Monday, 09 November 2009
-
Political Gamesmanship
Last night was your classic political gamesmanship. We had your classic Catch-22 in progress and all the players were scoring their political points and padding their voting records.
According to lifenews.com, "Reps. Joe Pitts, a Pennsylvania republican, and Bart Stupak, a Michigan Democrat, combined for a bipartisan amendment to prevent mandated abortion coverage in the essential benefits package"
Talk about a game of strategy. The Stupak Amendment as it was called last night, forced everyone who has any concern about their pro-life voting record to vote for the amendment. But what does this amendment do? It provided cover for people to vote for the bill because they were not funding abortions, a hot button issue at the moment.
By bringing the Amendment to a vote and it passing, it provided the extra votes needed to pass HR 3962. So in effect, the trap was baited and despite knowing it was baited , the Congressman had no choice but to vote for the Amendment ensuring that extra votes needed to pass the bill onto the upper chamber.
Few believe that Senate version will mirror the House version and that what Mrs. Pelosi pushed through the House will pass in the Senate. If the bill comes back from committee without the Stupak Amendment in it, there will be additional votes lost in the House.
This bill allowed the House leaders to flip off the people who have sounded out about healthcare reform and they are hoping that it will ice their efforts , taking the wind out of their sails. It was some very good gamemanship. Mrs. Pelosi learned the art of Politics very well.
Now as we marvel at how good of a politician she is, let us reflect upon the economy when she took over the reins of the House in January 2007. And let us reflect on all the spending packages that have come through her house. Under her leadership the country has amassed debt like no other time in history.
The Congress and specifically the House of Representatives is the body that crafts our budgets and handles the economic aspect of the government. How were you in 2007? How are your today? Remember who has been in charge of the nations purse strings since January 2007.Nancy Pelosi-Master Politician-bringing California economics to Washington DC.. What a player!.
-
recommend
- recs 4
-
share
-
email
- sent 0
Post a Comment
- Back to ProvokingThought's Xanga Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in ProvokingThought's local time zone: GMT -05:00 (Eastern Standard - US, Canada)
Comments (30)
That sounds like the fault of those who voted for it if they knew it was bait, more so than the baiters.
@Paul_Partisan - Political chess is always interesting. Most of these moves on both sides are to be able to say, I voted for this or that.
There is where I dont make a good politician. I would say, that is a trap. The counter argument is then what if the best thing you could get was the amendment? An excellent political move. Yet my bigger point is with things as they are...people are sick of the game and do not like the results.
Pelosi is a tool. Excellent post as usual.
It is always interesting when election time comes and you see one group denigrating one candidate for voting for a bill and then applauding a different candidate for voting in favor of that same bill. Obviously you can't just listen to the rhetoric in the ads to find that out, you have to look a little deeper but it is weird how that works.
It pisses me off how much of a game it is. I know that I can be very idealistic but I really think that people should actually be trying to pass legislation on its merits rather than by conning people or trapping them.
Ms. Pelosi to me is the epitome of the smarmy politician.
For me, it's her contempt for the citizens of America-she really does think that she knows best for us, despite what we say. For my money, Pelosi is everything wrong with politics today. I hate how the headlines proclaim last nights vote as a "victory for Pelosi", if she really was what she pretends to be then those same headlines would have lauded the vote as victory for the American people.
right now,, its all talk,,,
once its put into play,,, at that time,,, i dont think there will be any winners,,,
me and amazingdoggo were talking last nite,,, we do talk occasionally,,, he was telling me about his military time,,,
he was supposed to be getting a clearance of some kind,,, he recieved a phone call from an investigating source,,,
the caller said they had contacted one of his references and they said he was out of the military,,,
and that was a fact,,, hed been out for about a year...
i can see it now,,,
"were calling to see if mr jones still requires that surgery" ( pick a surgery)
uh,,, mr jones died a year ago.....
i repeat,, no winners,,, i doubt at this time pelosky will be claiming victory,,, maybe she will,,, hahahahaha,,,, i dunno...
@odetocorny - Pelosi - http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1114/p09s01-coop.html
@AnamcharaConcepts - you sure it is not just the botox's side effects? I wondered if it is botox for life for nancy now.
@QuantumStorm - @QuantumStorm - thanks Hawke.
Which is bigger, her ego or the district?
@mrcolorful - yeah those "conservative ranking" votes compiled by those organizations make some votes almost mandated no matter how poor the legislation is. The same for the demos too.
