March 21st, 2010
by Jonathan Zasloff
Maybe we have a day or so to celebrate. Maybe.
John Kyl has already promised to try to kill the reconciliation bill with endless amendments.
John Cornyn has telegraphed the GOP strategy for November. Try to kill the bill in crib:
“The question you’re going to see Republicans asking in November is, ‘Have your health insurance costs gone down?’ ” Mr. Cornyn said. “And I think the answer to that is going to be no.”
Ross Douthat claims that unless the health care bill satisfies the most optimistic projections, then it will show the bankruptcy of liberalism and our “rendezvous with a bankrupt, Californian future” (conveniently ignoring conservatives’ responsibility for the Californian present).
Thomas Donahue of the US Chamber of Commerce pledges to to keep opposing the health care measure “through all available avenues — regulatory, legislative, legal and political.”
The forces of plutocracy are not giving up, and it is easy for them. When you represent the interests of the wealthy and powerful, you tend to have access to a lot of wealth and power.
By all means, let’s celebrate, and as Mark suggests, say a “Shehechianu” for this moment. And then: back into the trenches.
Posted: Sunday, March 21st, 2010 at
11:15 pm
No Comments »
March 21st, 2010
by Michael O'Hare
After the SOU, I dinged Obama severely for non-feasance, combining hot air and too much caution. Tonight’s passage of the Senate Health Care Bill, never mind the unfinished business of the amendments, goes a long way to redeeming his administration; it’s a wonderful accomplishment and it doesn’t do to fuss now about how it could have been even better.
I don’t take back a word of what I said back then, because the presidency since January has been a completely different operation; he is doing exactly what I (and others) said he should do and it’s working. I bet he, and his inner circle of advisors, have learned a lot about stepping up and taking charge, and we can look forward to a spring and summer of very different, and a lot less disappointing, Obamocracy before the midterms.
But let us now especially praise Nancy Pelosi, with whipped cream and a cherry on top, whose repeated reelection proves people in the Bay Area are not hopelessly nuts, and who is so good at what she does, including not just thinking and strategy but also putting steel in the backbone of the president and lots of others, men and women, that it’s just a delight to watch. She and Joan of Arc, 120 years from now of course, will have a great time in the ladies’ lounge of heaven telling war stories and exchanging tricks to get men in charge to mount their damn horses and lead.
What an excellent day of wallowing in political process and punditry it has been.
Posted: Sunday, March 21st, 2010 at
9:29 pm
2 Comments »
March 21st, 2010
by Mark Kleiman
The election of Barack Obama marked the ultimate success of the Voting Rights Act. By - at last! – moving health care reform into law, Obama has put the capstone on the Great Society. The self-satisfied chuckle I’m hearing in the background sounds a lot like Lyndon Johnson’s.
Posted: Sunday, March 21st, 2010 at
9:28 pm
No Comments »
March 21st, 2010
by Mark Kleiman
As Bart Stupak got up to defend the health care bill from a Republican motion to recommit based on abortion concerns, some cowardly thug on the Republican side shouted “Baby-killer!” at him. I was hoping that the passage of health care reform would cause the Republicans to decompensate. Looks as if I might get my wish.
Posted: Sunday, March 21st, 2010 at
8:14 pm
2 Comments »
March 21st, 2010
by Mark Kleiman
That’s the final roll-call on health-care reform.
Blessed are You, HaShem our God,
Ruler of the Universe,
who has granted us life,
sustained us,
and brought us forth to this season.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted: Sunday, March 21st, 2010 at
7:56 pm
2 Comments »
March 21st, 2010
by Mark Kleiman
The Democrats will win the vote tonight, but the Republicans won the debate. Their speeches were uniformly mendacious, but they were logical in form (though not in substance) and conveyed apparently sincere fears about the consequences of passing the bill. The Democrats rarely challenged the untruths, and their speeches were about as exciting as laundry lists, and about as passionately delivered. I was waiting for some Democrat to say:
Let me tell you what the opponents of this bill are voting for: for unrestrained increases in health insurance premiums, for leaving open the “doughnut hole” in seniors’ prescription drug coverage, for burdening American employers with health-care costs their foreign competitors never face, for allowing insurers to cancel insurance when someone gets an expensive disease, for threatening anyone who loses his job – including those who lose their jobs because they get sick – with loss of health insurance, for lifetime coverage caps that threaten even those with health insurance with bankruptcy, for denying health coverage to those with pre-existing conditions, and – finally – for continuing to allow banks to rip off tens of billions of dollars from the student loan program. If Members want to go home and explain that to their constituents, I wish them the best of luck. But I for one cannot find it in my conscience to support the perpetuation of a broken system.
