Politics
More PoliticsScrap the Health-Care Bill!
Christopher Buckley's books include Supreme Courtship, The White House Mess, Thank You for Smoking, Little Green Men, and Florence of Arabia. He was chief speechwriter for Vice President George H.W. Bush, and is editor-at-large of ForbesLife magazine. His new book is Losing Mum and Pup, a memoir. Buckley's Daily Beast column is the winner of an Online Journalism Award in the category of Online Commentary.
Kristoffer Tripplaar / SIPA
In a revelatory Q & A, Christopher Buckley explains that health insurance is well and good, but driving the country into bankruptcy isn’t going to help anyone in the long run—and why we’d all be better off if Warren Buffett were president.
For anyone who, like your faithful blogger, is a) thoroughly confused, b) thoroughly anxious, or c) thoroughly bored by health-care reform, herewith a Q & A.
President Obama declared the other day that “Everything there is to say about health care has been said and just about everyone has said it.” Is this correct?
Apparently not, to judge from the papers, which contain some pretty hairy predictions about what lies ahead if health-care “reform” goes through.
Such as?
Continued skyrocketing costs, less actual health care, and massive bureaucracies. And although we're told that the bill is "deficit neutral," Washington's way of saying, "It's not going to cost a dime, who, really, believes that? As P.J. O'Rourke says, "If you think health care is expensive now, just wait until it's free."
I, for one, would sleep very soundly if Warren Buffett were president of the United States, or speaker of the House, or Senate majority leader, or chairman of the Joint Chiefs, yeah.
But isn’t that just the usual partisan/ideological bickering?
Not unless you consider, say, Warren Buffett “partisan” or “ideological.” You’ll recall that Buffett was an early supporter of Obama’s candidacy. But following the “health-care summit,” he advised the president to scrap the health bill and start over. As he put it, the critical issue with health care is “costs, costs, costs.” And until we attack that aspect, everything else is essentially beside the point.
Are you saying insuring people with no health insurance is “beside the point”?
No, but driving the country into bankruptcy isn’t going to help anyone in the long run. Wouldn’t you agree?
I’m asking the questions here, smart ass. Getting back to Buffett, why should we listen to him?
Because in addition to being one of the wealthiest self-made Americans alive, he is also one of the smartest. You may recall that while Alan Greenspan, more or less the entire U.S. Congress, Fannie Mae, and Wall Street were all gaga-enthusiastic about subprime mortgages and derivatives and credit default swaps and other toxic instruments, Warren Buffett, almost alone, was calling them “weapons of mass financial destruction.” You may also recall that in September 2008, they went ka-boom.
Yeah, I kind of remember that part. So it’s WWWD? What Would Warren Do?
I, for one, would sleep very soundly if Warren Buffett were president of the United States, or speaker of the House, or Senate majority leader, or chairman of the Joint Chiefs, yeah.
Well, where do the American people stand on the issue at this point?
The American people could be accurately described as “nervous as hell” about all this. They are basically good folks, Americans. They want to extend a helping hand to those who can’t afford health insurance. But their confidence level in Congress is basement-low. They are also suspicious of bills that run to 2,074 pages. Can you imagine if the Congress today were put in charge of writing the Declaration of Independence?
Let’s not go there, please.
OK by me. The bottom line is—polls show that more than 60 percent of Americans are against the current House and Senate bills.
But surely 100 percent of Americans are tired of all the back-and-forth, and want action taken.
Ask yourself: Is taking action in itself a virtue?
Who are you, Socrates?
Far from it. But consider: There was a lot of debate back in 2001-03 about whether we should go to war in Iraq. President Bush finally stamped his feet and said more or less what Obama is now saying, namely: “The time for talk is over.” Do you think we did the right thing in 2003?
Are you saying that health-care reform could be Obama’s Iraq?
I hope not, for all our sake. Not to sound like Pollyanna, but we’re all in this together.
Do you have Warren Buffett’s phone number?
