Baggage Handling: Obama leaves behind unfinished business as he leaves for Asia
ABC News’ Rick Klein reports: What makes this trip different from all other trips?
There's the time zones … the temperature swings … the nagging sense that this trip doesn't come with a handy checklist of administration deliverables …
Mostly, though, this one stands out because President Obama's most important work is staying behind while he's in Asia over the next week.
The health care bill still needs his work — and some healing inside the Democratic Party that may be beyond his abilities.
Plus, the odd mix of public signals and private discussions continues on Afghanistan — with the consumption of more time raising the stakes of the president's decision, and giving the stakeholders more time to claim their ground.
The White House is signaling deep engagement and deliberation in what's going to be a tough sell, at home and abroad. In that vein, this might be a little going-away present:
"President Barack Obama won't accept any of the Afghanistan war options before him without changes, a senior administration official said, as concerns soar over the ability of the Afghan government to secure its own country one day," the AP's Ben Feller and Anne Gearan report.
"In Wednesday's pivotal war council meeting, Obama wasn't satisfied with any of the Afghanistan war options presented by his national security team, one official said. The president instead pushed for revisions to clarify how and when U.S. troops would turn over responsibility to the Afghan government. In turn, that could change the dynamic of both how many additional troops are sent to Afghanistan and what the timeline would be for their presence in the war zone."
Yes, he still has questions. And another voice may have new answers:
"The United States ambassador to Afghanistan, who once served as the top American military commander there, has expressed in writing his reservations about deploying additional troops to the country, three senior American officials said Wednesday," Elisabeth Bumiller and Mark Landler report in The New York Times.
"The position of the ambassador, Karl W. Eikenberry, a retired lieutenant general, puts him in stark opposition to the current American and NATO commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, who has asked for 40,000 more troops," they write. (Are we getting a glimpse at a new point person for a new strategy — albeit one who's been there before?)
The Los Angeles Times' Paul Richter: "Several senior civilian officials, including Vice President Joe Biden and White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, have privately expressed reservations about a further troop buildup. But few senior military officials have lined up among the doubters, giving Eikenberry's reported statement special impact."
"Eikenberry's last-minute interventions have highlighted the nagging undercurrent of the policy discussion: the U.S. dependence on a partnership with a Karzai government whose incompetence and corruption is a universal concern within the administration," The Washington Post's Greg Jaffe, Scott Wilson and Karen DeYoung report.
Get the message yet that the president wants a way out? "Obama asked his advisers how long it would take to implement the various options and insisted that an enhanced mission be conducted in the swiftest way possible, according to an administration official," Ken Bazinet reports in the New York Daily News.
Well-timed advice: "You take your time and you figure it out. You're the commander-in-chief and this is what you were elected for," Colin Powell told Roland Martin on the Tom Joyner Morning Show.
Another big factor — since this all doesn't work without trust: "President Barack Obama expressed fresh doubts about the credibility of Afghanistan's government in high-level discussions Wednesday over what troops to send there," Peter Spiegel reports in The Wall Street Journal. "According to officials familiar with the effort, James Jones, the White House national security adviser, is expected to visit Pakistan this week to discuss U.S. deliberations over troop levels. Mr. Eikenberry's concerns come late in the process, and it is unclear how they will ultimately affect Mr. Obama's decision making."
Skepticism runs both ways: "The Obama administration plans to send hundreds more American advisers as part of a so-called civilian surge, increasingly seen in Washington as perhaps as important as the pending decision about whether to send more troops," The Boston Globe's Farah Stockman reports. "But Afghan officials have begun to push back, complaining the Americans are often overpaid, underqualified, and unfamiliar with the culture of the country. Even the best, most qualified advisers can sow mistrust because they answer to the US government or firms rather than to Afghan officials."
