Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 11/06/2009 10:40:10 AM PST by Sub-Driver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Sub-Driver

So he’s not a complete shill....

Refreshing


2 posted on 11/06/2009 10:41:55 AM PST by panzerkamphwageneinz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

Maybe WE should hire him to be OUR spokesman!
.....or....is it simply a case of the old saying that even a broken clock is right twice a day?


3 posted on 11/06/2009 10:42:34 AM PST by Welcome2thejungle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

Paging, Mr Obvious!


4 posted on 11/06/2009 10:44:13 AM PST by griswold3 (You think health care is expensive now? Just wait till it's FREE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

It’s just gonna be another kitty to steal from...like SS, Medicare, Medicaid...and like those, the “contributions” by taxpayers will always go up and up and up......


5 posted on 11/06/2009 10:44:43 AM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

So is this THE Robert

Ryyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy-SHA?

Hard to believe it is


8 posted on 11/06/2009 10:48:44 AM PST by A_Former_Democrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

He is an advocate of Canadian-style single payer and is not shy about saying so. No doubt he is disappointed that is not what they are voting on.


10 posted on 11/06/2009 10:50:38 AM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

Rats jumping off a sinking ship.


11 posted on 11/06/2009 10:51:12 AM PST by NH Red
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver
fta “I could find no major media references to his rather startling commentary.”

The major media is your enemy.......shop around judiciously for your information. I don't normally watch the major TV networks but I have been baby sitting and had to watch the ABCNBCCBSCNN stations and was horrified at the spin and bias. I have decided to watch at least a half-hour each evening to keep abreast of the lies and also to know what advertisers to avoid.

14 posted on 11/06/2009 10:57:28 AM PST by BilLies
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

Obama, if you’ve lost this little prick, you’re in serious trouble.

Let’s get real here though. Reicccccccccch says this because it’s not leftist enough, not because it’s too leftist.


16 posted on 11/06/2009 11:01:34 AM PST by DoughtyOne (Unseal the lock box containing every document pertaining to Obama's life, TODAY!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

Isn’t this the same midget who said not to hire white men with stimulus money? He wants more socialized medicine - not the “watered down” version he sees coming out of congress...he’s still a puke


17 posted on 11/06/2009 11:02:02 AM PST by WhyisaTexasgirlinPA (Blankety blankety blank)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

actually it will RAISE costs, and worsen care.


18 posted on 11/06/2009 11:02:38 AM PST by TexasFreeper2009 (Obama lied, the economy died)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.


19 posted on 11/06/2009 11:03:20 AM PST by DavidAccord
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

Maybe it could be modified to only anglos had to pay.


20 posted on 11/06/2009 11:03:52 AM PST by ichabod1 ( I am rolling over in my grave and I am not even dead yet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

Bobby must be sick. He seems to be a bit worried about the quality of health care lately!


22 posted on 11/06/2009 11:06:28 AM PST by April Lexington (Study the constitution so you know what they are taking away!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver; panzerkamphwageneinz; Welcome2thejungle; griswold3; Sacajaweau; 11th Commandment; ...
Read his entire blog post, though. It is VERY, VERY revealing:

Health Care Reform is Critically Important, But Getting Americans Back to Work is More So

Presidents tend to overcompensate for the errors of their predecessors in the same party and in so doing sow seeds of their own mistakes. Bill Clinton wanted above all to avoid Jimmy Carter's fate -- losing re-election because the economy was heading south on Election Day. So Clinton made a deal with Alan Greenspan to slash the budget deficit and thereby jettison much of his ambitious campaign agenda (that was Greenspan's precondition for lowering interest rates and causing an economic boom in time for the re-election) and then Clinton took direction from Dick Morris, who told him to move to the right. The result: Clinton avoided Carter's failure and won re-election handily. But the Clinton years produced few if any major social reforms. Clinton spent so much of his initial political capital, as well as his time and energy, on deficit reduction that he didn't have enough left to enact health care in 1994.

Barack Obama came to the White House intent on not repeating Clinton's failure to enact universal health care. Did he overlearn the Clinton lesson? Obama seems to have made all the right moves to enact something he can credibly label health-care reform: Rather than spend his political capital elsewhere, he reserved most of it for health care.

I sincerely hope America gets genuine health reform and I hope it's stronger than what's emerging in the Senate. (Whoever voted for Joe Lieberman last time around ought to pray for continued good health.) I worry, though, that Obama's strategy may turn out to be a mistake comparable to Clinton's overemphasis on deficit reduction. Obama's focus on health care rather than jobs, when the economy is still so fragile and unemployment moving toward double digits, could make it appear that the administration has its priorities confused. While affordable health care is critically important to Americans, making a living is more urgent. Yet the administration's efforts to date on this more basic concern have been neither particularly visible nor coherent.

