Obama 'Concerned' About DFHs Attacking Centrist Dems over Health Care Reform. Gee, I Wonder Why?
By Susie Madrak Saturday Jul 04, 2009 3:30pm
If the president was more passionately engaged in the fight to achieve the goal (instead of announcing he's rather have something bipartisan than legislation that, you know, actually gets the job done), and Congressional leaders were more focused on actually getting us affordable health care instead of placating the insurance lobby and other members of Congress, this would be a moot point.
But they're not.
And if the Democrats had shown they're actually looking out for us, and not their powerful sponsors, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
What the president doesn't seem to understand is, to us, this is an economic Hurricane Katrina. The water is rising and we're stranded on the roof, praying and waiting for help. Seems to us that you're more interested in looking bipartisan than getting us off the roof. Don't you know how scary it is, watching the water rise? Are you actually telling us to wait on the roof and mind our manners?
Mr. President, will you help us - or the insurance lobby? History has shown that you can't do both.
President Obama, strategizing yesterday with congressional leaders about health-care reform, complained that liberal advocacy groups ought to drop their attacks on Democratic lawmakers and devote their energy to promoting passage of comprehensive legislation.
In a pre-holiday call with half a dozen top House and Senate Democrats, Obama expressed his concern over advertisements and online campaigns targeting moderate Democrats, whom they criticize for not being fully devoted to "true" health-care reform.
"We shouldn't be focusing resources on each other," Obama opined in the call, according to three sources who participated in or listened to the conversation. "We ought to be focused on winning this debate."
Specifically, Obama said he is hoping left-leaning organizations that worked on his behalf in the presidential campaign will now rally support for "advancing legislation" that fulfills his goal of expanding coverage, controlling rising costs and modernizing the health system.
Remember when candidate Obama's campaign was urging big donors and other contributors to give directly to his campaign instead of liberal activist groups? I didn't trust it then, and I don't trust it now. I'm not all that interested in allowing what is far too often a corporatist, right-leaning agenda to go unchecked.
That said, there's a legitimate case to be made that we should focus on positive goals rather than negative attacks. I'm not saying I agree (certainly not in all circumstances), but we could at least have a reasonable discussion about that. (In fact, I just had one the other day from a friend who's working in health care reform, and she said the same thing. But see, I trust her.)
In the call, leaders of both chambers expressed optimism that they will hold floor votes on legislation to overhaul the $2.2 trillion health system before Congress breaks in early August.
For his part, the president vowed to use his strong approval rating with voters to continue making the case for sweeping reform, according to one congressional staffer with knowledge of the conversation. Obama also hinted that efforts are under way to discourage allies from future attacks on Democrats, according to the source, who did not have permission to speak on the record about the discussion.
"Sweeping"? I think that word does not mean what he thinks it means. Because until we sweep greedy insurance companies out of their seats at the right hand of the throne, this will be a reform in name only, just like Massachusetts.
I wonder how they're going to "discourage" us? Cut off our internet access?
Photo by Thomas Neff.
Login or Register to post comments.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSz6X5NMXnM
Susie I suspect you already know that the only kind of 'reform' that can be accomplished is that which further enriches the Health Insurance Parasites, and the rest who have us enslaved, and are harvesting our resources like grape-pickers stripping vines.
There is no possibility of any real change, either in health care, or in energy policy, or in international militarism, or in climate policy, or in species protection policy or in water and air purity regulation, or in product safety, or in anything else that might cost the Owners a thin dime or a moment's discontent.
We've traded a smirking, inarticulate, classless bumbler for a toothy, glib, polished charmer. The country took off the cowboy boots and slipped into the sharkskin loafers.
I breathlessly await the next emanation of "change": I'll bet Obama doesn't cut brush with a chain-saw...
considering the alternative, I think we traded up, slightly, sorta.
Change comes from getting congressmen in office that won't take bribes. Until then we are not in the game.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q
These people are living the high life. Taking money from all directions, in a job that was never supposed to exist in it's present form.
There was not supposed to be career polliticians. It was supposed to be government of for and by the people.
You were supposed to do your civic duty and spend a term being a congressman or a senator and then go back home and do what you were doing before. There was not supposed to be retirement packages, high wages, and lifetime jobs!
There is not one average American that could not do a better job for 25% of the cost. If we get rid of the career pollititcian you would finally see America as it was ment to be. But as long as we let the same people stay and hand off the seat to the next person that will stay for life, we will get the same old criminal behavior we have been getting for the last 50 years or more.
