. I’m kind of having one (bad cold, head in a bucket, coughing). 😉

  9. Gary Cooper says:

    I don’t think Deal’s resignation will have any bearing on Obamacare. First off, the house passed their version with a 220-215 line. The Democrats have already lost three votes due to resignations of Reps. Neil Abercrombie (sp?) and Robert Wexler; and the sad passing of John Murtha. That puts the votes for ‘yea’ at 217. Add to that the change in votes by GOP Rep. Cao and Dem Rep. Stupak from ‘yea’ to ‘nay’ and the current total is 215-215.

    Abercrombie’s replacement will not be chosen until early May and Wexler’s replacement will not be chosen until mid April. The Hawaii GOP has a chance thanks to election law there to actually win the seat as they seem to be rallying around one candidate while several Democrats are said to be interested and will probably run. And the Republicans are now favorites to pick up Murtha’s open seat. Given these numbers the earliest possible date that the House could take up the Health bill would be early-mid May. And even at that point it is no guarantee that Pelosi will have the votes because a large contingent of House Democrats only voted ‘yea’ back in November because of the Stupak language. If that is not placed back into the bill and Rep. Stupak himself still claims to vote ‘nay’ then most of this House Dems will not sell their political careers short for one bad bill. And Pelosi needs them in order to pass the bill. The Democrats who voted ‘nay’ back in November have no reason to change their votes because the Health bill is more unpopular now than it was then.

    So all in all, Deal’s resignation has no bearing on Obamacare because he will resign effective March 8 and a special election has to be held between April 9th and April 18th. There is only one Tuesday in between and the most likely date for the special will be April 13th. That will be exactly one week prior to the election to replace Wexler in Florida and at that point the Democrats will still need 217 votes to pass the health care bill. Deal will escape having to answer to this, but unfortunately he will have to answer to the whole dodging the ethics investigation thing.

    • IndyInjun says:

      If the Dems make a move to ram through Obamacare, look for 90% of the Blue Dogs to change parties.

      • polisavvy says:

        I don’t necessarily think they will change parties; but, to save their own behinds (elections), they are probably not going to support it given the fact that the vast majority of Americans are against it.

        • IndyInjun says:

          That won’t save their behinds. If that bill gets rammed through, they will be toast with a “D” beside their names in their districts.

          • polisavvy says:

            You’re probably very true, Indy. It’s going to be tough for any of them if this thing passes. Didn’t quite think of it the way you did, but your way could be a distinct possibility.

          • Gary Cooper says:

            Let me add to my comment from above. All of those election dates and scenarios won’t alone stop the bill. The good ole calendar is the bills biggest enemy. Giving those election dates, the earliest Pelosi could schedule a vote would be mid-May. However, we all know things don’t happen that quickly in Congress so for arguments sake the earliest she WILL bring the bill to the floor is early June. By that time we will be in the thick of primary season and by then none of the 38 Democrats who voted ‘nay’ will change their mind and those who favor the Stupak language will sit on their votes because the Dems cannot change the bill and have it pass using reconciliation. Add to that this is all on the House and doesn’t even suggest the Senate schedule. If somehow the Democrats pass the bill in the house, it could be July before the Senate has a chance to take it up and use reconciliation. By that time, no one in Washington will want the debate to continue, especially if the country still has over 9.5% unemployment. If the Democrats go into the August break still trying to pass healthcare and doing nothing to help the economy; start looking for a incumbent bloodbath this November. The new Congress in January will definitely be a fresh one.

            • polisavvy says:

              Gary Cooper, I believe you have it pegged pretty well. I just hope that you are accurate. Good post.

              • Gary Cooper says:

                Thanks. For the sake of our country, I hope so too. Remember, they have been talking about this bill since the beginning of last summer. Everyone in Washington thought it would have passed by now because of the number of Democrats. That hasn’t happened and the chances of it diminish day by day.

        • polisavvy says:

          What’s up with that going on Alabama? I guess it could be a good thing — at least they aren’t quitting.

            • polisavvy says:

              That’s really sad to hear Indy. How is Georgia going to be affected by Congress not acting on Medicare and Medicaid? I’m sure it’s going to affect us as well, right? I believe I have heard some ungodly number but I can’t recall. Do you have it?

              • IndyInjun says:

                AJC does

                Several key lawmakers say Gov. Sonny Perdue’s plan for a hospital “bed” tax — to help fund a $608 million shortfall in Medicaid — is going nowhere fast……

                • polisavvy says:

                  Oh Lord!! What in the world are we going to do if it doesn’t pass? I know there are people on both sides trying to figure out what to do, but this is a terribly high amount of money. This could completely bankrupt the State, couldn’t it? Thanks for your link, by the way.

                  • Gary Cooper says:

                    This is actually a problem in all states which is why Congress is feeling the heat from Governors to act. You’re right, this could financially strap the states even worse than they are now.

                    • polisavvy says:

                      It’s a sad state of affairs, in my opinion. Once again I will ask a question, and I’m sure I’ll have my head taken off (not by you necessarily), but why do things get to this point before something is done?