Critical for the domestic political landscape: "Republican leaders are gearing up to [criticize] Obama's eventual decision on the way forward in Afghanistan even if it falls modestly short of sending an additional 40,000 troops, a senior GOP aide says," per Greg Sargent, at The Plum Line blog. "But there's an interesting caveat, one that underscores the political challenges the GOP will face as they respond to Obama's decision: What if he decides to send less than 40,000 troops, but the decision is endorsed by the commanding officer, General Stanley McChrystal?"
Setting the tone: "This is like a slow-motion train wreck, watching this decision-making process, and it is really is having a debilitating effect, I think, on troop morale in Afghanistan," former UN Ambassador John Bolton told Fox News' Greta Van Susteren.
Toll of war: "War and tragedy are putting President Obama through the most wrenching period of his young administration," Joel Achenbach writes in The Washington Post. "Visibly thinner, admittedly skipping meals, he is learning every day the challenges of a wartime presidency. Health-care reform, climate-change legislation, the broken economy — all are cerebral exercises compared with the grim responsibility of being the commander in chief."
Great ti me to skip town. ABC's Karen Travers and Yunji de Nies raise the curtain: "President Obama departs today on a four-country, weeklong tour of Asia, his first trip to the region as president. But unlike previous presidential trips overseas this year, it is unlikely Obama will return home with any substantial agreements on the key issues facing him on the trip: climate change, North Korea's nuclear ambitions and a free trade agreement with South Korea."
The president's sked, per ABC's Sunlen Miller: "Before he leaves, the president will make a short statement about the economy in the Diplomatic Room. En route to Tokyo, Air Force One will make a few hour stop in Anchorage, Alaska. The president will meet with troops and give a short speech at Elmendorf Air Force base," she writes.
"The president's visit to Alaska has been a long time coming. During the campaign he'd often joke that the one state that he hadn't visited was Alaska, pausing for the imminent chuckles from the audience no doubt in reference to the former governor of Alaska and 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin."
The trip runs the risk of seeming ill-timed — given the pressing issues on the domestic and world agendas that all demand some presidential attention: "If Obama faces any risk, it's the domestic backlash that could result if American voters feel he is spending too much time abroad while job losses mount back home," Peter Nicholas reports in the Chicago Tribune.
And is there room for this? (Yes.) "One country Obama has not seen yet is Afghanistan. It's not on the official schedule, but don't be shocked if the president takes a detour after leaving South Korea on Nov. 19 and drops in to visit the troops," Nicholas writes.
A new world image — and a new level of travel. CBS' Mark Knoller: "Even before President Obama sets foot on Air Force One tomorrow to begin a 9-day trip to Asia, he has traveled to more countries in his first year in office than any of his predecessors. Since taking office, he has made 7 foreign trips and visited 16 countries, 3 of them twice. The Asia trip – which takes him to Japan, Singapore, China and South Korea – will bring his total to 8 foreign trips and 20 countries."
Back to health care — that weekend deal looks worse for the wear with every passing day.
How much fun does this sound like? "White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, senior advisor Valerie Jarrett and Domestic Policy Council director Melody Barnes, health care reform czar Nancy-ann DeParle and other White House officials met with a dozen officials from liberal women's and abortion right's groups this afternoon where they had a ‘frank exchange,' in the words of one attendee," ABC's Jake Tapper reports.
Where's the civil war now? "A grim reality sits behind the joyful press statements from Washington Democrats. To secure passage of health care legislation in the House, the party chose a course that risks the well-being of millions of women for generations to come," Kate Michelman and Frances Kissling write in a New York Times op-ed. "Political calculation aside, the House Democrats reinforced the principle that a minority view on the morality of abortion can determine reproductive health policy for American women."
"I don't think we consider Nancy Pelosi an anti-choice Democrat, but we're extremely disappointed that this went to the floor," National Organization for Women vice president Erin Matson said on ABCNews.com's "Top Line" Wednesday.
(And will a final bill that includes the Stupak amendment be part of NOW's legislative "scoring"? "Well, absolutely," Matson said.)