We have to put these people out of government for good!
They are criminals, they do take birbes and at the expense of the whole country.
Here is a list of elected people taking payoffs to cheat the American people and the amounts of bribes being taken. This is just from health care and insurance.
It is mind boggling to think how much these people are taking from others!
Arlen Specter (R-D- PA- $4,026,933)
Max Baucus (DLC- MT- $2,833,731)
Mitch McConnell (R-KY- $2,758,468)
And when you just go right to Big Insurance, the non-presidential candidates who got the biggest legalized bribes were the 7 senators who have been tasked with the job of killing single-payer:
Ben Nelson (DLC-NE- $1,196,799)
Max Baucus (DLC- MT- $1,184,113)
Joe Lieberman (DLC- CT- $1,036,302)
Arlen Specter (R-D- PA- $1,035,530)
Chuck Schumer (D-NY- $981,400)
Mitch McConnell (R-KY- $929,207)
Chuck Grassley (R-IA- $884,724)
We need to investigate and prosecute these criminals now. Severe jail terms are in order for these criminals!
This is just the tip of the iceberg, you know if this is being reported that there are multiples of this.
This greed is destroying our country, we have got to change this and soon! Our very existance depends upon it.
It is impossible for me to believe that a randomly chosen panel of jury members, all faithful and true, would not find every one of these crooks guilty of quid pro quo-based bribery and influence peddling. the entire crew you have listed is rotten to the core. FWIW I also wonder exactly how much money Obama has taken from those sources.
I agree with you on almost all the Senators on the Finance Committee that you single out with one exception, Chuck Schumer. He may not be the most liberal Democrat but he is a Senator who is trying to craft a public or single payer option. He's in disagreemnt with Grassley and the Democratic Chairman Max Baucus. What a system we have. There are more people who live in my Congressional District in Brooklyn NY than in the entire state of Montana. Chuck Schumer is the best fundraiser bar none but the kind of money he's gotten doesn't go that far in New York He's been on record and on national TV as being in favor of public plan.
and the sad, sad truth.
Thank you.
I'm with ya, woody.
Obama for America, yes we Cannes.
The people ate it up.
They watch their TeeVees and they believe the shit.
As Tyler Durden replied
The reelection campaign will best be something like: I can't believe it's not change.
Chomsky - Necessary Illusions: Thought Control in Democratic Societies 1/6 here and Class War here
too true.
I believed it when he said he wouldn't support single payer. He said....
Barack Obama
On Health Care:
Every American has the right to affordable, comprehensive and portable health coverage. My plan will guarantee coverage through partnerships among employers, private health plans, the federal government and states.
versus...
Hillary Clinton
On Health Care:
I’m going to provide universal health care -- quality, affordable coverage for every American. We can do it by spending our health care dollars more wisely.
versus...
Dennis Kucinich
On Health Care:
I am the co-author and co-sponsor of HR 676, the Conyers/Kucinich bill, which will provide for true universal, single-payer health care. All residents of the United States will be fully covered for medical, dental, vision, mental health and long-term care. There will be no deductibles, no co-pays, and no insurance company employees whose job it is to deny you coverage so their company makes more money.
The people made their choice in the primary. Regardless how this health care thing goes, I'm satisfied that Obama was a much better choice than McCain.
Jobs:
Barack Obama
On Good Jobs:
As President, my trade policy will open foreign markets to create and support good middle-class jobs – for American workers. At a very minimum we need to stop giving tax incentives to companies to shift job overseas. And we need to reward companies who invest in America.
versus...
Hillary Clinton
On Good Jobs:
Part of a new strategy for jobs means that universal, high-speed broadband access has to be as big a priority today as interstate highways, canal systems, rural electrification and railroads were in generations past.
versus
Dennis Kucinich
On Good Jobs:
My first act in office will be to notify the appropriate parties that the United States is pulling out of NAFTA and the WTO. We will return to a system of bilateral trade based on worker rights, human rights and environmental protection.
---
Once the nominee was decided, it was time to close ranks and keep McCain out.
You didn't mention Nader or McKinney who had a comparable message and roughly the same chance as Kucinich.
A world apart from two corporatist candidates.
Keep slurping up the Democrats' crap and that's all we will ever have.
Air the Chomsky videos.
“Obama is a complete corporatist.”
Yep - that's what most Democrats wanted. They wanted another Bill Clinton.