Christopher Buckley's books include Supreme Courtship, The White House Mess, Thank You for Smoking, Little Green Men, and Florence of Arabia. He was chief speechwriter for Vice President George H.W. Bush, and is editor-at-large of ForbesLife magazine. His new book is Losing Mum and Pup, a memoir. Buckley's Daily Beast column is the winner of an Online Journalism Award in the category of Online Commentary.
For more of The Daily Beast, become a fan on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.
For inquiries, please contact The Daily Beast at editorial@thedailybeast.com.
YOUR FRIENDS
Joy Behar Was Right
Jeff Shesol is the author of Supreme Power: Franklin Roosevelt vs. The Supreme Court. He is also a founding partner of West Wing Writers, a speechwriting and strategy firm and the author of Mutual Contempt. From 1998 to 2001, Shesol served as a speechwriter to President Bill Clinton. A Rhodes Scholar, he holds degrees in history from Oxford and Brown universities. His comic strip, Thatch, appeared daily in more than 150 newspapers from 1994-1998.
Dragon Tattoo Star Narrowed to Final Four
Gina Piccalo spent a decade at the Los Angeles Times covering Hollywood. She's now a contributing writer for Los Angeles Magazine and her work has appeared in Elle, More and Emmy. She can be found at ginapiccalo.com.
A former editor of Men's Journal, Claire Martin has written for Outside, the New York Times, and the Los Angeles Times magazine.
Inside Chelsea's Wedding Party
Lynnley Browning is a frequent contributor to the business pages of The New York Times and is a former Moscow-based correspondent for Reuters, where she covered energy and commodities. She grew up in Tulsa, Okla., majored in Slavic Languages and Literatures at Princeton University, and is fluent in Russian. She lives in Hamden, Conn., with her son.
Let the Democrats Win
Christopher Buckley's books include Supreme Courtship, The White House Mess, Thank You for Smoking, Little Green Men, and Florence of Arabia. He was chief speechwriter for Vice President George H.W. Bush, and is editor-at-large of ForbesLife magazine. His new book is Losing Mum and Pup, a memoir. Buckley's Daily Beast column is the winner of an Online Journalism Award in the category of Online Commentary.
The Frum Flap
Christopher Buckley's books include Supreme Courtship, The White House Mess, Thank You for Smoking, Little Green Men, and Florence of Arabia. He was chief speechwriter for Vice President George H.W. Bush, and is editor-at-large of ForbesLife magazine. His new book is Losing Mum and Pup, a memoir. Buckley's Daily Beast column is the winner of an Online Journalism Award in the category of Online Commentary.
The Right Stifles Debate
Christopher Buckley's books include Supreme Courtship, The White House Mess, Thank You for Smoking, Little Green Men, and Florence of Arabia. He was chief speechwriter for Vice President George H.W. Bush, and is editor-at-large of ForbesLife magazine. His new book is Losing Mum and Pup, a memoir. Buckley's Daily Beast column is the winner of an Online Journalism Award in the category of Online Commentary.
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
This user is no longer registered.
John Murphy
Palin Admits To Travelling To Canada For Health Care
In November of 2009, Sarah Palin - who is always suggesting that health care reform will lead to socialism - insisted that Canada needs to reform its health care system to "let the private sector take over." But this past Saturday in Calgary, Canada - at "her first Canadian appearance since stepping down as governor of Alaska last summer" - Palin seemed to deviate from her fear of socialized Canadian medicine when she revealed that her family may have benefited from the Canadian system:
PALIN: We used to hustle over the border for health care we received in Canada. And I think now, isn't that ironic?
This isn't the first time Palin highlighted the difficulty of obtaining affordable health care in America. During the presidential campaign, Palin discussed how her and husband Todd had "gone though periods of our life here with paying out-of-pocket for health coverage until Todd and I both landed a couple of good union jobs." At the Vice Presidential debate, Palin recalled times in her marriage "in our past where we didn't have health insurance and we know what other Americans are going through as they sit around the kitchen table and try to figure out how are they going to pay out-of-pocket for health care?"
