The Rude Pundit-A Final Word on the Health Care Summit: President Obama Calmly Fucks the Republicans

[meegbear]

A few things up front here: The Senate health care reform bill, as it stands, is not a good bill. The House bill is significantly better in actually achieving, you know, reform of health care. Most Democrats know that. The Senate bill exists in its current form only because of the hope of appeasing conservative Democrats and compromising with Republicans. Everyone in Congress knows that. The Republicans just pretend like they don't. A truly progressive bill is far, far closer to the House than the Senate. Yet many progressives are willing to vote for the Senate version because something has to happen in health care. Are you gonna give up on banning pre-existing conditions? Or dropping coverage? Ask every old time Fuller Brush salesman: You have to get your foot in the door before you can make the final sale.

Also, everyone knew that, ultimately, yesterday's Health Care Summit o' the Good Ship "Bipartisan" was going to fail to do anything. That wasn't the point of the exercise. No, the reason why Democrats and Republicans sat down at the Blair House was so that, at the end of the day, Republicans could not say that they didn't make their case. And if they do (as in complaining about how much President Obama talked), well, there's a few hours of video that prove the opposite.

What Obama did yesterday will either go down as the naive last gasps of hope and change on health care reform or as a stroke of genius, providing cover for Democrats and resuscitating an effort that will progress from the degraded baseline of the current bill. With what seems to be honest-to-Christ momentum towards reconciliation, the Rude Pundit believes the latter. He thinks that Barack Obama calmly, gently, even, fucked the Republicans in the ass yesterday, his well-lubed thrusts just enough to make them comfortable until the very end.

You have heard or will hear from yer awesome CNNMSNBCFox talking heads spewing forth about about Republicans having done well or Democrats having fucked it up. On Morning Starbucks with Joe today, Mark Halperin helpfully offered that the nigger was being uppity when Obama referred to the members of Congress by their first names. Halperin fanned himself frantically and said that Obama was being "disrespectful" and almost "bullying" towards a group of politicians who at various times have accused him of being an evil socialist and trying to destroy the nation by killing old people. Halperin, though, generally has sand in his vagina. Who wants to be the first to show a meeting where Bush did the same thing with no complaints from Mark Halperin?

You may see again and again the clip where Obama and the increasingly creepy John McCain got into it. Or how Obama smacked the fuck out of John Boehner. Or how Obama shut down Eric Kantor. Or how strangely rational Tom Coburn sounded, as the Rude Pundit noted yesterday. But what actually happened yesterday was that Obama kept highlighting how obsessed the Republicans were with process, with whether or not something passes through reconciliation, with the repetition of "start over," although they never really said what starting over would look like. They talked procedure and price. Meanwhile, the Democrats kept bringing it all back to flesh and blood, to stories of people dicked over by insurance companies, people who have no insurance, on and on with endless tales of suffering wrought by the injustice of there being haves and have-nots in this country when it comes to getting dentures or having surgery on a baby. It wasn't showy. It was even really boring at times since both sides stuck to well-worn talking points.

No, it's not a good bill. But it's a bill that will help many, many people. That's the bottom line. It will make insurance companies richer. It will please lobbyists and donors. But it will also help millions of people. That's the fucking trade-off. And the subconsciously subversive part of it is that, in a few years, it will show how ridiculous it is to not have nationalized health care (which is one reason the Rude Pundit thinks that some Republicans oppose it).

Back to the summit: Republicans may not have noticed how well they were being fucked until the end. That's when Obama told them, more or less, "I'm fucking you right now" and thrust his dick in hard. After having offered them every opportunity to say they agree with him on something, Republicans remained recalcitrant. So Obama said, "I've put on the table now some things that I didn't come in here saying I supported, but that I was willing to work with potential Republican sponsors on. I'd like the Republicans to do a little soul searching and find out are there some things that you'd be willing to embrace that get to this core problem of 30 million people without health insurance and dealing seriously with the preexisting condition issue." Of course, Republicans "soul searching" presupposes quite a bit.

That was the tease around the sphincter. It continued, "And the truth of the matter is, is that, politically speaking, there may not be any reason for Republicans to want to do anything. I mean, we can debate what our various constituencies think. I know that -- I don't need a poll to know that most of Republican voters are opposed to this bill and might be opposed to the kind of compromise we could craft. So it would be very hard for you politically to do this." Yeah, it's like they thought they'd get away with just the head.