Getting real: "What happens now? Democratic supporters of abortion rights need to accept that their House majority depends on a large cadre of antiabortion colleagues. They can denounce that reality or they can learn to live with it," E.J. Dionne Jr. writes in his column.
New from the DNC — the latest in the "call 'em out" series, with a Web video featuring the best (and worst) from House Republicans on health care. (Everything you need to see from CSPAN in two and a half minutes.)
New storyline: "Barack Obama ran for president on a promise of saving the typical family $2,500 a year in lower health care premiums. But that was then," Politico's Carrie Budoff Brown reports. "No one in the White House is making such a pledge now."
Wait — the Senate bill is still changing? "Majority Leader Harry Reid is considering a plan for higher payroll taxes on the upper-income earners to help finance health care legislation he intends to introduce in the Senate in the next several days, numerous Democratic officials said Wednesday," the AP's David Espo reports.
Just a slice of what Reid is going through: "He has complained to colleagues that the White House has pressured him to lean on the CBO to speed its cost estimates of the measure — something that could easily be seen as exerting improper influence on the CBO's calculations, which are supposed to be free of political pressure," Time's Karen Tumulty reports. "And he has been pleading with liberal interest groups to ease up on Senator Joe Lieberman — an independent whom Reid counts as part of his 60-member caucus — over Lieberman's public declaration that he will filibuster any bill that contains a public option."
The Wall Street Journal's Naftali Bendavid and Louise Radnofsky track the ad spending: "The fight over the future of the U.S. health-care system is heading outside the Beltway this week, as groups on all sides take advantage of Congress's Veterans Day recess to put pressure on lawmakers."
A timeline on "don't ask, don't tell" repeal? Happening in 2010, says Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass.: "Military issues are always done as part of the overall authorization bill," Frank said, according to Kerry Eleveld of The Advocate. "'Don't ask, don't tell' was always going to be part of the military authorization."
"Both the White House and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) back the strategy of using the defense bill to change policy on gays in the military, an aide to Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) told The Hill on Wednesday," The Hill's Eric Zimmerman reports.
It begins: "Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty will unofficially launch the New Hampshire 2012 presidential campaign when he visits the first-in-the-nation primary state in December," the Union Leader's John DiStaso reports. "UnionLeader.com has learned the Republican will be the keynote speaker at a fund-raiser on for the Republican Senate Majority Committee PAC on Dec. 16 at the Courtyard By Marriott Hotel in Concord."
Mike Dennehy, a former McCain adviser who now advisers New Hampshire state Senate Republicans, to ABC's Teddy Davis: "Tim Pawlenty was really tops on their list to be the first person this cycle to raise money for them because he is a new, fresh face, he just started a political committee, and he has been traveling around to different states."
Teeing up Palin week: "We talked about everything," Oprah Winfrey said of her interview with former Gov. Sarah Palin, set to air Monday.
Palin, on Facebook: "Willow, Piper, and I are in Chicago and just wanted to let you know that I had a great conversation with Oprah today. We taped the show for Monday, November 16th, and enjoyed it so much that we went way over on time. The rest will air on Oprah.com. Oprah was very hospitable and gracious, and her audience was full of warm, energized and (no doubt) curious viewers." (No doubt.)
On the Thursday radar screen: "Nearly 10 months after leaving office, former President George W. Bush plans to emerge from self-imposed political hibernation on Thursday as he starts a new public policy institute to promote some of the domestic and international priorities of his presidency," Peter Baker writes from Dallas for The New York Times. "In a speech at Southern Methodist University, home of his future library and museum, the former president will kick off the new George W. Bush Institute as a forum for study and advocacy in four main areas: education, global health, human freedom and economic growth. Advisers said he hoped his institute would be more focused on producing results than many research organizations are."
Thursday and Friday, at the Newseum: The Bloomberg Washington Summit. Thursday's interviews include Gen. David Petraeus; Ken Feinberg; Richard Trumka, Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I.; T. Boone Pickens; Joel I. Klein; Shaun Donovan; Peter Orszag; Neil Barofsky; Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md.; and Alex Castellanos.