Palin's experience also highlights the fact that American medical-tourism to Canada is common, despite conservatives' claims that Canada's health care system drives Canadians into the states. "Every year, thousands of Americans undergo surgery in other countries" where they can receive the same care "at half the price." "In 2007, an estimated 750,000 Americans traveled abroad for medical care; this number is anticipated to increase to six million by 2010%u2033 - far outpacing the number of Canadians coming into the United States for medical treatment. It's good to know that Palin was once one of them.
dana64
The root of our problems is LACK OF FUNDS.................but I will believe those who talk about Bankrupting the country ONLY IF THEY HAVE the COURAGE to STOP The WAR SPENDING.
i am truly fed up with all the NEGATIVE THINKING ............as if America cannot OVERCOME the present mess.
dana64
oh and by the war..................OBAMA was the CORRECT CHOICE.
and we should be proud of this election.
Mockley
Palin also lied about being without healthcare. Due to Todd's native status, their family has alwys had gov't paid healthcare.
boogyman
You will have to excuse my snarky tone here Mr. Buckley, but after the way you tossed aside the wisdom of your father for the populism of lesser men, you seem to have little credibility with regard to Mr. Obama.
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
CitizenPain
Obama "couldn't sell watermelons if you gave him a State Trooper to flag down traffic " Dan Rather 3/7/2010 ... is buckley related to barney frank?
lordmi
did You try?
prove that
CitizenPain
dont need to prove anything to you ya re tard
Shadowsmgc
I heard O'bama, in a recorded cilp, today, urging that "pre-existing conditions" be covered. I have a treasure trove of prospects, for him. How about the entire Naiton of Haiti? He can insure all thier citizens, and cover all their homes, and liability coverage. How's that, for a real Bonanza?
Dennis
DeeAmbro
Well, one can only assume that you yourself have no "pre-existing conditions" otherwise you would see the positive result of at least tackling that atrocity. The 60% opposed are a combination of the callous, the fearful, the misinformed and the people who don't think the bill goes far enough. If you can't even support the pre-existing conditions changes the only explanation is that you work for an insurance company or you have no heart.
timeisnow
Dee
The Republican Bill has coverage for Pre existing conditions in it, just not the slime of the Obama Back room deals and higher taxes.
HollyK64
DeeAmbro
You're misinformed. Here's the problem. Insuring those with pre-existing conditions doesn't work financially unless everyone is required to have insurance. Ignoring for a minute whether ordering everyone to buy insurance is even constitutional, there are many people who can't afford insurance. Obama's solution is to make middle class people pick up this expense through paying higher taxes. He denies that this is where he's going but everyone knows that's what will end up happening. I know you want to think the problem is simply good people with hearts versus bad heartless people but it's more complicated than that. It's not fair to make middle class people pay for this entitlement. The Republican solution is to reform through incremental steps, step one being curb fraud and waste in existing government run programs and not burden one segment of the population with the bulk of this expense. Does is surprise you that Obama has zero interest in stopping waste and fraud? He'd rather get up there on his high horse and demonize the insurance companies. The truth is Obama doesn't know how to fix this problem but he sees an opportunity to grab more power and that's what this is about. It's not about the poor and the sick, that's for sure.
timeisnow
The Republican Bill has in it the coverage for Pre existing conditions, cant be kicked off your policy. It just doesnt have all the back room deals that made Obamas Billl Dirty and too expensive, with tax increases for everyone in it.
dana64
the insurance companies would never accept covering PRE-existing conditions if we did not give them NEW CLIENTS..............and the GOP just says that because they know they would be LAUGHED AT ........
AND the DIRTY DEALS were not really dirty.......they were stupid and they are going to be GONE by the reconciliation which you probably call dirty....????
Mockley
I guess if you keep saying it, you figure someone might believe it.
lordmi
people usually think before extrapolation.
In fact, they usually think before to say a word on public.
Seems , You never bother to do so.