But then, Obama concluded, "So the question that I'm going to ask myself and I ask of all of you is, is there enough serious effort that in a month's time or a few weeks' time or six weeks' time, we could actually resolve something. And if we can't, then I think we've got to go ahead and make some decisions and then that's what elections are for. We have honest disagreements about the vision for the country and we'll go ahead and test those out over the next several months till November."

That was the final, full-shaft fucking. The President called out the Republicans on their greatest hope, that the failure of health care reform will end the Democratic majority in Congress. Obama told them to bring it. And, most frighteningly for them, he fucked them calmly, like he knows he's right.

Of course, nothing is done until Democrats in Congress actually prove they're not willing to be the bitches of the minority. But, at least for that moment, the President showed who could do the fucking, too.

http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/

[cliffordu]

1. Heh.

That fucking Rude. Always the way with the words.

:rofl:

[NOLALady]

2. Niiiice!

[Beetwasher]

3. Yup Yup Yup

The rude pundit, a blogger after my own heart. Couldn't have said it better (or ruder).

[OHdem10]

4. Exactly!!

corrected sp

[Obama Fan]

5. insurance

Sir,you are right.The repubicans are paid by the innurance co.to stop healthcare.And they are paid by the banks as well.
Repubicans think that the rich,should be the only ones getting healthcare,not working slobs like us.
Healthcare is a right and they have no right to tell me that I can't have it.
And the GOP.needs to get over the fact that the PREZ. is balck they call him every name in the book.
But what they call him behind colsed doors in the N word,no one will say that to his face.
They know the brother in him will put them on the ground.O,they are on it any way,they are dirt.

[PassingFair]

9. Welcome to DU!

Can't believe that the name "Obama Fan" wasn't
already taken!!

:hi:

[madokie]

32. Yes its all about the color of his skin

sorry bastids that they are
I'm proud of the fact this whole white house hold voted for him not just once but twice. We all seen the man for what he is not where he came from or the color of his skin. In the end President Obama will win and be remember for eons as one if not the best president we've had. I promise.

And welcome to du

[Jester Messiah]

6. A lot of people on this site need to read this paragraph in particular:

"No, it's not a good bill. But it's a bill that will help many, many people. That's the bottom line. It will make insurance companies richer. It will please lobbyists and donors. But it will also help millions of people. That's the fucking trade-off. And the subconsciously subversive part of it is that, in a few years, it will show how ridiculous it is to not have nationalized health care (which is one reason the Rude Pundit thinks that some Republicans oppose it)."

Ideology be damned. The people who are hurting and dying Right Now can not afford to wait for the perfect bill to come along, even if such a bill had a chance in hell of passing, which it doesn't. We need to get what we can in place right now, then we can work on perfecting it as time goes on.

[ThomWV]

7. When did it become acceptable for the tradeoff to be visible graft?

We usually try to hide it.

[Jester Messiah]

8. When the alternative became worse than the graft.

This is the real world we're living in. If that is what it takes to alleviate the misery of millions, then it is an acceptable price to pay. For now.

[postulater]

10. I don't get it.

Is this guy saying getting the shaft in the sphincter is a bad thing?

[Mopar151]

12. Depends...

Close friend or Clydesdale? KY or coal slag?

[Scurrilous]

11. K & R

:thumbsup:

[Toucano]

13. UR for vile imagery. n-t

[Misanth]

18. Grow up, dude.

Seriously? :eyes:

[Toucano]

26. Get a sense of humor, dude.

Dude?

[starroute]

14. The uninsured and uninsurable are really the core issue

My best understanding is that the GOP proposals, such as they are, might modestly decrease the cost of health insurance for people who currently have health insurance -- but will do nothing at all for those who don't.

So that's what we're really fighting over at this point.

There are certainly other issues, such as the skyrocketing costs of premiums and the devastating impact on small businesses. But that's more diffuse and abstract.

The question the Republicans need to be asked over and over is, "What will your plan do for the people who don't have insurance and can't get insurance?" And I don't believe they have any answer.

[mlevans]

15. You are absolutely correct.

That is because they have no intention that those without insurance should ever get any. They seem to have the notion that those who have none and can't get any are those who are not gainfully employed. Such may at some point in time have been the case, but it surely is not so now.

[ThomWV]

17. No, it is the desire to segregate the market into "insurable" and "uninsurable" factions

Because there isn't a thing in the world stopping everyone from being tossed into one pool, and then to equally share costs between us - which of course would be called single payer if paid for it out of tax dollars.

