The insurance industry doesn't want to repeal Obamacare, just the parts that aren't to their advantage. I betcha betcha betcha they won't push to repeal the individual mandate, for example.
At the very least, if they actually are for repeal it suggests the bill is not beneficial. Or it's possible that they think none of the major planks will be repealed (after all, as Ezra points out, the teabaggers seem to be against things that help the industry, like mandates), and just believe a Republican Congress will eventually just loosen regulations, making HCR even more profitable.
So are hair cuts covered now?
Does a panel of experts have to determine that you need one really badly?
The insurance industry doesn't want to repeal Obamacare, just the parts that aren't to their advantage
You can take that to the bank. The insurance industry exists to game the system. That's their entire racket. Making big concessions to them at the start of the process (as Tom Daschle's oops-did-I-say-that-out-loud moment this week confirmed) only made this part of the process all the easier for them. And they're almost certainly going to win this time too.
5: I guess that could be an actual test of the power and indepence of the Tea Party -- if they are able to mount a strong campaign to repeal the individual mandate in Obamacare, or if they just lie down and let the insurance industry relax regulations and maintain the individual mandate.
6: The big players in the right wing machine will quietly take aside some of the leaders of the TP movement and let them know that keeping quiet about this will help them with some other part of the agenda. Perhaps more likely they'll let them know that keeping quiet will ensure lucrative future employment.
I thought the leaders of the TP movement were already funded and organized by big players in the right wing machine. The only thing they would ever break with the Republican position on is immigration.
keeping quiet about this will help them with some other part of the agenda
I don't think you're being cynical enough, togolosh. Railing about the mandate makes good electoral politics and it's a free vote because Obama will veto any attempt to repeal it. Just as having voted for TARP themselves when President Bush proposed it isn't keeping many Republicans from screaming about Obama's socialist bank bailout. They know exactly how informed and nuanced their audience is. The rhetoric never has to align with any real action; all they have to do is screech louder and at a higher pitch than the day before.
Shorter 9: internal consistency and a buck fifty will get you a cup of coffee.
a buck fifty will get you a cup of coffee
HA! No.
A buck fifty will get you a cup of coffee at my local Starbucks. Maybe it's a buck seventy-five.
11,12: Does this mean that even Starbucks isn't internally consistent?
I wouldn't mind conceding pirate-blushing profits to insurers in exchange for truly universal, Medicare-for-all-without-the-weird-Depression-era-holes-for-medication-and-dentistry coverage.
||
...lose the shits, take out the odd Jesus Christ, and lose Oh fuck off...
|>
15: Somewhere near the end. (NSFW w/o headphones.)
5: Tom Daschle's oops-did-I-say-that-out-loud moment this week
I didn't hear about that, I don't think.
I put up a picture of my haircut, as I noted below. I had to fight insurance tooth and nail for that haircut.
except, like, it didn't work. but I think I fixed it now.
So, what do the Chicagoans think of Rahm Emanuell's chances at the mayoralty of Chicago? Part of me doesn't want him to do anything ever in elected office, and the other part thinks that this might be the one area where his particular style could do some real good.
yeah, I don't imagine anyone is thinking, "rahm's just not ready for that sharp-elbowed, back-stabbing crowd. he's like a lamb to the slaughter."