That is what Madison Avenue is all about, convincing the mass market to buy something that actually is not in their interest.
The Obama campaign was top notch at Madison Ave, that is why they won the Cannes awards.
"The people made their choice in the primary."
actually, I don't believe the People made the choice. They were mostly manipulated into the choice they made because the MSM utterly controlled the dialog and debate. They went out of their way to reelentlessly depict anybody who stood up for a People oriented government as being total loonies, they aggressively ignored them during the debates - letting them speak only when it couldn't be avoided, and finally, refused to let them attend. All while this was going on, there was a relentless barrage of tripe about so-and-so is unelectable and would never do, while the corporatists were promoted as the fall back positions to the Republican candidates.
Kucinich and Gravel were the best candidates for the People and for government of, by and for the People. And the Republican owned and operated MSM made sure thay they were portrayed as lunatic fringe. Best thing that can happen in the next cycle is for people to throw their TV in the trash.
Yes, I certainly agree. The fix is in. O-bought-ma is protecting the insurance companies. Seems like any corporation is better than us peóns and our screaming about real health care, not supporting another parasite corporation.
But there is nothing that these crooks can do that cannot be undone and set to right. We need to stop electing the MSM/DCCC/DLC/DSCC annointed candidates. It's the only way real change is ever going to happen. If the electorate won't do that, then put a fork in it, the country is finished in an exact replay of the causes that extinguished the Roman empire.
As much as I want a single payer system I'm still amazed that people think we can destroy a multi-billion dollar industry in one fell swoop. It is going to take more than one step to get there.
it doesn't. And the industry would not be 'destroyed' as you put it. Health Care costs and the work of administration would be taken care of by Yours Truly, the US Gov't. The big losers would be the CEOs etc, who get the obscene compensation packages. The employees would be needed still to process claims. Their work would not go away. Not like a manufacturing job, or a job at a financial institution that's been taken over.
After breaking as many campaign promises as he has, Obama no longer holds the moral high ground to tell us what to do. If we want to go after centrist Dems, we will.
He needs to deliver on the change he promised or shut the puck up! I am tired of being lied to... and Obama appears to be no better than BUSH at this point. He has done little to nothing to advance single payer, private option with healthcare reform. He has done nothing when it comes to transparency! And on the torture issue, he's done absolutely ZERO to turn things around. In fact he's worse than BUSH!
What about the economy? After promising to really crackdown, to insure that the Wall Street crowd, the banks etc, could no longer take the risks they did, he's done the opposite. They can still run wild and take everyone down with them. Obama has surrounded himself with the biggest enablers. He's done nothing to strengthen the rules.
Why? Is every promise he made just another Bush like lie? Sadly, I think it is...
“He has done little to nothing to advance single payer...”
He specifically opposed it in the campaign. However, the one thing he did say, so I think I recall, is, opposed to McCain, he would not tax the value of employer paid health insurance as imputed income. Instead he said he would finance health care for the uninsured by cutting federal spending elsewhere.
Now, I hear that taxing employer paid health insurance is no longer off the table. That will hit yours truly here in the wallet.
Bottom line: we get health care reform WITH a public option or the Democrats get no more support, of any kind, ever again.
"Elect more Democrats" my shiny, metal ass.
That third and/or fourth party needs to get here soon...
Do what's right and not politically correct. Everyone knows the GOP is in the tank for big insurance companies and nothing you do will sway them. The last thing the GOP wants is competition for the health insurance industry because they know it will kill their profit for death. Why are we even having this discussion? Just do what's right. Put a one payer system to a vote. You have the votes to do it. IF a Dem votes against it, we'll get rid of them. This is a once in 50 years chance. We will not see a 60 majority for another 50 years. If it doesn't get done now, this country will die becuase of increasing cost.
!!!
In the (paraphrased) words of Joe Clark, "God told me to fix it, but he didn't say 'Joe, be nice about it'!"
http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20090628/cm...
“The Nation -- God I hope David Broder is wrong. "The President has told visitors," the Washington Post columnist wrote last week, "that he would rather have 70 votes in the Senate for a bill that gives him 85 percent of what he wants rather than a 100 percent satisfactory bill that passes 52-48."”
You know, I'm not buying this "bipartisan" approach. I think it's a con job to disguise a means of accommodating lobbyists.
This isn't bipartisanship. It's merely using a word and the concept it embodies for cover to excuse guilty, willful complicity in support of a vast criminal enterpirse. It is becoming impossible for me to consider anybody who is standing up for the insurances companies, for-profit hospitals and HMO's and drug industries as anything other than irredeemably corrupt anti-People crooks.