What they are trying to do in every instance is segregate the market for increased profit. They are trying to limit, not expand, the pools.

[wiggs]

20. But another core issue is that something like 70% of bankruptcies are (were)

medical-related...and HALF OF THEM ACTUALLY WERE INSURED. So what kind of insurance is at least as important as who is insured.

In the president's example of having "show" car insurance that did nothing for him when he actually needed it as a youth, Obama made the point that the kind of insurance that is provided has to be worthwhile...not ending up in bankruptcies or in avoidance of using the health care system.

[truedelphi]

46. Yep, he keeps saying what the Health Care "Reform" efforts must do

But the thing is, the friggin' Senate Bill is avoiding most of the reforms that would help most people.

Many of the uninsured are uninsured because the pre-existing ban keeps them out of insurance. Nothing in the Senate Bill changes that.

And reconciliation cannot touch the big aspects, it can only noodle around a bit and pull out the advantages that Landreau got for LA and that Nelson got for NE.

At least, that was what was being pointed out on the Olbermann show late last week.

I don't want any bill that can mandate we buy such a shitty product from this awful group of Rat bastard Parasites (also known as Big Insurers) whose money is keeping everyone in the Senate, except for Sanders of VT, and is keeping the President under their control.

[JDPriestly]

35. Actually, the core issue is that for-profit companies should not be

taking a portion of our health care dollars. For-profit companies add absolutely nothing to the provision of health care in America.

Doctors take an oath to do no harm. For-profit companies do not.

If Congress is afraid to take for-profit companies our of the provision of health care then it should, by law, impose a fiduciary duty on them to their subscribing patients. That way, a patient could sue the insurance company if the insurance company does not pay for the services that the patient needs.

I can understand tort reform to reduce damages in litigation when it comes to the doctors and nurses, but I believe that same tort reform should increase the risk that insurance companies take if they don't follow the law or don't pay for needed services.

This bill is not just a bad bill. It is a horrible bill. It will cause more problems than it solves. That's because the for-profit insurance industry is perverse. It does not care about people at all.

[change_notfinetuning]

37. You nailed it. The question is how to get average Americans to see this. n/t

[truedelphi]

47. One reason that we have tort lawyers running around suing

Doctors and nurses for high settlements is that in this nation, whatever you need to pay in terms of health care comes out of your pocket. Unless you are fabulously insured. Many insurance policies have caps on how much help yuou get aand once an inusured family goes over that limit, the family is out of luck.

So although it may look like the parents of the kid who got 13 million to pay for the child's expenses after somehting went wrong during an operation made out like bandits, but if the child needs health attendants 24/7 for the duration of the child's lifetime (with a lifetime expaectancy of mid sixties or seventies) the huge settlement might not even last for all those long years.

In nations that do not have these types of tort cases, there is Universal Single Payer HC so the parents of such an injured child know their child will always be getting the help that is needed.

But the Repugs say "Oh they don't have these tort cases in Europe, so we shouldn't have these tort cases here," - without mentioning the reason why it is not needed there.

[customerserviceguy]

16. Well, the Rude Pundit surely has his own way of putting things..

but he confirms what I've been saying, this whole thing is a way to transfer the immenent failure of HCR to the Repukes. There might have been a tiny chance to turn the public around on this, but a seven hour talkathon just probably isn't going to do it.

What remains to be seen is if this blame shift will be seen (as many here believe it will) as a wake-up call for people in red states and districts, or a trophy on the wall for Rethug politicians to show them, and win their votes by their efforts to stop HCR.

[twitomy]

21. If anyone thinks the failure of HCR in the form as it is now;

with the insurance payoffs and unconstitutional mandatory coverage is going to result in a punishment for the Republicans this Novemeber is in lala land. Fact is, the public wants HCR, but not this pile of shit. The Dems are looking at losing in November if this version HCR fails, or losing even bigger if it passes.

[customerserviceguy]

40. I'm in complete agreement

In fact, I welcome the failure of HCR as it exists, or as it will be further watered down to be. We get Blue Dogs defeated in November, and we get a chance to replace the Tea Partiers who replace them with solid progressives in 2012, when President Obama is on the ballot again.

[twitomy]

41. Yikes someone who agrees with me!

Thats dangerous here! The Dems have so botched an awesome shot at putting a GOOD HCR deal together that the voters are now pissed at them, egged on by the Repubs. What your hoping happens is a longshot IMO; not that it wouldnt be good, But we would have to have witnessed the swing voters going from pissed at Repubs in 08 to pissed at dems in 10, Then back to pissed at repubs again at 12. We are about half way there, which in itself is quite a feat (congrats dems!), to see yet another major swing in such a short time I think would be even more crazy..but nothing should surprise me these days I guess..

