Democrats short of a filibuster on Medicare bill

Washington Times ^ | Wednesday, November 19, 2003 | Amy Fagan

[JohnHuang2]

Senate Democrats don't have the votes to filibuster the Medicare prescription-drug bill, and some of them are inclined to support the measure.

"I would support a filibuster, but I don't know the numbers are there yet," Sen. Richard J. Durbin, Illinois Democrat, said yesterday as he left the Senate Democrats weekly luncheon, where the Medicare bill was discussed. He is lobbying colleagues to filibuster or vote against the bill.

[JohnHuang2]

Wednesday, November 19, 2003

Quote of the Day by South40

[dr_who_2]

Damn. Democrats can't do anything right, even accidentally.

[sourcery]

This is your country. This is your country under socialism. Any questions?

Just say no to socialism.

[GeronL]

Ah darn

I wanted to see what happens when the party of smaller government tries to pass a bill to make government bigger and the party of bigger government tries to stop the bill to make the government bigger because the bill does not make the government big enough and then no bill passes so that the government does not get bigger and the party of smaller government can use it in a campaign against the party of bigger government because the party of bigger government fought against and killed the bill to make the government bigger and those who wanted the bill that would make government bigger would blame the party of bogger government because they didn't make the government government and they helped the party of smaller government get the votes of those who wanted to make the government bigger.

follow me??

[GeronL]

I was really looking forward to a filibuster. See #4

RJayneJ- I nominate myself for quote of the day -#4. =o)

[GeronL]

CORRECTION OF TYPO'S

---

I wanted to see what happens when the party of smaller government tries to pass a bill to make government bigger and the party of bigger government tries to stop the bill to make the government bigger because the bill does not make the government big enough and then no bill passes so that the government does not get bigger and the party of smaller government can use it in a campaign against the party of bigger government because the party of bigger government fought against and killed the bill to make the government bigger and those who wanted the bill that would make government bigger would blame the party of bigger government because they didn't make the government bigger and they helped the party of smaller government get the votes of those who wanted to make the government bigger.

[Mad_Tom_Rackham]

[Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican, will oppose the bill and support a filibuster if it comes to that, a spokeswoman said.]

When will the citizens of the great state of Arizona expunge this hateful lunatic?

[GeronL]

did you try reading #6?

[GeronL]

Its #6 of course, not the one filled with typo's. I think I confused myself writing that one.

[Maynerd]

McCain is not opposing this bill in the interest of small government. He's again feebly attempting to poke Bush in the eye. McCain is a petty SOB.

[Mo1]

"I would support a filibuster, but I don't know the numbers are there yet," Sen. Richard J. Durbin, Illinois Democrat, said yesterday as he left the Senate Democrats weekly luncheon, where the Medicare bill was discussed. He is lobbying colleagues to filibuster or vote against the bill.

HAHAHA .. Go ahead Durbin .. I dare you to filibuster this bill

[montag813]

Senate Democrats don't have the votes to filibuster the Medicare prescription-drug bill

Too bad. Do we?

[Capitalism2003]

"Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican, will oppose the bill and support a filibuster if it comes to that, a spokeswoman said." What the HELL is wrong with this man?

[Fledermaus]

Which proves the Dems are morons. This bill sucks and is nothing BUT a large giveaway to big government BS.

I think the only thing they hate is that it won't go into effect until 2006 and thus the GOP can change it when they get a bigger majority in the Senate. That is if they do given they themselves are shoving big government bureaucracy down our throats.

But Bush wants another election issue since he's realized his "leadership" is non-existent on anything else. Bush is as bad as Clinton with his triangulation and his ridiculous "new tone".

After 9/11 Bush should have said, "Screw my reelction, I'm going to do whatever is necessary to secure the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of the American people as I promised when I took my oath of office."

But forget it. Steel tarriffs to pretend they can win Pennsylvania (dream on), pork spending that makes hogs endangered, massive increases in worthless bureaucracy and it's budget, lack of control over State and the CIA, no top down management of our military that lets Col. West be brought up on charges for fighting a war, etc.

Bush's only saving grace is that the Dems are zillions of times worse.

This drug bill doesn't get much reporting as to it's detail. Everyone argues the concept, not the solution. I believe this bill will be repealed less than six months into effect when the silent seniors (like the silent majority, they have assets and don't whine or are activist) see how screwed they will be. It will be just like that catastrophic health bill the Dems passed years and years ago that the media said the seniors wanted and when it passed they wanted it dumped. Dan "I can steal more than Byrd" Rostenkowski pushed the bill through and pulled it out and killed it faster than Buffy the Vampire Slayer once he started getting stoned in the streets by little old grannies.

And I have another problem...if this bill is so wonderful, why does Congress EXEMPT federal retirees from the program and continue to give them a GREAT program paid by them and the taxpayers (taxpayers should NEVER be forced to pay into government employee matching programs for healthcare and retirement)?

If the Federal healthcare program is good enough for federal employees (and it's full of choices where you decide services based on price and can pick and choose from among so many options about co-pays, deductibles, coverage for drugs or certain things like cancer, has eye-care, dental, etc. that the HMO's and PPO's that Ted Kennedy and they Dems created and now hate don't give to private citizens), then why can't it be good enough to replace Medicare?

I expected this kind of crap from Democrats, but Republicans? Even the "privatization" part that the Dems whine about is only 6 experiments in 6 cities and only starts in something like 2010! It's like when Bush and the GOP controlled Congress first gave us tax rate cuts but phased them in over the next 5 light years.

Or when they eliminate the estate tax bit by bit for 10 years and then wipe it all out in 2011 and go back to 2001! What incredibly stupid moron thought of that? Lott? Bush? Rove? Kermit the frog?

And we know the "estimated $40 billion a year" to ruin the entire prescription drug system will easily be more like $100 billion and most of the costs kept off the books in that wonderful world of unfunded future liabilities that is the world of pyramid schemes. No wonder they all want to let illegal aliens invade our country...they need the money to pay off future voters.

In 2004 I'm voting Communist. At least they mean it when they want to keep you in horrible poverty and kill you based on their whims and control every aspect of your life. The GOP and the Dems pretend otherwise and the Libertarians are too stoned and driving around looking for hookers to notice.

[RJayneJ]

Thanks for the heads up! };^D)

[onyx]

In 2004 I'm voting Communist.

ROFLMAO!

Hey RJayneJ -- not so fast --- look at Fledermas'! LOL!

[NittanyLion]

Darn. The Dems were the last hope of conservatives on this issue. More of my hard-earned money taken from me by the "party of less government".

[RJayneJ]

Thanks for the nomination! };^D)

[dalereed]

Instead of adding drugs they should be working to eliminate Medicare and SS!