im just so glad the democrats finally got what they always wanted


oh wait.

3/22/2010 12:23:41 AM

Quote :

"As soon as health care passes, the American people will see immediate benefits. The legislation will: * Prohibit pre-existing condition exclusions for children in all new plans; * Provide immediate access to insurance for uninsured Americans who are uninsured because of a pre-existing condition through a temporary high-risk pool; * Prohibit dropping people from coverage when they get sick in all individual plans; * Lower seniors prescription drug prices by beginning to close the donut hole; * Offer tax credits to small businesses to purchase coverage; * Eliminate lifetime limits and restrictive annual limits on benefits in all plans; * Require plans to cover an enrollee’s dependent children until age 26; * Require new plans to cover preventive services and immunizations without cost-sharing; * Ensure consumers have access to an effective internal and external appeals process to appeal new insurance plan decisions; * Require premium rebates to enrollees from insurers with high administrative expenditures and require public disclosure of the percent of premiums applied to overhead costs. * By enacting these provisions right away, and others over time, we will be able to lower costs for everyone and give all Americans and small businesses more control over their health care choices."

No more insurance gaps for a lot of young adults between high school, college, and first job/probationary period at said job. And more preventative care and less ER visits ftw. And no matter how many time the GOP says the dems would fair better in the fall if the scraped this and started over, they now have something real to run on, rather than just drummed up fears and tea party, death panels, crazy stuff. Big win tonight.

3/22/2010 12:23:57 AM

^^^ the tea-partyers are going to look lame by harping on a done deal.

The dems and Obama are going to move on to the next issue, and assuming it’s something that’s harder to spin as communism, their complaints aren’t going to stick.

[Edited on March 22, 2010 at 12:26 AM. Reason : ]

3/22/2010 12:26:19 AM

Quote :

"this could prove to be a Pyrrhic victory for the Dems. Expect to see quite a bit of "buyers remorse" from fiscally conservative independents in November. "

Nah...it might cost the Dems in the short-to-moderate term, but they'll have this forever. In 10 years, it won't matter what happens in the next election cycle or two, at least in terms of the makeup of Congress.

Quote :

" My prediction is that this helps Obama and the dems, not hurt them. "

hahaha

Quote :

"how is that any worse than prosecuting two unfunded wars."

The only fiscal saving grace is that wars eventually end.

3/22/2010 12:26:47 AM

Quote :

"My prediction is that this helps Obama and the dems, not hurt them. " hahaha"

don’t laugh.

The majority of Americans don’t have the attention span or depth of memory or knowledge about how things actually work as the people in TSB.

This might make you hate the dems more and longer, but most people only know what’s on TV for the week.

[Edited on March 22, 2010 at 12:28 AM. Reason : ]

3/22/2010 12:28:41 AM

Most sweeping legislation in decades to run on, is way better than the worst fears the right and tea party was spewing. The right and tea party and fox news has so demonized this bill that this there is no way the reality of it is as bad as how far they've lowered the bar and lowered expectation. Tonight is the best news for dems for Nov they've had in a long time.

3/22/2010 12:33:46 AM

Yeah, because all voters cared about in 2006 and 2008 was what happened the week before the election. Years of shitty leadership, unpopular wars and ballooning deficits had nothing to do with the Dem sweeps.

I'll stand by my statement that this is a partial victory for Obama but it'll serve as a net loss for the Dems in congress in this election cycle. But I suppose we shall see in the fall.

3/22/2010 12:33:51 AM

According to the GOP stopping this reform was supposed to be President Obama's Waterloo, it was supposed to break him, and the GOP has failed. And they were right, not passing reform would have been seriously damaging, and passing it will give the dems something to run on in November.

3/22/2010 12:57:11 AM

Boehner looked like he went from the Pumpkin skin tone to Oompa-Loompa in his speech. Did they ever find out who called Stupak a "baby killer"?

[Edited on March 22, 2010 at 1:06 AM. Reason : "]

3/22/2010 1:06:37 AM

republicans had some good moments but so did dems, especially bar stupak's speech which put the nail in the coffin
without getting any republican support this went way better than expected

two of the major controversies, abortion & procedure, were both distinguished by the executive order with stupak on board and them using up & down voting

the controversy actually worked to the dems favor as it gave something the right to focus on and demand up & down vote and fix abortion language, when that turned they had nothing to cling to
way to go dems, way to go Barack

3/22/2010 1:50:21 AM

I suspect the dems are already defeated come November, so they might as well pass their legislation to go with it.

