Rudy to Obama: “Here’s Your Bi-Partisanship, Slapnutz”

I’ve said many, many, many times before in this blog (I have a habit of repeating myself) that bi-partisanship is really just a Latin word that means “to bend over and do what the Democrats tell you to.” We’ve heard the word bi-partisanship a lot, yet that’s basically what most of the D’s mean when they say it.

This is usually where the left chimes in and says “we won.” Great. Call a vote. We can’t stop you.

Back to bi-partisanship, which you’re going to being hearing a lot of this week after Dear Leader speaks to us Wednesday night (again) aboot his health care plan (again). He’ll say that “all ideas are on the table” and that “he wants to work together,” but as Rudy Giuliani said on “Meet the Press” this past Sunday, that’s a bunch of horseshit.

Ok, so he didn’t say “horseshit” persay, but he did say this…

I think that, I think, but I think the biggest mistake the president has made is he hasn’t done cost savings. He, he hasn’t put a single realistic cost saving proposal on the table. A trillion dollars, healthcare history is everything costs three times as much when you look at the predictions for Medicare, Medicaid, everything else. So a trillion dollars is the low-ball estimate of what this is going to cost. He took off the table medical malpractice reform. Big mistake. Big, big mistake if you want a bipartisan solution to this. You take off the table one of the biggest ways in which you can save money and create some equity in the system. He took off the table interstate purchase of insurance. That’s real competition. Now you can–you have 50 states that are competing with each other, you can really bring the cost down.

If you take medical malpractice reform off the table, which is a major Republican objective, so that’s gone immediately, you take interstate purchase of insurance off the table, that’s gone immediately, it becomes impossible for most Republicans to figure out how you’re going to save the money other than pulling the plug on grandma. The president–remember what the president said was this is going to be deficit neutral. Some raise in taxes, but basically deficit neutral. So how do you reduce a trillion dollars or $750 million in–billion in costs, without taking services away from people who get services? And the people who basically get the services are senior citizens. So the president has created this dilemma. He wasn’t just not specific about it, the assumptions that he made lead, lead to the conclusion that he had, you have to cut massive numbers of people off.

So yeah, bi-partisanship my ass.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s