The Kicker:
"While we don't agree on everything, of course she is welcome in the party. … That's what I should have said." — Gov. Tim Pawlenty, to The Washington Post's Dan Balz, after criticizing Sen. Olympia Snowe's moderate politics last week.
"Some leaders in the media, politics and business have been urging me to go beyond my role here at CNN and engage in constructive problem-solving." — Lou Dobbs, leaving CNN, but probably not going all that far.
For up-to-the-minute political updates check out The Note's blog . . . all day every day:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/
Intern for the ABC News Political Unit:
The ABC News Political Unit is now seeking full-time spring 2010 interns in Washington, D.C.
The paid internship begins Monday, Jan. 4, 2010, and runs through Friday, June 4, 2010.
Political Unit interns attend political events and contribute to stories for the politics page of ABCNews.com. They also help ABC News by conducting research, maintaining our calendar of upcoming political events, and posting stories to ABCNews.com.
In order to apply, you MUST be either a graduate student or an undergraduate student who has completed his or her first year of college. The internship is NOT open to recent graduates.
You also must be able to work eight hours per day, Monday through Friday. Interns will be paid $8.50/hour.
If you write well, follow politics closely, and have some familiarity with web publishing, send a cover letter and resume to Teddy Davis, ABC News' Deputy Political Director, at teddy.davis@abc.com, by Sunday, Nov. 22, 2009, with the subject line: "INTERN" in all caps.
Please indicate in both your cover letter and the body of your email your student status and the specific dates and hours of your availability.
Email
Can Mitt Romney Win Conservatives Back?
Possible Contraception Compromise in D.C.
This President is systematically ruining America. The stimulus money is a joke – jobs to build roads, construct schools, etc and then what!? They are again out of a job! Small business is the answer but this administration is so bent on POWER they cannot do Economics 101! Now they want us to fund a healthcare bill that will further put all Americans in debt to Washington. 18% of our economy and they expect us to just say “Sure, why not.” We can only pray that the Senate has more brains and intelligence than the House! Increments would be great – one thing at a time. Pay for it and then move on! Can they possibly understand this? Probably not so we are doomed!
Posted by: M. Smith | November 12, 2009, 8:59 am 8:59 am
The president is not defined by what the media tells us to think of him. There is no “baggage” as he makes another successful foreign trip…
Posted by: matt | November 12, 2009, 9:19 am 9:19 am
Obama’s priorities have been very screwed up, for some time.
Posted by: Rick McDaniel | November 12, 2009, 9:21 am 9:21 am
Is it 2012 yet??? We need a change.
Posted by: wis134 | November 12, 2009, 9:26 am 9:26 am
What a piece of crap we have for a president.
Posted by: JJJ | November 12, 2009, 9:27 am 9:27 am
JJJ
Oh you mean Bush? I totally agree he was a piece of crap a big one oh and Cheney too!
Posted by: Angie in PA | November 12, 2009, 9:37 am 9:37 am
What has he accomplished???? Just name it, we are waiting.
Posted by: sammy | November 12, 2009, 9:39 am 9:39 am
I just watched the BO speak on the economy. He said he saved or created 1,000,000 jobs but unemployment continues to grow. He doesn’t want more jobs because if everybody is working health care reform isn’t that pressing.
Posted by: JJJ | November 12, 2009, 9:49 am 9:49 am
excuse me… but why isnt the ECONOMY the focus????? I know the reason, I just want to hear the liberals attempt to defend this socialists list of priorities versus doing something ANYTHING for the country
Posted by: realman1963` | November 12, 2009, 9:51 am 9:51 am
angie: good comeback. Name one thing this president has accomplished. Oh he saved 1 million jobs. I went on a diet and I lost or didn’t gain 40 lbs. so I’m successful in your world.