Or just have no tool to think with
iamone3
If the Congress today were writing The Declaration of Independence it simply wouldn`t get done. This Health care bill they are trying to shove down Americans throat will bankrupt the country. Most of those in Congress today will be nowhere to be found by the time it would go into effect, and the new Congress will be saying we inherited the mess. If the House passes the senate bill as is with promises to "fix" it later, you would never use them as your personal lawyer because doesn`t a lawyer tell you if its not in writing ,don`t sign it?
defannin
If the Constitution were written today the American People would vote against adopting it.
johnwr3
If the Constitution was written today we'd use liberal blood to write it.
bigwurzz
OK John if the constitution were written today the conservatives would be against it because they are always so scared of everything they never would have stood up to England and we would all still be singing god save the queen. Conservatives are bye and bye wimps who are scared of their own shadows who stock up on guns because of their ....
johnwr3
bigwurzz, Are you talking about the "no surge, appeasing" democrats? In every article relating to this subject on this site, Conservatives are war mongers. So which is it?
ginsushark
"liberal blood" - guess you would have to execute most of the founding fathers that were progressive. democracy was progressive in the late 1700s vs monarchy.
the surge only made sense if you were for the Iraq war. many Americans see the Iraq conflict as a Chevron/BP corporate war, wrapped in a flag. Saddam no longer controls Iraqs oil, Chevron and BP do. at least in roman times, conquored states payed tribute to teh romans, so they didnt have to pay income tax. tax hating republicans should appreciate that.
escomments
No Ginsushark it was never about Democracy and the Founders were not progressives. They pledged their lives, their treasure and their sacred honor for freedom from British totalitarian rule. Something that Liberals have little in common. They pledge other's lives, other's treasure and have no honor!
The constitution is a testament to individual unalienable rights endowed by the creator. Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness. These are the rights of the individual. To form a government that would never again usurp the liberty and take advantage of the citizenry and to govern with the consent of the governed.
Thomas Jefferson knew that from time to time the fruit from the tree of Liberty would need to be shaken.
Do you know what unalienable means?
You seem to be for American Totalitarianism. Progressive Government equals power over the masses by force to benefit the greater good as defined by progressives. Smarter, better educated, benevolent elitists who know better what is good for the rest of the unwashed masses and by all rights, should be in charge!
It would be you who were the monarch.
Liberal Blood would be shed!
pennsykid2000
Doing nothing will bankrupt the country, and yet that's what the Republicans in Congress want and have always wanted. Otherwise, they would have put through reforms when they were in charge. All they did was pass a prescription drug bill that hugely added to health care costs and ignored trying to pay for it. Yeah, those are the people who have a better idea how to fix the problem--NOT.
RevPettibone
to pennyskid2000....
Again and again liberals like you refuse to cite current facts and numbers substantiating their policy positions when fielding objections to the Right's insistence the healthcare bill under consideration needs to be started over....... instead the Democrats reach back to the former administration and beyond in their efforts to discredit questioning of Obama and any of his initiatives..... The date is 2010 lady, we're over one year in to the winter of our discontent ....don't you think it's time for you and your buds to quit living in the past and get with the program? No one of any consequence "today" is advocating we do nothing...... nor could they if they ever hoped to stay in office. However, plenty of Americans...an overwhelming majority I might add... are saying don't pass healthcare as it's written now. Maybe things today would be different had Mr. Obama heeded his own words and not "shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive towards" the Republicans at the summit.... something a statesman would have intuitively understood.
DeeAmbro
Not to mention the wars they fought without raising taxes. Our bankruptcy traces back directly to that. Clinton...with all his faults...handed over a surplus. Bush and his warmonger cronies are the ones who bankrupted this country.
RevPettibone
to DeeAmbro....
Liberals always start off talking about the surplus passed on to Bush compliments of the Clintons. You do know that's a joke, cause there really wasn't any surplus to speak of ....The $133Billion surplus you're referring to is science fiction. Mr Clinton just did some fancy juggling of the books and took funds from Social Security and other entitlements and used them in his projected 2001 budget, then buried that public debt in the books under Intergovernmental Holdings... It didn't make any difference to Clinton when he did it, he'd be out of office by the time it surfaced...... When the money Clinton had popped outta the entitlements surfaced, it added approximately $128Billion to the 2002 deficit right off the bat.......Why do you think Al Gore had stressed creating a "Social Security Lock Box" during the debates of 2000....When you learn more about how money was accounted for back then, it makes you wonder what really went on in the Clinton White House.
