<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: ObamaCare: Friday nuggets and tidbits</title>
	<atom:link href="http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/11/13/obamacare-friday-nuggets-and-tidbits/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/11/13/obamacare-friday-nuggets-and-tidbits/</link>
	<description>HotAir.com&#039;s Greenroom</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 01:15:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: CK MacLeod</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/11/13/obamacare-friday-nuggets-and-tidbits/comment-page-1/#comment-40098</link>
		<dc:creator>CK MacLeod</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 18:13:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=12499#comment-40098</guid>
		<description>If the reconciliation ship really has sailed, then the question is how to distributed the 20% likelihood that Hennessey gave it.  It was one-third of the 60% likelihood of a comprehensive bill in &quot;this Congress&quot; (newly amended from &quot;this year&quot;).  

I think that since reconciliation was a fallback position after failure to reach the most desirable outcome for Ds - comprehensive bill passed under &quot;regular order&quot; - then it makes more sense to add the 20% or most of it anyway to the &quot;Obamacare fails&quot; side.  It means that the Ds will have to get 60 votes for something, and that that something would be &quot;compromise^2&quot; at worst - a calibrated compromise between the Full Nancy and a small compromise bill.  Every day that passes would seem to calibrate that compromise^2 closer to the small bill, while reducing the whole exercise to a merely political &quot;get something-anything done&quot; or risk abysmal embarrassment (i.e., correct judgment of Democratic performance).  

If paying attention to Republicans wasn&#039;t considered a fate worse than death, the Dems could pass a bill with overwhelming majorities that would be quite popular at best, greeted with a nationwide sigh of relief at worst.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If the reconciliation ship really has sailed, then the question is how to distributed the 20% likelihood that Hennessey gave it.  It was one-third of the 60% likelihood of a comprehensive bill in &#8220;this Congress&#8221; (newly amended from &#8220;this year&#8221;).  </p>
<p>I think that since reconciliation was a fallback position after failure to reach the most desirable outcome for Ds &#8211; comprehensive bill passed under &#8220;regular order&#8221; &#8211; then it makes more sense to add the 20% or most of it anyway to the &#8220;Obamacare fails&#8221; side.  It means that the Ds will have to get 60 votes for something, and that that something would be &#8220;compromise^2&#8243; at worst &#8211; a calibrated compromise between the Full Nancy and a small compromise bill.  Every day that passes would seem to calibrate that compromise^2 closer to the small bill, while reducing the whole exercise to a merely political &#8220;get something-anything done&#8221; or risk abysmal embarrassment (i.e., correct judgment of Democratic performance).  </p>
<p>If paying attention to Republicans wasn&#8217;t considered a fate worse than death, the Dems could pass a bill with overwhelming majorities that would be quite popular at best, greeted with a nationwide sigh of relief at worst.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: elclynn</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/11/13/obamacare-friday-nuggets-and-tidbits/comment-page-1/#comment-40091</link>
		<dc:creator>elclynn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 17:16:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=12499#comment-40091</guid>
		<description>Maybe some of those now against saw the &quot;debate&quot; on C-SPAN like I did. When Boehner read parts of the bill, I was furious.
All sorts of perks to business and a go to jail card for US citizens. &lt;strong&gt;I hate Congress!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe some of those now against saw the &#8220;debate&#8221; on C-SPAN like I did. When Boehner read parts of the bill, I was furious.<br />
All sorts of perks to business and a go to jail card for US citizens. <strong>I hate Congress!</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kissmygrits</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/11/13/obamacare-friday-nuggets-and-tidbits/comment-page-1/#comment-40089</link>
		<dc:creator>Kissmygrits</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 17:01:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=12499#comment-40089</guid>
		<description>One loser depending on help from another loser.  When was Clinton rehabilitated to the point that real people respect what he says?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One loser depending on help from another loser.  When was Clinton rehabilitated to the point that real people respect what he says?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: rockmom</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/11/13/obamacare-friday-nuggets-and-tidbits/comment-page-1/#comment-40082</link>
		<dc:creator>rockmom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 15:23:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=12499#comment-40082</guid>
		<description>If you have to call in Bill Clinton to say you are winning, it most certainly means you re not winning.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you have to call in Bill Clinton to say you are winning, it most certainly means you re not winning.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