Posted by: JJJ | November 12, 2009, 9:51 am 9:51 am
Polosi in an interview said that in this health bill if you do not buy health care you will go to jail!! And that that was a fair trade. How are people who are border line welfare going to buy a program??? Polosi and Reid are liars
Posted by: Jim Rod | November 12, 2009, 9:54 am 9:54 am
SAMMY
He saved the Economy from going off the Cliff! he has saved some jobs Unemployment is slowing, Foreclouseres are down, and slowly we are coming out of the recession. The man has not even been President for a year yet and giving what he walked into I think hes done a great job! Things take time.
Posted by: Angie in PA | November 12, 2009, 9:55 am 9:55 am
JJJ
Things take time learn to have Patience It took Bush 8 years to wreck havoc on this country at least give this President some time like I said its not perfect but things are better or getting better then what they were!
Posted by: Angie in PA | November 12, 2009, 10:00 am 10:00 am
I went on a diet to lose or not gain 50lbs and I gained 5lbs. but I think i’m successful. angie, we spent 800 billion dollars that he pushed through and we have gone down ever since. good luck with that hopey changey thing.
Posted by: JJJ | November 12, 2009, 10:01 am 10:01 am
Reid wants to raise our payroll taxes to pay for health care??? I thought this was a plan that paid for its self??? These guys are liars. Cant we impeach some of these people? Oh no we cant. they control it all. I am tired of being taxed. Next we will be taxed for each flush of the toilet.
Posted by: Jim Rod | November 12, 2009, 10:01 am 10:01 am
angie ; mortgage applications are the lowest in 9 years. good luck with that hopey changey thing
Posted by: JJJ | November 12, 2009, 10:05 am 10:05 am
JJJ
Do you know what could of happen if we didnt have the Stimulus? how can you say we have gone down? have you seen the stock market latley? And slowly Unemployment is coming down, Home sales are on the rise like I said its not perfect but there are some good signs.
Posted by: Angie in PA | November 12, 2009, 10:05 am 10:05 am
one of the main reason stocks are up is because companies have higher profits becasue of all the layoffs and making the rest of the workers work harder.
Posted by: JJJ | November 12, 2009, 10:08 am 10:08 am
Lets see—
Bush and Cheney Waffled on Afghanistan- Let Bin Laden escape – and dithered as the Taliban regrouped –All the while they profiteering from their phony war for Corporate Profit in Iraq.Now all the Reich wing nut jobs can do is criticize Obama-While the Party of no(Who spent like drunken sailors under Bush) suddenly claim fiscal responsibility.Its twobad The GOP ran the Ship of State into economic collapse — Theonly thing they want to spend money on is War and Tax cuts for the upper 3%. Obama they will criticize no matter which way he turns yet they accept no responsibility for the Current state of things–
— GOP —
Got Our Payola!!!
Posted by: brian | November 12, 2009, 10:20 am 10:20 am
One Week, Four Countries, – let’s hope that the Air Force One will loose some of the President’s baggage …. so he will get a fresh start at home. Otherwise, there are no reasons to go. Relationship with Asia is not a priority when we run 10.2% unemployment. Oh, well, he will give four more speeches like: “People of , we will not let you down!” The only intriguing question for the ABC will what Michelle will be wearing?
Posted by: H1N1hysteria | November 12, 2009, 10:32 am 10:32 am
Very little coverage, Rick to the fact that Lou Dobbs is “leaving” sounds more like a rapid firing to me, i see him as Sarah Palins running mate….question tho- is he qualified??/has to have shot a moose or wolf, clubbed some baby seals-or simularly proved himself worthy-like can he see Russia from his toliet seat…..
Posted by: cowgirl | November 12, 2009, 10:35 am 10:35 am
You republicans are always saying you don’t want government in our lives, and yet you spend all your time complaining-they have not saved us..so which is it???