That said, this could work. The ideal system would be one where everyone buys catastrophic coverage and then pays out of pocket for everything else. That would inject price sensitivity into the marketplace, increasing competition and driving down prices for everyone. This system will do that!

All workers and employers should drop their current coverage and start paying the fine, which is the regulated price for catastrophic coverage, and then pays out of pocket for all healthcare spending: prescription drugs, doctor visits, small emergencies, etc. Once they get sick, they sign up for insurance and start paying premiums subsidized by the majority which are paying the fine.

This works. Just set the fine so it roughly matches the price of catastrophic coverage and then go on television and tell everyone that is not currently sick to cancel their coverage to pay out of pocket. Brilliant! I don't understand why I did not recognize this brilliance until just now. I should have been vehemently in favor of this legislation all along!

3/22/2010 2:00:05 AM

I guess, since the GOP said not passing Health Care Reform would be President Obama's Waterloo, that upon the reform passing they'll admit this helps the Dems chances in November/that this is the GOP's Waterloo right?

3/22/2010 2:02:50 AM

America is done today. Thanks to all the 60 year old hipsters in congress. I thank all you here that know absolutely nothing except what you hear on nbc/cbs/abc/cnn. You all should have been aborted... and as liberals you would agree.

Obama is going down as the worst president in history. We all would be better off getting raped behind a middle school on our birthday than following this never-done-anything-in-his-life douche.

There is a GLOBAL CREDIT FUCKING HELL STORM and he wants to pass an expansive healthcare reform plan; growing government with a shrinking private sector; and still trying to SPENDDD out of a recession, using depression-era justification that is obsolete in a global economy on the cuspe of a... GLOBAL CREDIT FUCKING HELL STORM.

Liberals pay attention: you will notice in a few weeks our treasury bond will lose a AAA rating. Gaurenteed.

The whole world is laughing at us.

3/22/2010 2:06:01 AM

You already said this and it was just as stupid and off base the first time. . .

3/22/2010 2:07:03 AM

America is done today. Thanks to all the 60 year old hipsters in congress. I thank all you here that know absolutely nothing except what you hear on nbc/cbs/abc/cnn. You all should have been aborted... and as liberals you would agree.

Obama is going down as the worst president in history. We all would be better off getting raped behind a middle school on our birthday than following this never-done-anything-in-his-life douche.

There is a GLOBAL CREDIT FUCKING HELL STORM and he wants to pass an expansive healthcare reform plan; growing government with a shrinking private sector; and still trying to SPENDDD out of a recession, using depression-era justification that is obsolete in a global economy on the cuspe of a... GLOBAL CREDIT FUCKING HELL STORM.

Liberals pay attention: you will notice in a few weeks our treasury bond will lose a AAA rating. Gaurenteed.

The whole world is laughing at us.

3/22/2010 2:07:33 AM

Third time is not the charm, sorry.

3/22/2010 2:09:49 AM

^^HAHA, where do i start

1. obama can definately say he has done something in his life, besides being elected president, he has helped to pass one of the biggest piece of legislation this country has seen in decades

2. no one can top bush as worst president ever. but since none of the right's or tea party's predictions have come true, i wont hold my breath on this one

3. healthcare reform is deficit reform

4. I hope you're wrong about losing our credit rating, but we have decades of irresponsibility to blame for that, and its funny that republicans say they want to reduce spending when its republicans who spend without taxing, who drive up the deficit by the most amount
obama is spending out of necessity and plans to raise some taxes to pay for it

3/22/2010 2:14:49 AM

They've been singing that credit rating song for awhile now and it hasn't been lowered yet so it doesn't seem reasonable to expect it to happen now no matter what legislation was passed.
And if they did lower it what credibility do the ratings agencies have anymore, were they not the same groups singing the praises of mortgage backed securities and credit default swaps. Though I'm sure that the media shitstorm it would create would be monumental

3/22/2010 3:20:45 AM

Quote :

"About FrumForum.com is a site edited by David Frum, dedicated to the modernization and renewal of the Republican party and the conservative movement."

http://www.frumforum.com/waterloo

Quote :