So far, no such luck.
Posted: Sunday, March 21st, 2010 at
6:59 pm
4 Comments »
March 21st, 2010
by Mark Kleiman
Rep. (or is it The Rev.?) Steve King of Iowa says the House shouldn’t vote on health care reform on a Sunday “Out of respect for God.”
Since Mr. King presumably calls himself a Christian, let’s take a look at the views on this question of the man Christians believe to have been God:
And he entered again into the synagogue; and there was a man there which had a withered hand. And they watched him, whether he would heal him on the sabbath day; that they might accuse him.
And he saith unto the man which had the withered hand, Stand forth. And he saith unto them, Is it lawful to do good on the sabbath days, or to do evil? to save life, or to kill?
But they held their peace.
I might commend the same course of action to Mr. King, and to Glenn Beck.
Posted: Sunday, March 21st, 2010 at
2:24 pm
6 Comments »
March 21st, 2010
by Mark Kleiman
Bart Stupak had a bunch of imaginary objections to health care reform.
Barack Obama just promised to keep them imaginary.
The good guys win.
Posted: Sunday, March 21st, 2010 at
1:55 pm
6 Comments »
March 21st, 2010
by Mark Kleiman
One day the parts of the body argued about who ought to be the boss.
The brain said, “I do the thinking around here, so I should be in charge.”
The hands said, “We do all the work around here, so we ought to be in charge.”
The feet said, “If we didn’t carry the body around, nothing cold get done, so we ought to be in charge.”
Every part of the body made its claim, until finally the rectum piped up, “I want to be in charge!”
All the others, who couldn’t agree among themselves, still laughed at the rectum’s claim. “Who ever heard of putting an anus in charge of anything?” said the brain. “Ewww, ick!” said the nose.
The rectum’s feelings were hurt. So it decided to shut down and do no more work. Then the brain became dull and vague, the hands became clumsy, the feet began to stumble.
All the other body parts apologized to the rectum, but refused to open up unless it would put in charge of the whole body. Eventually, they all agreed.
And the moral of the story: Read the rest of this entry »
Posted: Sunday, March 21st, 2010 at
7:40 am
12 Comments »
March 20th, 2010
by Michael O'Hare
The pope’s letter to the Irish continues the church’s long-time strategy of attending to the welfare (and self-regard) of church officials, from abusive priests up. An apology with no action in this context and for offenses this vile is about making the apologizer feel better about himself, not about the victims, just as keeping the abuse secret and passing predatory priests from parish to parish with a dose of prayer and self-reflection is about being able to pretend that they aren’t evil. As long as it goes on in that mode the church will continue to rot away from within, especially as long as church policy is to instruct priests and higherups to commit misprision of felony.
Maybe the problem is theological: if what really matters is the status of immortal souls after death, the victims are not at any special risk there and the abusers and their enablers are in good shape if they stay current with their confessions, which is more likely if they are comforted in the bosom of the church than if they are given to the cruel ministry of a penitentiary. I don’t recall anyone putting that theory forward, but there it is. If your principal reality is something no-one has ever checked out or reported back from, all sorts of sick stuff is possible.
Still, the church exists in our world, and what most surprises me about the whole ghastly history to this point is how the princes of a two-millenium-old and generally pretty successful enterprise could go on screwing up so badly. This cancer has popped up sequentially in at least five countries; wouldn’t someone, after the American cases were revealed and their toxicity demonstrated, wonder if there wasn’t something to get ahead of in other places? How are the Vatican higher-ups thinking about the dog that hasn’t barked yet in Italy, France, Spain…that it’s a northern, Germanic/Celtic, thing and it doesn’t happen in Latin countries? Or are they thinking that it’s a matter of practice, learning to more effectively suppress the facts in places where they haven’t burst forth yet [good luck with that one]?
Or are they just irrational, inept, and crazy with fear and (I hope for their sakes), guilt?
Posted: Saturday, March 20th, 2010 at
10:45 pm
13 Comments »
Subscribe to Excerpts
Subscribe by Email