Posted by: cowgirl | November 12, 2009, 10:41 am 10:41 am
Angie in PA –”He saved the Economy from going off the Cliff! he has saved some jobs Unemployment is slowing, Foreclouseres are down, and slowly we are coming out of the recession.” —
Actually no he hasn’t – if you haven’t noticed, we are still heading over the cliff. Unemployment is NOT slowing 10.2% and rising and now teh WH says that it will probably climb to over 11% and stay that way for 2 to 3 years (thats the administration’s own estimates)IF you use the U-6 figures which the media loved to use on Bush but somehow refuse to even mention with Obama, the unemployment rate is at a 53 year high of @18.5%. Foreclosures are actually not down and if you remove the inflated figures injected into the GDP by the cash for clunkers and Mortgage tax incentive programs (which were both temporary) then the GDP was only 1.1% and not actually 3.5%. In other words, the recession is NOT easing..Its getting worse.
As for your other post:
“It took Bush 8 years to wreck havoc on this country at least give this President some time”.
Between the beginning of the Bush presidency and 9/11, the country lost 6.8 million jobs (a side affect of Clinton’s tax policies that became reality when the dot com industry collapsed) Bush cut taxes and unemployment went from 7.5% to below 5% within 12 months. Obama spent 800 billion on his “stimulus” and unemplyment has gone from 7.2% to 10.2% over the same span of time.
Finally, the Bush administration did not cause this collapse, it was caused by the mismanagement of the mortgage industry by Freddie and Fannie who were supposed to be monitored by the senate commerse committee but were not. This committee was chaired by Barney Frank and controlled by DEMOCRATS… Operating under a deregulation law signed into law by Bill Clinton in 98.
The Dems are responsible for this economic mess and now are making it worse… let me guess, you think healthcare is a fantastic idea too…
Do you understand the phrase “lemming mentality” – because you certainly suffer from it.
Posted by: arkievet | November 12, 2009, 10:58 am 10:58 am
Things take time learn to have Patience It took Bush 8 years to wreck havoc on this country at least give this President some time like I said its not perfect but things are better or getting better then what they were!
Posted by: Angie in PA | Nov 12, 2009 10:00:31 AM
*******
For the first 6 years, things were going fine. Then the Dems (Obama included) took over the House and Senate. And spent and spent.
What part is better? Unemployement? 7% when Bush left. Over 10% now, AFTER a stimulus that was supposed to keep us under 8%. Housing? Foreclosures are still rising. The budget? Congress is RAISING their own CAP on how much the US can borrow. The Afganistan war? He’s still voting “present”.
Obama the candidate said he thought there were serious flaws in the Constitution. I am wondering if Obama the President thinks he is above it. If they leave jail time for people that don’t have insurance in the bill and it passes, I believe this will be challenged all the way to the Supreme Court. Government run healthcare may be challenged on its own. It should be.
Posted by: wheresmymoney | November 12, 2009, 11:07 am 11:07 am
“For the first 6 years, things were going fine.”
Riiiight. Bush passed a prescription drug bill he didn’t plan on paying for, invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, losing millions of dollars to fraud in those countries, lowered taxes which during wartime which is unheard of in human history, allowed America’s infrastructure to rot, oil companies to make record profits while alternative energy sources went undeveloped…geesh, you have to be pretty dim to think the first six years of Bush’s presidency were some kind of “success.”
Posted by: Amy in Maine | November 12, 2009, 11:17 am 11:17 am
Weak Leadership! Actually no leadership at all! Why is the White House “blocking” the investigation into the Fort Hood killings? Because Obama knew about Major Hasan months ago and told the CIA, FBI and US Army to lay off him because he was a Muslim.
Posted by: Peter Smith | November 12, 2009, 11:21 am 11:21 am
“Finally, the Bush administration did not cause this collapse, it was caused by the mismanagement of the mortgage industry by Freddie and Fannie who were supposed to be monitored by the senate commerse committee but were not.”
Ahhh, the conservatives favorite scapgoat, Fannie and Freddie. Conveniently forgetting that middleclass and upper class Americans were using their homes as ATM’s, borrowing on their inflated values to finance unrealistic spending habits, cause, you know, Bush DID tell us all not to worry about terrorism, just go shopping!