"Waterloo by David Frum Conservatives and Republicans today suffered their most crushing legislative defeat since the 1960s. It’s hard to exaggerate the magnitude of the disaster. Conservatives may cheer themselves that they’ll compensate for today’s expected vote with a big win in the November 2010 elections. But: (1) It’s a good bet that conservatives are over-optimistic about November – by then the economy will have improved and the immediate goodies in the healthcare bill will be reaching key voting blocs. (2) So what? Legislative majorities come and go. This healthcare bill is forever. A win in November is very poor compensation for this debacle now. So far, I think a lot of conservatives will agree with me. Now comes the hard lesson: A huge part of the blame for today’s disaster attaches to conservatives and Republicans ourselves. At the beginning of this process we made a strategic decision: unlike, say, Democrats in 2001 when President Bush proposed his first tax cut, we would make no deal with the administration. No negotiations, no compromise, nothing. We were going for all the marbles. This would be Obama’s Waterloo – just as healthcare was Clinton’s in 1994. Only, the hardliners overlooked a few key facts: Obama was elected with 53% of the vote, not Clinton’s 42%. The liberal block within the Democratic congressional caucus is bigger and stronger than it was in 1993-94. And of course the Democrats also remember their history, and also remember the consequences of their 1994 failure. This time, when we went for all the marbles, we ended with none. Could a deal have been reached? Who knows? But we do know that the gap between this plan and traditional Republican ideas is not very big. The Obama plan has a broad family resemblance to Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts plan. It builds on ideas developed at the Heritage Foundation in the early 1990s that formed the basis for Republican counter-proposals to Clintoncare in 1993-1994. Barack Obama badly wanted Republican votes for his plan. Could we have leveraged his desire to align the plan more closely with conservative views? To finance it without redistributive taxes on productive enterprise – without weighing so heavily on small business – without expanding Medicaid? Too late now. They are all the law. No illusions please: This bill will not be repealed. Even if Republicans scored a 1994 style landslide in November, how many votes could we muster to re-open the “doughnut hole” and charge seniors more for prescription drugs? How many votes to re-allow insurers to rescind policies when they discover a pre-existing condition? How many votes to banish 25 year olds from their parents’ insurance coverage? And even if the votes were there – would President Obama sign such a repeal? We followed the most radical voices in the party and the movement, and they led us to abject and irreversible defeat. There were leaders who knew better, who would have liked to deal. But they were trapped. Conservative talkers on Fox and talk radio had whipped the Republican voting base into such a frenzy that deal-making was rendered impossible. How do you negotiate with somebody who wants to murder your grandmother? Or – more exactly – with somebody whom your voters have been persuaded to believe wants to murder their grandmother? I’ve been on a soapbox for months now about the harm that our overheated talk is doing to us. Yes it mobilizes supporters – but by mobilizing them with hysterical accusations and pseudo-information, overheated talk has made it impossible for representatives to represent and elected leaders to lead. The real leaders are on TV and radio, and they have very different imperatives from people in government. Talk radio thrives on confrontation and recrimination. When Rush Limbaugh said that he wanted President Obama to fail, he was intelligently explaining his own interests. What he omitted to say – but what is equally true – is that he also wants Republicans to fail. If Republicans succeed – if they govern successfully in office and negotiate attractive compromises out of office – Rush’s listeners get less angry. And if they are less angry, they listen to the radio less, and hear fewer ads for Sleepnumber beds. So today’s defeat for free-market economics and Republican values is a huge win for the conservative entertainment industry. Their listeners and viewers will now be even more enraged, even more frustrated, even more disappointed in everybody except the responsibility-free talkers on television and radio. For them, it’s mission accomplished. For the cause they purport to represent, it’s Waterloo all right: ours."

3/22/2010 5:45:27 AM

I know it's more important than it feels, but "OH NOES OUR CREDIT RATING MIGHT BE LOWERED BY THE SAME COMPANY THAT ISSUED ALL THE BOGUS CREDIT RATINGS THAT CONTRIBUTED TO THE ECONOMIC COLLAPSE!!!!"

You'll pardon me if I fail to give a shit.

(Yes, I know it's more important than that, but still)

3/22/2010 5:59:10 AM

Quote :

"by then the economy will have improved"

ahahahahahaha. no.

Quote :

"the immediate goodies in the healthcare bill will be reaching key voting blocs"

So you're saying they've locked up votes they already had and who, now, have less incentive to go out and vote because they got what they wanted?

Quote :

"This healthcare bill is forever."

I truly think that large portions of it have a questionable constitutional future. That being said, the government controls the narrative these days. Any future problems in the insurance industry, even if directly the result of this bill, will be blamed on the insurance companies not the mess that this bill is.

[Edited on March 22, 2010 at 7:20 AM. Reason : .]

3/22/2010 7:17:37 AM

Quote :

"So you're saying..."

Nope, a guy who was a former special assistant to President George W. Bush, conservative lobbyist, and pro-GOP author is.