Cold day in hell before I will vote for any of them a second time, regardless the outcome of the election in which they satand for office. (You reading this Obama staffers?)
Now, what is he going to do about it? He hears us.
If he blows this, he's lost me. I will turn on him.
And I believe that would be a harbinger for the next Prez election.
So, pay attention Mr Prez. You are losing us at an accelerated pace.
"We shouldn't be focusing resources on each other," Obama opined in the call, according to three sources who participated in or listened to the conversation. "We ought to be focused on winning this debate."
that is just what we are doing mr.President. we want true
health care reform. there are several important democrats
(bluedogs) who are not on board and are definitely siding
with the mega-insurance and pharmacy corporations.
don't tell us to sit back and take our chances.
this is one campaign promise we are going to make
sure you KEEP YOUR WORD. so don't tell us to STFU !
KEEP YOUR WORD !
This should be our rallying cry. Period.
Sounds like he would rather lose the game and win the best sportsman trophy.
I feel like I've drawn at least 7 or 8 of them so far, and he keeps stepping right over them, a couple before I even voted for him. I'm done with both him and the Democratic Party if this doesn't happen.
We need to "make him do it" just like FDR.
A person where I work is considered to be working independently/self employed. His health care insurance comes from his paycheck. He has a family of four. To get mid level coverage he has to pay $1500.00 a month for Health care insurance. $18,000 a year. That's 36% of his income. Another 27% goes to taxes (Federal, State, local, and property). 63% percent of a persons income making $50,000 goes to taxes and health care insurance. That leaves him 37% of his income do do what? You're not working for a living, you're living to work. I understand taxes, they should be lower, but paying 36% of your income to health care? We call this country the greatest country on earth. Bullshit.
Ouch,
here, a salary of roughly 65k USD, would make you pay 18k USD in taxes, and be covered in the bargain. Admittedly, we do have a higher cost of living here in Norway than in the US, with a 25% sales tax on consumption (12% on food), and the healthcare is not entirely free, but I never heard of anyone in this country getting ruined by medical bills, but still,
we have a 7,8% tax on gross income, then a 10k USD flat deductible, then 28% on the net income after the deductible(until you reach the progressive layers). Try that for a socialist hellhole drowning in taxes, and compare to your system.
what percent of the Noregian people in live in need? True neediness?
If America doesn't get the proper health care it deserves, it's proof the country is run by rich interests, and both parties are ineffectual and ineffective.
You're the wealthiest country in the history of the planet, you put men on the moon, you control world politics. How about some health care for the citizens??? Is that asking for too much?
(I usually don't weigh in on these threads because I am Canadian, and we already have it. It does send a clear message to the world about who's running the country and planet.)
...and have single payer, you're probably BETTER qualified to comment about what we're doing.
I was trying to explain single payer to a group of people on a sports forum who had made typically poorly-informed comments about how awful it would be to live in Canada...the government steals their money to insure deadbeats, and so on. I don't live there (though I'm still trying to get there), but I gave it my best shot, having seen how efficiently my aunt in British Columbia received necessary care when she became critically ill.
I don't have all the facts and figures exact--hell, I'm trying to just keep up with what's going on here in the U.S. But what got me was that this was a group of self-identified Obama supporters...but they're mad as hell because "Obama's gonna turn us into Canada, raise our taxes, and make us pay more for health care where you can't get in to see a doctor." I wish I could have explained Canada's system better...without using the term "you fucking idiots."
But then, I wish I lived in Canada, too.
My point is, you're uniquely qualified to comment.
by a conservative Canadian Senator:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/...
You might also point out that 91% of Canadians believe that their healthcare is superior to the USA's. That's a landslide in anyone's book.
I am not Canadian, but as I understand it, there are some European single payer systems that are even better than Canada's.
Thanks for the link, Bryan.
below the article, so you might want to read them before sending the link along. I read them after I posted it. Bottom line is though, the vast majority of Canadians think that their system if superior to ours.
From what I read here, yours is a nightmare I wouldn't wish on anyone. I am
110%150% satisfied with our system.Yes, I understand. And I've heard grumbling when I visit, too. But with that grumbling comes the acknowledgment that Edwin makes below: for all Canada's systemic problems, they're nothing compared to those of health care in the U.S.
In the "wealthiest country in the world," millions have inadequate care or go without here. That's absolutely immoral.