Posted by: Amy in Maine | November 12, 2009, 11:23 am 11:23 am
How is it that we are always getting photos of O’Babble with his nose in the air, or shot from a low angle so that he looks superior to we ordinary mortals. C’mon folks, we already know that he’s the Messiah.
Posted by: Ron | November 12, 2009, 11:39 am 11:39 am
Angie in PA in said to poster”JJ”
[Oh you mean Bush? I totally agree he was a piece of crap a big one oh and Cheney too!]
“Angie in PA…referring to Bush warrants the use of the past tense verb “had”. Obama, however, is our “have” president…as in: he is our president now. He is fully responsible—-NOW… He owns this presidency…NOW! Capish?
Posted by: littleleers | November 12, 2009, 11:56 am 11:56 am
“referring to Bush warrants the use of the past tense verb “had”
Thank God!!!!!!!
Posted by: Amy in Maine | November 12, 2009, 12:01 pm 12:01 pm
Ahhh, the conservatives favorite scapgoat, Fannie and Freddie. Conveniently forgetting that middleclass and upper class Americans were using their homes as ATM’s, borrowing on their inflated values to finance unrealistic spending habits, cause, you know, Bush DID tell us all not to worry about terrorism, just go shopping!
Posted by: Amy in Maine | Nov 12, 2009 11:23:05 AM
********
Can you please refer me to the website where Bush told us not to worry about terrorism? And while your at it, please show us where Fannie and Freddie did great.
Our dollar keeps dropping because this administration just prints more.
Posted by: wheresmymoney | November 12, 2009, 12:23 pm 12:23 pm
The whole health bill is a scam—–its a hidden tax meant to jack up taxes 20% and will certainly lower health care across america for everyone and cost massive amounts of jobs as businesses just lay off people or cut salaries to pay for the forced expenditure. On top of this, this tax scam is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
Posted by: VeryPainfulTruth | November 12, 2009, 12:29 pm 12:29 pm
Obama and his big pharma buds are pushing this scam that will enrich them and forced in more socialism/communism. Communist Lenin long advocated controlling health care, because it was a way to controll people. Obama needs to be tried for treason and fraud….along with his buds at big pharma and crooks like Pelosi aiding in this rip off.
Posted by: VeryPainfulTruth | November 12, 2009, 12:31 pm 12:31 pm
A mandate requiring all individuals to purchase health insurance would be an unprecedented form of federal action,” said the CBO. “The government has never required people to buy any good or service as a condition of lawful residence in the United States.”
In an analysis published this July, the CBO said that an attempt to justify a mandate that people buy health insurance by using the Commerce Clause—which gives Congress the power to regulate commerce “among the several states”—raises a “novel issue.”
“Whether such a requirement would be constitutional under the Commerce Clause is perhaps the most challenging question posed by such a proposal, as it is a novel issue whether Congress may use this clause to require an individual to purchase a good or a service,” said the CBO.
In a recent interview with CNSNews.com, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R.-Utah), a longtime member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said that it was “not constitutionally sound” for Congress to mandate that individuals buy health insurance.
“But here would be the first time where our [federal] government would demand that people buy something that they may or may not want,” said Hatch. “And, you know, if that’s the case, then we didn’t need a ‘Cash for Clunkers,’ all we had to do is have the federal government say you all got to buy new cars, no matter how tough it is on you. You know, they could require you to buy anything. And that isn’t America. That’s not freedom. That’s not constitutionally sound.”
Hatch said that if we let the federal government begin forcing us to buy things we may not want to buy without having a clear constitutional justification for doing so “we’ve lost our freedoms, and that means the federal government can do anything it wants to do to us.”
Posted by: Lizzie | November 12, 2009, 12:39 pm 12:39 pm
Obama is on a mission to ruin our capitalist system so that it can be rebuilt under the socialist model he so desperatly desires.
Wake up people. This healthcare bill ain’t about healthcare, it is about governmental control.
It is about a bunch of elites in Washington believing that they know FAR better then the American people do about running their own lives. Our Founding Fathers are crying right now.