@mejicojohn - take a letter Maria....
I'm confused. Do you think it's going to pass the senate?
@dropsofjupiterihh -
" Do you think it's going to pass the senate?"---not as written. they just wanted to pass something and they did., I would go even further and say that if rep's thought that was the final version, it would not have passed ./
So there's still hope for no change!
@ProvokingThought - //Which is bigger, her ego or the district?//
Given her current status I think it's a toss-up. But then that's to be expected from a two-timer like Pelosi. Bill Clinton is a n00b in the liar industry when compared to her.
@dropsofjupiterihh - This would be the perfect time for someone to come out with a "emergency" pre-existing condditions bill that will give them access to care at a rate to be determined based on their income by medicaid.
@QuantumStorm - i will give Bill Clinton his due. As a Rhodes scholar he was a very intelligent man who had some control issues.Yet as a politician he could work across the aisle and often overrode his partisan staff. It is normally the recipe for disaster for a one party control of the executive and legislative branch as you truly lose checks and balances.
Ppl tried to say Obama would be another Clinton but the whole mix is different . I think Clintons experience as a governor combined with his intellect equipped him for the job. I havent seen a working intellect on Obamas part to date.
You would make a good sportscaster.
That's what I hate, the game. Can't politicians ever actually care about the people? *sigh* My husband says I am too much of an idealist but I can't believe that this is the best our government can be.
There have to be folks out there who are like the founding fathers - who actually do things for the good of the people instead of just doing what benefits them the most. At least, I have to hope they're out there.
How would a cancer paient feel before chemo, how would he feel after chemo?
@firetyger - there still are. The problem is you have to be a millionare to run for office and unfortunalty most millionares are corrupt same as are politicians. Money hungry idiots.
@bukeshow - Sure seems like it
@trunthepaige - my grey matter can't fathom being paid to go to games. Sure beats 70 virgins.
@CelestialTeapot - perhaps more akin to watching someone put diesel in a Harley .
I spent too many years in the industry to be distracted by smoke and mirrors. The government had a solution before they understood the problem and they were quite clear on that throughout the hearings. If you remember in mathmatics, you had to prove your answer.
A person who is without insurance does not need insurance. Insurance is a distraction. Insurance companies are a distraction. When I am sick, I do not go to my insurance company. So why is insurance being mandated? If I am sick, I need a doctor. I need care. Now if 85% of the people have insurance and a doctor then my concern is not them, it is to find a solution for the 15%.
Like Charlie Rangel said, no one goes without emergency care, they go without insurance. So the focus is on whatever percent do not have insurance and a way to provide care for them. I will tell you from being in the industry we had professional shortages in doctors and nurses, especially those who were accepting medicare and medicaid. Medicare and Medicaid are a paperwork nightmare and it is all a coding game with CMS. The 90 delay in payment adds additional stress of carrying debt. The lower reimbursement rate was made up by higher fees to those who have private pay or private insurance.
The government blew this big time, they needed to provide care solutions not insurance solutions. But what do you expect from the government anyway? They have been being ripped off for over a decade with medicare and medicaid and it keeps getting worse not better. They have no incentive to get their act together, it is only our money they are being irresponsible with and there is more where that came from.
@firetyger - well as I said to CT, much of this comes from them having a solution before understanding the problem. It is a big game because they do not understand the mechanics of it. If I fill a gasoline engine with diesel it will not cure its lack of fuel problem, only create another problem.
I wouldnt get overly concerned until we see something head to committee. Reids agenda is Reids, Pelosi's is pelosi's and Obamas is Obamas. If you listened to the debate (you have to be sick to have) on saturday, they kept reminding democrats what Obama promised and this was not it. (If you like your coverage you can keep it)
there are more good willed people out there than you realize Heidi and many of them are in the health care industry. It is just the stench that comes out of DC keeps your eyes watering. I would pick a doctor who could diagnosis the problem and not know the cure over a doctor who didnt bother to understand the root of the problem and only tried to cure symptoms. The second doctor is congress.
@bukeshow - I think the bigger issue is that it was never intended to be a full time position. The federal government was not given enough power to make it a full time position or that it should be in session all the time.. The longer they are there, the more they cost us.
@ProvokingThought - great analogy.
I came to see your post. I'm a little slow. What's the connection to my post again, lol? Do you know if there's any way to bring Pelosi to account for lying to the American people? I want to see her go more so than anyone else in DC.