[customerserviceguy]

42. As you've correctly observed

our Democratic representatives have managed to go from heroes to zeroes in about a year, and are looking at some serious retirement issues in about eight months. I personally feel it's too late to stop this from happening.

But -- the cycle always comes around. A few teabaggers get elected, make some speeches that make Jim Bunning look like a friend of the common man, and we get some real progressives who don't have to fight off a Blue Dog in a primary. When Barack Obama is at the top of the ticket, the folks who showed up to elect him in '08 (but otherwise really don't care to bother to vote) will show up again, and in an exercise of simplicity will vote a straight Democratic ticket.

[twitomy]

43. 10-4! NT

[truedelphi]

48. How about a nice late night

:toast:

[spanone]

19. chuckie todd said the reTHUGS were 10 times more prepared than dems...go tell chuck

[ThisThreadIsSatire]

22. Bravo! nt

[MindandSoul]

23. Well. . .not sure I agree with all the verbage. . . but I sure agree with the whole!!!

[icee]

24. I'm not 100% sure what Rude Pundit said this time. Was this some

kind of disguised victory? It looked to me like a stalemate.

[Krashkopf]

25. I won't believe it until I see "the cum shot" . . .

Obama's gotta pull out and shoot a big load of PUBLIC OPTION all over the Republicans' collective face.

[live love laugh]

27. "...his well-lubed thrusts..." Bwaaahahaaaaa TRP has a way with profanity. nt

[TransitJohn]

28. I love the rude one.

He is a bit of an Obama cheerleader, but he does decent analysis.

[kenny blankenship]

29. Someone should adjust his aim: the ppl who need a good hard shag are in THIS party

[redqueen]

34. No, in his analogy there getting fucked is a bad thing.

It's about dominance and subjugation. I really fucking hate that kind of framing... but do I agree with his assessment.

[geckosfeet]

30. The health insurance lobby and their clients are doing the fucking

[madokie]

31. Couldn't agree more

[AllyCat]

33. I so hope TRP is right. I want this to be the chess move everyone has talked about

I just wish the move was for a stronger bill. Why try to float this compromise. Lets float what we want.

[change_notfinetuning]

36. IMO, the president didn't do shit except give a performance worthy of an

Oscar. I'll give him that. I hate Republicans as much as anyone, and he sure showed how he can make them look like the stupid, obstructionist, heartless assholes that they are. But that isn't the same as giving your best effort to bring about real health care reform, not deform.

This whole charade was just like watching wrestling. There's the good guys (Dems) and the bad guys (Reps) who are all in on the fix, but put on a good show. The show is scripted by the owners and benefits the owners (the health industrial complex) every bit as much as is the case with the McMahons and WW+E, F, or whatever letter or name they're using now. That's great for wrestling, the purpose of which is entertainment. Not so good for health care. We don't go for blood tests, a pap smear, a prostate exam, a colonoscopy, or surgery for entertainment. We go to prevent illness/disease, to maintain our quality of life, or to stay alive by cheating Death through medical miracles.

It is said, "If you save a life, you save the world." I've even heard President Obama say that. I think we can all agree that wrestling will never save the world. I wish we could all agree that we deserve better from our "leaders" than that talk-wrestling extravaganza.

[icee]

38. Excellent. I agree. Obama is a great talker.

[truedelphi]

45. Your post is one that represents my view completely.

As Che Guevara put it, a person like Obama is a "negotiated solution." In the Fifties and sixties and seventies, the CIA would look for someone who was "warm and fuzzy," and have them run for office, whenever the tyrannical lunatic was falling out of favor and his lunacy might insprie people to get out in the streets and get some real true change.

[DisgustedInMN]

39. Here's the bottom line:

"Of course, nothing is done until Democrats in Congress actually prove they're not willing to be the bitches of the minority."

I'll believe it when I see it.

[bjjblackbelt]

44. ...

As usual, talking the talk. All are puppets held by corporate strings.

[Political Heretic]

49. Why do people like Rude Pundit?

I can think of at least ten different places that posted blogs or op-eds saying that the President delivered a master-stroke with the summit and is beating the Republicans handily on health care - and they are better written.

So is it truly just because he's an obscene adolescent?