SeaSection
REV PETTYboner is a phony pulpit pimp liar, in my humble opinion.
He would not know Jesus if he stood beside the Demon Pettybone.
Paul warned us of these collection plate sponges like Pettybone, going into the houses of weak women, and conning them for a living.
Be a man phony baloney, and get a real job!
easton
If this bill, which passed with 60 votes in the Senate means shoving it down the throats of Americans, then Bush's 51 votes passing his massive tax cuts meant shoving it where the sun don't shine. Look, learn something about Representative Democracy. If a party wins the House, Senate, and White House that means they have earned the right to pass their agenda (Republican or Democratic). Obama and the Democrats were very, very clear that this was very high on their agenda. It is anti-Representative Democracy to state their passing their agenda is "trying to shove down Americans (sic) throat." Now if you hate America might I suggest you go elsewhere.
HollyK64
easton
Except...Obama was the one who once said health care should NOT be passed with just 51 votes because it's too important a piece of legislation to be forced on the country that way. How do you explain his change of tune? This is how I explain it. When he said that he thought he'd have no trouble passing the bill with 60 votes. Once it became obvious (Thank you Scott Brown) that that wasn't going to happen, he threw all his high ethics out the window and decided to get down and dirty, Chicago-style. And all of those who are commenting here saying a majority of Americans like things in the bill, that is just more evidence that this bill needs to be scrapped and those elements incorporated into a new bill. I mean my God, do you buy a car because you like the leather seats even if the engine is a lemon? You buy something or sign on to something when it's what works. Why is Obama in such a hurry to get this done even if it means getting a crappy piece of legislation that will bankrupt us? Trust me the answer has nothing to do with what's best for the country.
DeeAmbro
HollyK64,
Maybe we should just go with a Canadian-style system. Over the weekend, Sarah Palin admitted she and her family would sneak over the border to take advantage of Canadian style government run health care. He, he, she said it was ironic! Yeah, ironic that the teabagger queen who scared all the seniors into believing in death panels, has herself used the Canadian health care system. I wouldn't exactly call it ironic. I would probably call that more lies from the right. At least they're consistent...always telling us about their christianity while lying, fornicating and stealing.
RevPettibone
to DeeAmbro......
The Democratic Congress has sat in power since 2006 and allowed Fannie and Freddie to get away with incalculable damage to the country all the while Senator Chris Dodd and Representative Barney Frank along with their senatorial partner in crime Barack Obama, took in plenty of handouts and enough Lobby money to feather their own little rat's nests. All the while the country continued to suffer and slid into financial collapse. This was happening as a number of Republicans were pointing out and requesting the need for more regulations. These requests fell on deaf ears and were being completely ignored by Congressional Democrats in both houses..
DeeAmbro
Well, RevPettibone,
The republicans have a chance now to put their money where their mouth is. On financial regulation, where are they now? Nowhere to be found. To blame our financial meltdown on the two years the dems controlled the house while Bush was president is foolish, naive, and disingenuous. We are doomed to repeat this catastrophe if we don't learn from our mistakes. Lack of regulation of Wall Street was the main culprit here.
RevPettibone
to DeeAmbro.....
Damn right the lack of regulation was a main cause..... and the culprits that initially facilitated that were all associated with Bill Clinton's White House ........... Ya gotta love the way the 42nd president loves to tout his accomplishments... He has even gone as far as to credit himself for signing major legislation leading up to the bubble. In '04, before the recession hit, Clinton boasted in his autobiography how his administration was responsible for the staggering $800B in loans to borrowers who couldn't qualify. Mr.Clinton also exclaimed in an August '08 interview on ABC, how Democrats for years resisted any efforts by the Republicans to reign in Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac before it was too late. In addition if you reflect to others working for the president, you will see during the summer of '98, operatives of the Clinton administration, namely Giethner, Summers, Greenspan and Rubin, did at the behest of the president, torpedo and sink all efforts by Brooksley Born to regulate the derivatives market.