3/22/2010 7:38:47 AM

Theme song of the day!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bmxyj6iInMc

3/22/2010 8:09:51 AM

Quote :

"I truly think that large portions of it have a questionable constitutional future."

what's constitutional has nothing to do with anything

3/22/2010 8:33:03 AM

We will carry you through this, kicking and screaming, and in the end you will thank us.

Wait, no, who am I kidding? You won't ever thank us. Enjoy your quality healthcare, ingrates.

3/22/2010 8:34:32 AM

Quote :

"healthcare reform is deficit reform"

lol. no. that rosy cbo estimate is about as much the final word on this bill's deficit implications as my estimate of this morning's turd. furthermore, the bill does not include additional, extremely costly but extremely necessary changes in health care spending, like the "doc fix". if you view this bill as some health care spending and deficit reduction panacea, than i have some snake oil you can add to the kool-aid you've been drinking. i'm not even saying i'm necessarily against the way this bill was funded. i'm just saying a spade needs to be called a spade.

Quote :

"Enjoy your quality healthcare, ingrates."

lol. no.

phase 1: universal health insurance coverage
phase 2:
phase 3: universal access to quality health care services

3/22/2010 9:12:41 AM

Quote :

"* Eliminate lifetime limits and restrictive annual limits on benefits in all plans;"

I would have preferred death panels.

3/22/2010 9:17:15 AM

I would prefer death panels for everyone in the tea party.

3/22/2010 9:17:59 AM

I didn’t realize there were so many nutters in the woodworks lurking TSB.

3/22/2010 9:18:50 AM

Any quality health care you receive 5 years from now will be from secondary or black markets.

Going to a hospital is turning into a privilege to stand in line while the system debates about how the hospital will receive payment for you being there. You might as well just skip the step of a doctor looking at you and doing nothing or referring you to somewhere else to stand in line while someone else argues about receiving payment for doing nothing.

3/22/2010 9:27:04 AM

^ that in no way reflects the reform bill. Congratulations on buying into Rush’s delusions.

3/22/2010 9:33:02 AM

wow there's alot of wingnut crying in this thread, it's unbelievable.

you know, you couldn't wait to spend a trillion dollars on Dubya's war - now when we try to pass something to put us on the right track domestically to fix an unsustainable system, and one which the CBO projects will save us money in the long run....oh, you cry foul.

3/22/2010 9:36:51 AM

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/21/opinion/21holtz-eakin.html

Former CBO Director:

Quote :

"ON Thursday, the Congressional Budget Office reported that, if enacted, the latest health care reform legislation would, over the next 10 years, cost about $950 billion, but because it would raise some revenues and lower some costs, it would also lower federal deficits by $138 billion. In other words, a bill that would set up two new entitlement spending programs — health insurance subsidies and long-term health care benefits — would actually improve the nation’s bottom line. Could this really be true? How can the budget office give a green light to a bill that commits the federal government to spending nearly $1 trillion more over the next 10 years? The answer, unfortunately, is that the budget office is required to take written legislation at face value and not second-guess the plausibility of what it is handed. So fantasy in, fantasy out. In reality, if you strip out all the gimmicks and budgetary games and rework the calculus, a wholly different picture emerges: The health care reform legislation would raise, not lower, federal deficits, by $562 billion. Gimmick No. 1 is the way the bill front-loads revenues and backloads spending. That is, the taxes and fees it calls for are set to begin immediately, but its new subsidies would be deferred so that the first 10 years of revenue would be used to pay for only 6 years of spending. Even worse, some costs are left out entirely. To operate the new programs over the first 10 years, future Congresses would need to vote for $114 billion in additional annual spending. But this so-called discretionary spending is excluded from the Congressional Budget Office’s tabulation. Consider, too, the fate of the $70 billion in premiums expected to be raised in the first 10 years for the legislation’s new long-term health care insurance program. This money is counted as deficit reduction, but the benefits it is intended to finance are assumed not to materialize in the first 10 years, so they appear nowhere in the cost of the legislation. Another vivid example of how the legislation manipulates revenues is the provision to have corporations deposit $8 billion in higher estimated tax payments in 2014, thereby meeting fiscal targets for the first five years. But since the corporations’ actual taxes would be unchanged, the money would need to be refunded the next year. The net effect is simply to shift dollars from 2015 to 2014. In addition to this accounting sleight of hand, the legislation would blithely rob Peter to pay Paul. For example, it would use $53 billion in anticipated higher Social Security taxes to offset health care spending. Social Security revenues are expected to rise as employers shift from paying for health insurance to paying higher wages. But if workers have higher wages, they will also qualify for increased Social Security benefits when they retire. So the extra money raised from payroll taxes is already spoken for. (Indeed, it is unlikely to be enough to keep Social Security solvent.) It cannot be used for lowering the deficit. A government takeover of all federally financed student loans — which obviously has nothing to do with health care — is rolled into the bill because it is expected to generate $19 billion in deficit reduction. Finally, in perhaps the most amazing bit of unrealistic accounting, the legislation proposes to trim $463 billion from Medicare spending and use it to finance insurance subsidies. But Medicare is already bleeding red ink, and the health care bill has no reforms that would enable the program to operate more cheaply in the future. Instead, Congress is likely to continue to regularly override scheduled cuts in payments to Medicare doctors and other providers. Removing the unrealistic annual Medicare savings ($463 billion) and the stolen annual revenues from Social Security and long-term care insurance ($123 billion), and adding in the annual spending that so far is not accounted for ($114 billion) quickly generates additional deficits of $562 billion in the first 10 years. And the nation would be on the hook for two more entitlement programs rapidly expanding as far as the eye can see. The bottom line is that Congress would spend a lot more; steal funds from education, Social Security and long-term care to cover the gap; and promise that future Congresses will make up for it by taxing more and spending less. The stakes could not be higher. As documented in another recent budget office analysis, the federal deficit is already expected to exceed at least $700 billion every year over the next decade, doubling the national debt to more than $20 trillion. By 2020, the federal deficit — the amount the government must borrow to meet its expenses — is projected to be $1.2 trillion, $900 billion of which represents interest on previous debt. The health care legislation would only increase this crushing debt. It is a clear indication that Congress does not realize the urgency of putting America’s fiscal house in order. Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who was the director of the Congressional Budget Office from 2003 to 2005, is the president of the American Action Forum, a policy institute."