...when it is considered that there never seems to be the slightest problem raising trillions for wars of aggression or trillions more to bail outcorrupt banksters or trillions more in the aggregate for a thousand different variations of corporate welfare and other scams to plunder the wealth of the nation and place it in undeserving private hands.
"Furthermore, according to a Fraser Institute study, in 2006, the U.S. spent $6,714 per capita versus $3,678 in Canada."
That's the $3,000 in paperwork and insurance comapny hoo-haw, we don't have.
Too be honest, I'm not even sure exactly how it works. It's just always been there, my whole life.
We used to pay monthly premiums, which were very low, but they replaced that with an Employer Health Tax. Businesses pay the tax now. I've never heard any business complain about it either. I guess it's a tax write-off for them.
I've always had a card in my wallet that entitles me to free services anywhere I go. Flash the card, see the doctor, leave. You never see a bill, or even know how much it costs.
I am aware that OHIP (province of Ontario) has some guidelines for the doctors, but they are not terribly invasive. (Like you shouldn't be going to a GP if you want psychological services.) You get whatever care you need, no questions asked.
There are things like, I needed to get a hernia fixed, and the doctor said the wait time is several months, because it is not a threat to your health. If it strangulated (in the meantime), you'd be rushed right into surgery for the repair job. So, yes, there can be wait times, but not for serious conditions: those are done immediately.
If you had to rush to emergency for anything, you'd be whisked right into surgery, if needed. No questions, no delays.
I figured that was reasonable. A hernia is not life-threatening.
She's been in pretty decent health her whole life. She hadn't seen a doctor in years because she hadn't needed to (keep in mind, she's elderly...should she have been receiving regular check-ups? Maybe so, but that's another issue).
So when she became ill, in she went. Showed the card, got in to the doctor. She did have to have a surgery scheduled, but they got her in quickly (quickly enough that we had to haul ass up from the states to see her in hospital). Here's the big point: they allowed her to convalesce in hospital, too! In the U.S., she would've been kicked out quickly, moved into either a nursing facility or sent home. She's single and elderly. There would've been no way for her to care for herself.
She's lucky she's in Canada. She'd likely have been dead had she lived here. What's that line in "A Christmas Carol" about "reducing the surplus population"?
Of course you convalesce in the hospital. Where else would you do it? They don't send you home until you're in good shape.
When I broke my leg, and have to have surgery, complete with two screws (still in there-- look cool in x-rays) I stayed for 2 weeks. My doctor came to see me every day.
You're shipped out pronto--because the insurance company will only pay for time in hospital it deems "reasonable." Happens with Medicare/Medicaid, too, from what I understand.
The hospital's position is, "You can stay longer, but it's now on your dime."
Often what happens is people have to pay to find in-home care if they need to recuperate, or family has to take time off work to care for them. Sometimes they are permitted to go to nursing care facilities for "short stays," a portion of which some insurance will pay for--other insurance will not. And the level and length of care varies widely.
It's a mess. You get what you pay for.
OK, so my Dad again. He's as fiscally conservative as they come!!! He would be a GOP supporter if he were American (although I think he's changed his mind since BushCo., but traditionally, they could do no wrong. He loved Raygun and Thatcher.) He's white, he's 80, he's Anglo, he's a well-off lawyer. He was an all-star university football quarterback, self-made man, into Canadian Conservative politics etc., etc. (Can you imagine my teenage years-- hippie that I am?)
He would not change our system for any amount of money, and praises it up and down. He thanks his lucky stars to be fortunate to live in Canada.
True of our Canadian relatives, too--regardless of where they fall along the political spectrum.
My first lover (of 10 years) was born American and raised in Michigan. (I used to go over there all the time, so I do know lots of "real Americans.") He has dual citizenship, but will never return to the USA.
As I said, we've tried to make our way north--for more reasons than health care, of course.
Don't get me wrong; there's a lot to love here in the U.S., too. We have a lot of family here, and we're more fortunate than many.
But we feel--for lack of a better term--that Canadian "values" more closely reflect what we're about. Hopefully, at some point, we can move up. Our family there has encouraged it, but it's going to take time.