DeeAmbro
Yes, RevPettibone and the republicans were all too willing to assist. So let's not pretend the financial meltdown was the democrat's fault alone. We all share the blame as well, for buying into the housing bubble, and maxing out our credit cards with no money in the bank. Plenty of blame to go around.
PhilMcRoin
RevPetitFour
are you seriously trying to argue that republicans are and have been FOR financial regulations? You are mad, delusional and living in some alternate reality.. Yes there was a lot of deregulation that happened under Clinton.. yes he signed the bills.. he was a corporatist democrat, I will not argue that point.. but WHO WROTE THE BILLS?!?? And who has been pushing deregulation for the last 30 years?
fred88
deeambro writes: "Over the weekend, Sarah Palin admitted she and her family would sneak over the border to take advantage of Canadian style government run health care"
1) She was 6 years old at the time, so she had no choice.
2) The canadian hospital was closer to where her family lived than the ones in alaska. (and do you know what it was like to try to travel in Alaska in the 60s?)
3) The Canadian style government run health care was not yet implemented at the time.
timeisnow
Not when it going to cost every american more money, and not get the same kind of coverage your used to, and have to pay more for it. This bill is dirty with its back room deals and needs to be Started from Scratch with the Republicans
RevPettibone
to McGroin...and you to DeeAmbro.
For clarification of my inference one has only to remember before the 1994 Republican takeover, Democrats had sixty years of virtually unbroken power in Congress where they honed those deceptive traits I speak of now .... with I might add, the securing of substantial majorities most of the time as well...... With that information in hand the question must be asked, how can a group of smart people, studying issue after issue for years on end, with virtually unlimited resources at their command, not come up with a single policy that works now? Having the majority once again, why are Democrats of this decade so chronically incapable?
All that being said, one of two things must be true. Either the Democrats are unfathomable idiots, who ignorantly pursue ever more destructive policies despite decades of contrary evidence, or they understand the consequences of their actions and relentlessly carry on anyway because they somehow benefit. For many it is simply a practical matter of eliciting votes from a targeted constituency at taxpayer expense; we lose a little, they gain a lot, and the politician keeps his job. But for others, the goal is more malevolent ..... the failure is deliberate...... many on the left say in order to achieve equality the juggernaut must be brought to it's knees.. You do realize the breaking of a bank can be accomplished in more than one way, right ?????.
PhilMcRoin
RevPetticoat
It is very easy to sit on the sidelines as conservatives do and point out the flaws of every piece of legislation the other side puts out there.. but at least someone is doing something. To sit idly by and collect your paycheck, ensure your pension, and pocket as much corporate money as you can is not my idea of representing the public. Your expectations of some Utopian end result from flawless legislation never ceases to amaze me..
Oh what a perfect world it would be if only there were no progressives.. no liberals to get in the way.. we'd still have slaves to break their backs toiling in the fields keeping profits high, children would still have the right to work 90 hours a week and courageously die faithfully for the company along side their fathers for pennies a day the way God intended. There would be no pesky middle class getting in the way of business expecting to be treated with respect and dignity and a living wage. Women would be in the kitchen and the nurseries and not in the voting booths, diligently mending the fabric of the American family. Unions would be brought to their knees bathing in their own blood and shattered skulls at the mercy of federal troops.. What a wonderful world it would be.
dana64
revpettibone
THE ROOT cause of all the financial MISCHIEFS was the REAGAN REVOLUTION and his REAGANOMICS........................................the scrapping of Glas steagall act and the ARROGANCE of free marketeers........the MASTERS of the UNIVERSE in WALL street.
ARROGANCE ruins a lot of things............
i agree wiht DeeAmbro
camfield
Conservatives want to continue raping and pillaging the economy in their own unrestrained manner, anything that will maintain the status quo, growth of a class society and benefit the privileged above all. They have no respect of or concern for the welfare of average Americans.