3/22/2010 9:48:10 AM

Quote :

" So-called "Cadillac" plans costing more than $10,200 a year for individuals or $27,500 for family coverage (not counting dental and vision plans) will be subject to a 40% tax on the portion of the cost that exceeds the limit. Though the tax would actually be paid by insurers, it's expected that it would be passed along to plan holders in the form of higher premiums. "

Why, would the gov't punish companies or individuals that take responsibility for purchasing adequate health care for their needs???

Quote :

"Individuals earning more than $200,000 a year, or couples earning $250,000 or more, would be hit with a 3.8% surcharge on investment income to help pay for the bill."

Should not the tax code be changed so that individuals most benefitting the health care reform have to pay into the system that they use??

I have heard all to many cases/anecdotes of people who can not "afford health insurance" yet go out to the bars every weekend, have the premium cables channels, and/or
some rediculous car payment for a brand new auto. Retarted is the fact that this is the dems cash cow for helping financing their health care agenda.

Instead of highlighting these points the GOP instead focuses on garbage like ZOMG abortion as their means of fueling
the sensationlism surrounding the bill.

Quote :

"Obama is going down as the worst president in history."

Exaggerator or troll?

Quote :

"2. no one can top bush as worst president ever. but since none of the right's or tea party's predictions have come true, i wont hold my breath on this one "

maybe not worst per se but i bet history will show him to be pretty far up there.

I do not even agree with this legislation but think the rhetoric from the GOP goes a little to far.

[Edited on March 22, 2010 at 9:51 AM. Reason : f]

3/22/2010 9:50:59 AM

Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who was the director of the Congressional Budget Office from 2003 to 2005, is the president of the American Action Forum, a policy institute

Nice piece from a right wing think tank (AAF) president.

3/22/2010 9:52:36 AM

Gonna have a lot of fun reading all of the crying and hand-wringing from right-wing spank tanks this week.

3/22/2010 10:05:28 AM

Quote :

"Nice piece from a right wing think tank (AAF) president."

Super! Now, do you have any points to refute the claims?

[Edited on March 22, 2010 at 10:07 AM. Reason : ]

3/22/2010 10:07:16 AM

Quote :

"^ that in no way reflects the reform bill. Congratulations on buying into Rush’s delusions."

No, it reflects what the bill doesn't do. This is the direction that the status quo leads us in and the bill protects that. When you go to a hospital you are not the customer. That will continue to be true and, in fact, get worse.

Quote :

"wow there's alot of wingnut crying in this thread, it's unbelievable. you know, you couldn't wait to spend a trillion dollars on Dubya's war - now when we try to pass something to put us on the right track domestically to fix an unsustainable system, and one which the CBO projects will save us money in the long run....oh, you cry foul."

