On today’s “Morning Meeting with Dylan Ratigan” on MSNBC, Iowa Senator Charles Grassley, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, said that even if the
committee’s final version of a health insurance reform bill gives him everything he says he wants, he will vote against it.
When NBC’s Chuck Todd, in a follow-up question on the show, asked the Iowa Republican if he’d vote against what Grassley might consider to be a “good deal” — i.e., gets everything he asks for from Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus (D) — Grassley replied, “It isn’t a good deal if I can’t sell my product to more Republicans.”
In short, Grassley says he’s willing to walk away from legislation in which he gets everything he wants. Over to you, Max Baucus…
Why won’t our politicians lead nowadays? Is it really that hard to explain to your constituents why unpopular legislation should be passed? It seems that everyone’s afraid to stick their necks out on anything.
>big Health Insurance Companies that contribute so heavily to the Republican party.
Care to look up contributions to Obama and Hillary and McCain, or would you just like to hold on to your stereotypes?
#141 Brace yourself for a shocking revelation, MikeN: Big Biz covers their bets and contributes to *both* parties. Usually more to the party in power, but over time history has shown Big Biz and Republicans are most comfortable with each other.
Social Security and Medicare are not handouts per se because citizens pay into these programs (by force of the government, I might add). The problem is that they provide a very poor return on investment. The benefits one receives from Social Security pale in comparison to the amount that was paid in. To add insult to injury, these benefits are taxed as income. In other words, Social Security is a loser. If given the choice between an individual retirement account or Social Security, I would chose the former. That is why participation in Social Security is mandatory. If it were voluntary, the system would collapse because no one would participate.
#143 Given the recent collapse in the stock market (thanks to those smart Wall Street boys operating without parental supervision), you should thank your lucky stars that you weren’t allowed to invest your share of SS in the stock market.
Kind of an unfortunate example you came up with there, pal.
But overall, I agree with you that it’s basically a pyramid scheme, and with people having fewer and fewer kids to pay into the system, it will eventually collapse.
#138/#139,
For you, Fido, it’s very simple. You either wish to save your wife’s life or 10 strangers’. Which is it?
For you, Confusion, you’ve already said you would do anything in your power. It is in your power to send those 10 husbands packing. Now we just need to know why?
I’d bet a shiny silver dollar anybody with a set of balls would actually answer this question if it were posed to them.
As I’ve said before, I’m not going away on this until you either see this through or I’m banned. Eventually, you’ll run out of excuses.
#145
Loser,
You are refusing to answer why you didn’t save my father. Why won’t you answer?
#120 LibertyLover:
‘Perhaps that is where Liberals get their definition of a “right?” From two wrongs?’
Nope. Three LEFTS!
#146, You are avoiding the question like all good liberals do.
Please answer the question.
WHY would you save your wife instead of 10 strangers?
#148, Loser,
Why didn’t you save my father?
#148, You are avoiding the question like all good liberals do with a weak attempt to change the subject.
Please answer the question.
WHY would you save your wife instead of 10 strangers?
The sad irony of course is all the “angry callers slamming grassley” are medicare recipients.