Meanwhile, if health care cost continues (without reform) to rise as it already is doing, is that preferable to the form of cost increase some (but not all) foresee if health care reform is effected? At worst, the main difference, with reform, is that more people would receive health care--less pampering of the health care industry and the wealthy in general; more concern for the disenfranchised.
John Murphy
What will bankrupt the US and all Americans is the status quo, the insuranmce takeover of hea;th care which Republican puppets are pushing to please their insurance industry puppet masters. Reform is the only theing which can SAVE the US from bankruptcy. REAL reform (i.e. a single payer system) is the only thing that Amerrcians will have aftre the current inusrance run and insurance rationed system implodes from it's massive greed, massive overhead, and massive bureaucracy.
iamone3
Well written by Christopher Buckley. Yes Warren Buffett would be a better President than Obama for our country.
pennsykid2000
Everyone likes Buffett, but that comment shows how unserious, or naive, Buckley is in this piece. Being smart and having good ideas is only part of what is required of a president. Even more critical is being able to maneuver legislation through Congress to get it passed, and there's nothing in Buffett's background to say he'd be able to do that. Everyone first thought Perot would be great because of his business background, but he showed what a disaster he'd be in practice because of a complete inability to work with anyone else. Buffett is far more sociable and congenial, but I doubt he'd be any better at navigating through all the interests in Congress to get a major piece of legislation passed. You only need look at the dedicated obstructionism of the Republicans in Congress to realize that.
RevPettibone
to pennsykid2000....
Given your example..... Obama was and still is not qualified to run things.... Hell, at least Buffett has made a payroll and balanced his books..... quite well I would think considering his wealth .
CoddledEgg
For a write of Buckley's enormous talents, the Q&A is kind of a phone in.
Not so such of the relevancy of the Buffett references- the guy isnt President, he isnt running and he isnt going to be President. The guy has an opinion- great. It should be considered along side all the other pundit's observations.
Mike1c
I'm very surprised at this Q&A w/Buckley. The answers give very little insight to anything at all concerning health care reform. "As P.J. O'Rourke says...", "I, for one, would sleep very well..." That's crap.
Sorry Christopher. Poor reasoning doesn't bring light to this subject that upon which Dems need to close the door, because Republicans are against anything at all, except bankrupting the nation with tax cuts we cannot pay for.
SeaSection
Obama did not run the country to HELL like Shrub did so called liar REV PETTY pulpit PIMP.
DakLak
The son is nothing like his father - has less brains, too.
HollyK64
Christopher.
Thank you for that. We need your voice in this discussion.
libbygadsen
The Conservative movement has been thrown off balance, with the populists dominating and the intellectuals retreating and struggling to come up with new ideas. The leading Neoconservative figures of our time are now drawn from mass media, from talk radio and cable news. They've traded in the real Buckley for Beck, Kristol, Palin, and conservatism has been reduced to insulting sound bites.
Today, it is not clear that conservative thinkers have compelling alternatives to Obama's economic or foreign policy other than do nothing. At best, the right is badly divided over how to fix the economy and handle Iran and Afghanistan. So for the time being, the populists alone have the spotlight.
DeeAmbro
How to fix the economy that they themselves destroyed. Yes, that is a conundrum!
RevPettibone
Your two bit short term 'Political Idol' is complaining and crying out that he 'the innocent one' walked into this mess and never saw it coming. What a two faced congenital liar!%u2028America deserves better than this masquerade artist, who's an affront to all that is honest and real in America.%u2028Barack Obama owes an apology to the unemployed and those that are homeless today because of his attitude of self aggrandizement while he bankrupts the nation.
DeeAmbro
The unemployed? You mean the people Tom Delay thinks aren't working because unemployment benefits "keeps people from going and finding jobs."? Or the people that Jon Kyl says are sitting at home on their computers blogging because "because people are being paid even though they're not working."? Or the people Jim Bunning said "tough sh*t" to last week when he staged a one man filibuster against extending benefits? All I can say is THANK GOD for the democrats. Because if these heartless republicans were in power we'd really be in trouble!