You would be surprised. Out of the people in this thread foaming at the mouth attacking the health care bill - many of them will attack what the Republicans did.

Considering the placement of this post, I can take most credit for it. I'm not a republican. I voted Democrat every time I voted for a major candidate (though few) and I've never once cast a vote for a republican candidate. I'm aware of how Fox News operates and I get my news from The Daily Show. And I want a public option for health insurance!

Your inability to frame the debate in any way other than familiar terms shows the political demagoguery instilled in you. Party comparisons are only relevant to the question of "which one is driving us to crisis faster" at this point. The real culprit lies in the institutional forces that dictates a rigid, inefficient, and dangerous direction is the only direction that we can take. See: health care reform. The Iraq war was just as bad - true, but irrelevant. Parties suck. It's time to vote all of these clowns out of office. We're due for an austerity plan like Greece at this point.

I would retort by calling anybody who associates with Democrats or Republicans "nuts", but I know that's not true. They're just uninformed.

3/22/2010 10:11:34 AM

Gaurenteed!

3/22/2010 10:13:03 AM

ONE BIG PYRAMID SCHEME, I thought those were illegal.

3/22/2010 10:14:03 AM

WTG Democrats

I am no expert, but I like everything I have seen about the bill that passed yesterday.

3/22/2010 10:16:24 AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_Care_and_Education_Affordability_Reconciliation_Act_of_2010

Quote :

"The proposed Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act of 2010 (or H.R. 4872)[1] is a reconciliation bill currently under consideration in the 111th United States Congress to make changes to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (H.R. 3590). Together H.R. 4872 and H.R. 3590 are the primary vehicle of the Democratic-controlled Congress's and Obama Administration's efforts to reform health care in the United States. The proposed Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is a bill that has passed both the Senate and the House but has not yet been signed into law by the President. The reconciliation bill was passed by the House of Representatives on March 21, 2010, by a vote of 219–212, but has not yet been approved by the Senate."

Maybe there's still hope, Obama could decline to sign it into law

3/22/2010 10:26:27 AM

While I'm not a fan of the name calling aspect of this graphic, I think its main point is telling.

In addition to delivering health care reform, last nights vote also brought this:

Quote :

"House boosts college aid for students in need By JIM KUHNHENN Associated Press Writer updated 11:44 p.m. ET, Sun., March. 21, 2010 WASHINGTON - Riding the coattails of a historic health care vote, the House on Sunday also passed a broad reorganization of college aid that affects millions of students and moves President Barack Obama closer to winning yet another of his top domestic policies. The bill rewrites a four-decades-old student loan program, eliminating its reliance on private lenders and uses the savings to direct $36 billion in new spending to Pell Grants for students in financial need."

We've avoided another depression, the Health Care Reform campaign promise is delivered, the student loan reform promise is delivered, the president advocates for science in our schools, he support stem cell research, the president ordered a return to the Army Field Manual rather than enhanced torture techniques, the president signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, he signed a bill to expand veteran benefits, he signed kids tobacco legislation, he signed a major land protection act, and we finally have a time-table (a word fiercely opposed by the last administration) for getting out of Iraq.

BEST

PRESIDENT

EVER

[Edited on March 22, 2010 at 10:31 AM. Reason : .]

3/22/2010 10:26:47 AM

Is there a non-partisan synopsis of exactly what is in the bill?

I don't believe anything I see in any of the major news outlets.

I've searched high and low, but it's all either "YAY WE FINALLY GET FREE HEALTHCARE" or "THE WORLD IS GOING TO END" type garbage.

3/22/2010 10:32:11 AM

When did the Bush administration use our tax dollars "to kill people"?

^ http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1914020220100319

[Edited on March 22, 2010 at 10:35 AM. Reason : ]

3/22/2010 10:33:30 AM

The Iraq War.

3/22/2010 10:34:10 AM

holy christ

3/22/2010 10:34:52 AM

I believe "national building" would be a more accurate and neutral phrase than "killing people".

3/22/2010 10:36:48 AM

Quote :

"The Iraq War."

You think the objective of the war was "to kill people"?

[Edited on March 22, 2010 at 10:37 AM. Reason : ]

3/22/2010 10:37:21 AM

well yeah

duh

[Edited on March 22, 2010 at 10:37 AM. Reason : there is no need to be neutral when discussing WAR, guys]

3/22/2010 10:37:40 AM