                    • Greed. Pure and simple greed. Everyone has their pet projects that they want taxes to fund. Don’t have enough in the coffers? Just raise taxes, we’ll increase spending a little bit and whaddya know… we can afford whatever they want!

                    • IndyInjun says:

                      “why do things get to this point before something is done?”

                      Because people like me get called names and accused of engineering the “Doom Train” when we bring the causation and the impending damage up.

                      Because people like my state senator treat items like the $20 billion unfunded healthcare liability for state employees as too hot to handle saying it “will be funded out of future revenues.” (To be fair he and his opponent said the same thing.)

                      Because the government statistics are LIES that fall on their face when the money is gone.

                      Because the likes of the POTUS, Treasury, and Fed all said the “economy is sound” and the “financial system is strong” within weeks of the September 2008 Bush pronouncement “This sucker could go down!” if money did not loosen up.

                      I predicted these things right here and got called a ‘doomer’ for it.

                      Google “Challenger Investigation” and read Richard Feynman – What Do You Care What Other People Think

                      http://www.scribd.com/doc/3806540/Richard-Feynman-What-Do-You-Care-What-Other-People-Think-Challenger-Investigation

                      Nutshell – Realists are prone to ridicule….people die for it.

                    • Gary Cooper says:

                      Simple, things get this bad because we don’t have leadership. No one who can step up and tell us how bad things are and the hard choices that need to be made in order to correct them. And of course there is what David Staples mentions – greed. Congress and public service is now a career instead of being a sacrifice.

                    • polisavvy says:

                      David, Indy, and Gary: I see all your points of view. I guess all I can say is that it basically boils down to issues that end up sucking for us all, doesn’t it. There is no accountability and that really makes it even worse. Both parties point fingers at the other, and no one will accept or own up to any mistakes made along the way. In the meantime, things like this happen.

                      If we all ran our households like the federal and state governments do, we’d all be bankrupt and living in tents somewhere.

                • Henry Waxman says:

                  Medicaid CANNOT have a “shortfall.” Perdue’s folks are simply making up BS to pass a tax hike. Medicaid is a matching program: Georgia spends money on Medicaid eligible items and services delivered to Medicaid eligible people and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services sends the state a check once per quarter for approximately 70% (the FMAP rate) of what Georgia spent. Now, Georgia can spend more than it projected it would on Medicaid, but there are no “shortfalls.” Shortfalls happen in programs like SCHIP and TMA that have a set Federal account that can be exceeded if a state overspends.

                  • ByteMe says:

                    The shortfall is that this recession has added a whole lot more people to the Medicaid roles that they didn’t anticipate, so they didn’t budget for it. Now they whine about it and hope the Feds bail them out of their stupidity… while at the same time decrying that the Feds bailed the banks out of their stupidity.

            • benevolus says:

              Let’s be clear: It’s not “Congress” that has not acted, it is Senator Jim Bunning (R-KY) who is blocking any action.

              • polisavvy says:

                For whatever it’s worth (and probably not worth much), I don’t think that any one man should ever be allowed to stand in the way in a matter like this when the fallout is so detrimental to so many, regardless of party affiliation.

              • IndyInjun says:

                Question – How do we fund the Unemployment Extension? Medicaid? Teacher Health care? War?

                The heat Bunning is catching says that the people want to spend and spend and spend until this sucker goes down.

                It also answers the question of how things get this bad.

                The answer clearly seems to be PRINT TO INFINITY!!!!!!!!!

                A loaf of bread may cost you $10 in four years if this is kept up.

                Gold bugs = Geniuses of our time = saw that the people would DEMAND ‘printing’ and scapegoat all in the way.

                Thanks for the investment advice.

                • benevolus says:

                  OK, so you are on record as supporting Bunning. That’s cool.

                  So what happens when we cut Medicare reimbursements to heath care providers by 21% overnight?

                  • IndyInjun says:

                    They will have to cut their prices.

                    EVERYONE is going to have to adjust.

                    EVERYONE is going to have to sacrifice.

                    The numbers don’t lie.

                    The adjustment is coming either by default (teachers, docs and hospitals too) or by hyperinflation to wipe out debts which will also wipe out all savings, 401k’s, and purchasing power of labor. The Washington pols, except for a few like Bunning, have opted for Inflation Nation.

                    Inflation will starve retirees. Deflation won’t.

                    Wage parity with China was known to be coming and was known to be excruciating. Go luck up Perot’s debate speech.

                    That can our leaders cretins have been kicking down the road suddenly is filled with lead and breaking their toes and feet, hence the retirements.

              • Henry Waxman says:

                Bunning isn’t blocking the Medicare Part B physician payment fix (the 23% payment cut). The Democrats want to include it as a sweetener/hostage to pass ObamaCare

                • ByteMe says:

                  You are incorrect. What Bunning is doing has nothing to do with the health care reform situation, since that has already passed in the Senate.

Comments are closed.