RevPettibone
to DeeAmbro...
Bunning took a stand by pointing out no sooner had Democrats adpoted a policy of "pay-go"... than they turned around and refused to pay for the unemployment extension.... I've yet to read or hear a good answer to that, what's your explanation for them not taking the few $Billion out of the unused stimulus to pay for the extension???
I know people that do exactly what Kyl and Delay said some people collecting unemployment do......I also know a great many that collect unemployment and make an agreement with their new bosses to be paid in cash until their unemployment runs out........ and if you say you don't know folks that do any of that, than you're either blind,dumb... or are a member of the 3 categories I just listed.
awasixteyfour
"Polls show that more than 60 percent of Americans are against the current House and Senate bills."
True. But it's also true that those same ~60 percent of Americans are in favor of the current House and Senate bills when asked about the specific provisions *in* the bills rather than just being asked "Do you support or oppose the health care reform bill?" If you're going to make the point that we should listen to Warren Buffet because he's smart, you can't turn around and tell us we should be listening to the demonstrably-ignorant masses too.
As far as the Bush/Obama Iraq/Health Care comparison goes... Bush had 75% support both from the public and from Congress for military action in Iraq, and there was virtually no dissent being given a voice by the media at the time. Bush stamped his feet and said "the time for talk is over" as a way of announcing the launch of an invasion--Obama is stamping his feet and saying "the time for talk is over" because he's spent the better part of a year arguing with a Republican party that is completely unwilling to contribute to the conversation, instead choosing to fabricate lies about death panels to scare the American people into the "nervous as hell" state they're now in.
Lastly, your crack about "2,074-page bills" is uncalled for. The bill is only that long when printed in the markup format Congress uses--18-point font, double-spaced, two-inch margins on all sides, with line numbers for each line. An average, highly-readable novel--say, Florence of Arabia--would probably be 1000 pages printed the same way.
Monk66
Thank you for using facts instead of sound bytes to make your points.
I just wish the other isle would do the same..
Maybe this decade perhaps.
defannin
Warren Buffet seems like a nice old man. He has undeniable been a successful Wall Street investor. But the Last Thing We Need is a Wall Street type as President. I know he lives in Omaha and not NYC, but so does Ben Nelson.
BooBots
Is it belaboring the painfully obvious to point out that Boy Buckley endorsed and voted for Obama? What, pray tell, did he expect. You do reap what you sow, after all.
GPatton
Chris: You are the S.J. Perlemen of the smart set. When you try to be Ayn Rand, you make an ass of yourself. G. Patton
This user is no longer registered.
truthiness2
Buckley, Buffet, Zuckerman and other rich smart men did their best to hang Obama around our necks in the first place. Now, they are crying foul. Well, if they are so smart how come they were so wrong then? Did not get they payback they expected?
neverlate
You are spot on. These so called "smart men" did not see what seemed to me to be obvious. It is not like Obama isn't doing exactly what he said he would do.
mikeeeee
if you don't want to use the public option then don't. it's like abortions, if you don't like them don't have one. another old white man spewing shit on his way out the door. your descendants are going to pay dearly for your selfishness.
lordmi
Sure.
That is exactly where freedom starts.
Feel free - to use it or not to and give other people freedom to have it if the want to.
dana64
FREEDOM from fear of sickness and not being able to get a Doctor.
Buckley should be ashamed of himself.
we can create community health centers that will not be too costly.we have to fix so many matters that are not functionning well............this is a never ending project which is DECENT.
and one day AMerica will be rich again.
DON't WORRY be HAPPY as the song said.!!
dana64
Be POLITE..............you ruin your logical point by using dirty words.
as JESUS said they do not know what they are doing..............it is always $$$$$$$$.......
Jesus would even give MEDICARE for all...............instead of this bill
.
dana64
ON abortions they are right...........that we should not use TAXPAYER DOLLARS........
but in the land of FREEDOM ....you cannot PUNISH a DOCTOR for performing this procedure ..............
abortions are evil , but a sometimes necessary evil.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.