The current rate of unemployment would have been even higher were it not for the federal stimulus package, but the stimulus should have been much larger. Especially with the states still cutting back on spending and raising taxes, the federal stimulus will be barely enough to keep unemployment from hitting 11 percent by the middle of 2010. Yet as the rate of unemployment continued to rise faster and higher than the White House anticipated, Obama could not return to Congress to seek a larger stimulus. He was spending political capital on health care.

The Wall Street bailout, meanwhile, has saved Wall Street but left most regional banks in deep distress. Almost nothing has trickled down. Small businesses still can't get loans. Foreclosures continue to mount largely because jobs continue to vanish and homeowners can't pay their mortgages. Yet at this point, on the eve of a health care bill, it would be difficult for Obama to return to Congress seeking billions more to aid distressed homeowners and small businesses.

While health care reform, if done right, can help American families stay afloat in the economy, the current bills won't offer most Americans any appreciable decline in the cost of their health insurance nor clear improvement in the efficiency or quality of the health care they receive, and those who will benefit won't see the benefits until 2014 at the earliest. All this is partly a result of Obama's sharpest break from Clinton -- whose ambitious health care plan drew immediate fire from Big Pharma, the American Medical Association, and health insurers: The Obama White House bought off the medical-industrial complex by promising it fatter profits, bolstered by tens of millions of new paying customers.

That and other deals cut with industry -- including promises to Big Pharma that Medicare wouldn't use its bargaining clout to reduce drug prices, to the AMA that doctors wouldn't have to face larger cuts in Medicare reimbursement rates, and to private insurers that the White House wouldn't fight hard for a public insurance option -- are likely to make the resulting reform far more costly than it would be otherwise. These extra costs will be borne by those Americans who will be required to buy insurance but won't qualify for federal assistance, along with Medicare beneficiaries who will be paying more and receiving less. These people may not know they're indirectly paying the costs of buying off these industries, but they'll know they're getting shafted (Republicans will be sure to make them aware, even though the GOP has a much longer record of shafting the middle class for the benefit of big business).

The optimist in me says Obama can pivot off a health-care victory and launch some new initiatives that palpably and quickly spur job growth. The realist says there aren't any such initiatives -- at least none that can work fast enough to reverse the tide of unemployment before the midterm elections. Fiddles such as a new jobs tax credit can help but they won't make much of a dent. Even with a larger stimulus, a jobs recovery would still be far off. The tangible benefits of health-care reform are likely to be so elusive in the meantime that the public may become easy prey for demagogues on the right who blame Democrats for the economic insecurities that bedevil the nation next November.

If Obama and the Democrats lose one or both houses of Congress in the midterms, it will be because the president learned only the most superficial lesson of the Clinton years. Health-care reform is critically important. But when one out of six Americans is unemployed or underemployed, getting the nation back to work is more so.

(all emphasis above is mine)

Reiccccccccccccchhhhhhhhhhhhaa is a nasty piece of work. For those of you who may think that he either has had an epiphany or is throwing Obama under the bus, he isn't doing either. He is a committed progressive who really doesn't give a rat's a$$ whether health care reform is cheaper or not. He wants the government control over our lives...no matter the cost to the individual...so that the "smart" people can make all the important decisions.

Since he was directly in the Clinton cabinet at the time, it sounds to me like he would be in a position to know about a deal between Clinton and Greenspan. By revealing this, that tells me there is no way he would be supporting Shillary, as he just stuck a blade between Bill's ribs. Since her credibility depends on her being wife-o-bill rather than anything she's managed to do on her own, that comment would just sink her during any future primary season (the committed leftist radicals would not approve of doing deals with the Fed...to say nothing of an intentional move to the right for political purposes).

25 posted on 11/06/2009 11:13:52 AM PST by markomalley (Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

So, even Robert Reich, taking time off from his job at the Lollilop Guild, is against Obamacare? Wonders never cease....


26 posted on 11/06/2009 11:16:31 AM PST by Rummyfan (Iraq: it's not about Iraq anymore, it's about the USA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver
Whoa!

He'll be taken to the woodshed. He's strayed off the reservation...

maybe he has inside info that tells him the bill is going to go down in flames and he wants to be seen as being on the right side

29 posted on 11/06/2009 11:43:45 AM PST by maine-iac7 ("He has the right to criticize who has the heart to help" Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver
That ObamaCare-loving media choose to ignore such logic is totally mind-boggling.

Saying Mugabe's...I mean...Obama's priorities are screwed up is pretty basic. Unfortunately, Reich's ideas are so equally screwed up that it doesn't make much difference. It's six or one and half a dozen of the other.

31 posted on 11/06/2009 12:07:18 PM PST by stevem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

If Reich doesn’t like the bill, it can only be that it doesn’t call for the immediate icing of the older generations. Maybe he’s feeling his age and getting paranoid.

Just because he doesn’t like it, doesn’t make him one of us.


35 posted on 11/06/2009 1:10:52 PM PST by DPMD (~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson