Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Fumesucker

(45,851 posts)

5. No one could have predicted that a Republican House would block spending on Obamacare

Reply to marmar (Original post)

Sat May 11, 2013, 06:33 AM

May 2013

I think about half the political stories on DU make me want to say "No one could have predicted" in an ironic way because so many of them are as predictable as gravity if you have been paying attention to politics for a while.

I like a term I first read on Krugman's blog: Hoocoodanode?

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=hoocoodanode

Slang for "Who Could Have Known?" Made mockingly, toward a situation where short term choices present an outcome that is clearly obvious - yet the claimants say the outcome could never be anticipated. There is an implicit assumption that person(s) at fault, refuse to accept responsibility for their choices. The original question (used by them) is an attempt to deflect criticism. This word is popularized on economic blogs and forums.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

22 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Health Secretary Goes Begging to Insurance Companies [View all] marmar May 2013 OP

This is going to be a massive political disaster for Democrats unless-- eridani May 2013 #1

I agree. Not only does this have the potential to be a political disaster for dems cali May 2013 #2

Leave out the word 'potential' -- it WILL be both. nt Demo_Chris May 2013 #18

The funding required for the ACA is miniscule compared with what would be required for single payer. bornskeptic May 2013 #6

The funding required for single payer is miniscule compared to what we spend on our military. Occulus May 2013 #13

Not true, of course. bornskeptic May 2013 #14

I'm sorry, I wasn't clear... but your complaints suggest nothing different to me. Occulus May 2013 #15

You can claim that it would reduce overall healthcare costs, but the government bornskeptic May 2013 #17

Profits make up less then 1%??? DiverDave May 2013 #21

That's bullshit. California alone is spending a billion dollars just to help people navigate ACA eridani May 2013 #19

or move to add Medicare to an "open enrollment" for all. stlsaxman May 2013 #10

For $900 a month? bornskeptic May 2013 #11

i wasn't aware that recipients pay $900/month... stlsaxman May 2013 #22

I disagree. It's going to be a disaster if we aren't very vocal supporters. There was a legit okaawhatever May 2013 #16

Message auto-removed Name removed May 2013 #3

In Taiwan the conservatives were smart enough to do just that eridani May 2013 #4

Message auto-removed Name removed May 2013 #7

The insurance companies do NOT want single payer, or even a public option n/t eridani May 2013 #8

No one could have predicted that a Republican House would block spending on Obamacare Fumesucker May 2013 #5

This is ProSense May 2013 #9

Thanks Pro! This is the first I've heard of things being "a disaster" flamingdem May 2013 #12

"Pushing to increase awareness" is costing one hell of a lot of money-- eridani May 2013 #20