Liberals have screwed up our economy for years through gov’t intervention, and now claim the only way to fix it is with more gov’t intervention.
Posted by: Dave | November 12, 2009, 1:04 pm 1:04 pm
I have a ton of respect for Obama and approve of his actions as the commander and chief of this country. I think the media distracts from what is accomplished. With regard to Afghan, I think it’s wise for him to ask the tough questions, ensure an exit strategy et al before he decides – he does not get a second shot at this – once a decision is made it is his and you can guarantee the media will paint it in a bad light and all the far rights will critize no matter what he does. Personally I respect him for not just sending off 40,000 troops without answers – With regard to healthcare – quite frankly, the best thing that could happen is to give insurance companies a real competitor in a government option – going to asia is setting the stage for future discussions.
Posted by: confidential416 | November 12, 2009, 1:05 pm 1:05 pm
Will be interesting to see the first person arrested for not having health insurance…Wow!
Posted by: Freedom | November 12, 2009, 1:17 pm 1:17 pm
Posted by: M. Smith | Nov 12, 2009 8:59:13 AM posted “probably we are doomed”. So the better option is more of the same Supply Side Economics that got us to where we are today?
During the last recession I lived through, I’d already spent 5 years training for my profession. In 1982 unemployment in my state was 12% – there were NO job openings in my field. I had to find a work, any work, and finally found a job with a long commute and miserable pay that barely covered child care costs.
However, my new employer did provide training + affordable medical coverage to support a major career change. Our economy won’t recover fully with out these 2 crucial pieces of the puzzle – re-training and medical coverage.
I don’t know about your small business, but today mine can’t afford to provide medical coverage, and my business certainly can’t justify hiring poorly educated, untrained employees.
People who are unemployed may eventually find lower paying service jobs, but not the strong Family Wage jobs our country needs to reduce the deficit.
Posted by: CenterOne | November 12, 2009, 1:36 pm 1:36 pm
“Can you please refer me to the website where Bush told us not to worry about terrorism?”
ABC apparently doesn’t like it when I try to post a comment with a link to the Washington Post or New Times, they took down my reply with the article I wanted to cite. Short story: GWB cut taxes, lowered interest rates, all the while mounting what would be an incredibly ambitious and expensive low range project of changing the face of the Middle East. This was supposedly not going to impact our economy? With no effort to get us off foreign oil and keeping us at the mercy of those who control the price of oil?
Here is a book I can recommend that explains the mortgage collapse, and it weren’t poor people who crashed the system, buddy:
“Chain of Blame: How Wall Street Caused The Mortgage and Credit Crisis” by Paul Muolo and Matt Padilla.
Posted by: Amy in Maine | November 12, 2009, 1:40 pm 1:40 pm
“between the beginning of the Bush presidency and 9-11 we lost 6.8 million jobs”
What planet do you live on? Because here on Earth, the economy lost 967,000 jobs.
In 2008, as a consequence of George Bush’s tax and economic policies, the economy lost 3 million jobs.
From the beginning of Obama’s presidency to the present (using the same criteria you used to blame Clinton), the economy has lost another 4.2 million jobs.
Who had the bad economic policies again?
Posted by: gary | November 12, 2009, 1:52 pm 1:52 pm
Barney Frank is not a member of the Senate Commerse (sic) committee, since he is a member of the House.
The committee was controlled by Republicans in 1998, when Clinton eventually made a horrible decision by signing a deregulation bill written by Republican Phil Gramm and passed by the majority Republican Congress (in fairness, almost all Dems voted for this bill too).
Posted by: gary | November 12, 2009, 1:57 pm 1:57 pm
thanks gary for posting that information, but these morons don’t care about-FACTS-those things that can be proven..its mostly right wing over the edge and around the bend-aerosol can sniffers,with CLOSE family ties-if you get my drift…..
Posted by: cowgirl | November 12, 2009, 10:35 pm 10:35 pm