Well, you're just a communist and Amurka is the best country in the history of the world, and you may live longer than I will, but when you die you're going to Hell, while I'll be takin' target practice with my Glock and AK-47 and drinkin' beers with the Baby Jeebus, and laughin' at all you commies fryin' down there in Hell. And even if everyone in Canada thinks your health care system is better than ours, you'd still give up everything just so you could be Amurkins, cuz our military could kick your military's butt and nothin' -- and I mean nothin' -- is more important than that. Health care, schmealth care, we're so damn rich we build fighter planes we don't even need and if it came down to a choice between universal health care or keeping every last one of our nukes, you can bet your commie ass we'd keep the nukes. Shit, Edwin, having a good health care system is a sign of weakness. Real men don't whine about "tightness in the chest" or "numbness in the face" or "coughing up blood." No, sir, they STFU and join other real men doing important things like bitchin' about taxes and hosting tea bag parties.
Or not. You are indeed fortunate to have been born on that side of the border. My last name is French Canadian and I curse the idiot of an ancestor of mine who was stupid enough to leave Canada for the US.
....gawd how sad....(great snark tho!)
Beat me to it.
Dean has been more visible of late. I think he's begun to recognize he's got a role to play in getting the left heard on this issue. Personally, I'll be listening to hear where he recommends we focus our fund-raising efforts and energy.
I've been returning all fund-raising emails from the Obama camp with the reply, "Single payer health care now." No money. Obama's not getting another dime from me unless we get legitimate health care reform.
MoveOn might. Dean's Democracy for America might. Obama isn't going to have any kind of "record fund-raising efforts" the next time around, though. He's losing the left.
Robert, I'm afraid that the "left" that Obama is losing is such a tiny sliver of Democratic voters that it won't have a major impact on either his fund-raising or re-election. I wish it weren't so, but it's easy to spend time reading blogs like C&L and get the impression that lots of people feel the way we do. In reality, we're pretty insignificant I'm afraid.
I talk to good friends who've always voted Democratic and they are mostly perfectly happy with Obama. They think Obama is better than Bush, and that seems to be the only important standard at this point. They all have decent health insurance (or so they think), secure jobs (or so they think), and aren't paying any attention at all to Obama's appalling record so far on state secrets, detainees, etc. Nothing I say to them makes any difference at all. If the public option fails, they aren't going to be angry at Obama or even consider not supporting him. The idea of solidarity (now there's an archaic word) with people less fortunate than they are is alien to them.
That's why my run-in with the local sports page was pretty disconcerting to me. People are either blindly following Obama because, well, he's Obama, or they're blindly reacting to the crap, lies and misinformation they hear from "repeaters" and know-nothings like Palin. They get a meme in their consciousness (to the degree they ARE conscious), and that's reality for them. There's no critical thinking or fact checking or reasoning or listening to other opinions. It's just "this way" or it isn't. Facts be damned.
Party Democrats are as bad about it most of the time as Republicans.
is so small and ineffective why did Obama complain about us pushing for Health Care? Why did he ask Big Donors to give their money to HIM not us? (Between that and his FISA vote it was pretty clear what he stood for).
Your good friends sound like some of mine: ("why can't the Gays wait a bit?"). Most people think/say "Oh, It's just politics" or one friend: "I'm really not into political stuff". Telling her "political stuff" is a life or death issue these days is like talking to my cat, except she (my friend) doesn't lick her butt. That I know of.
we have influence beyond our numbers.
Every email I get from Obama's camp gets returned with an epistle on the virtues of HR-676 and how, if he really gave a shit about the American People, he'd be tirelessly promoting it and not thecrooked scam that he's backing now. Every email I get from the DCCC or DSCC gets the same treatment, only the epistle is about how their idea of a perfect candidate fits my definition of a rightwing, corrupt, corrporatist fuckwad, and that I don't have any money left for them because I gave it all away to Blue America.
Obama is going to be a one term president. He's blown it with this and other issues; I'm not going to forgive those lapses, because they have each been the result of deliberate and considered choices.
have asked, indignantly "What's the fuss about Health Care- we've been without it for decades, why must it be now?" and "Why are the gays making such a fuss now? "Obama needs to focus one the War and the Economy."
I reply that these issues are inter-related. Decent single payer healthcare for all would create a fantastic -and real, not a bubble- economic boom in the USA. It would come mostly from the bottom-up, small businesses could expand, entrepreneurs would "give it a try" when they are no longer held back by sticking to a job with "health benefits"; New businesses -immigrants opening restaurants is one example- would pop up. Single Payer is a quick way to stimulate the economy.
Rescinding DADT might halt the insidious takeover of our military by religious crazies. Bring back some desperately needed expertise in all sorts of areas, help us end or win the wars.
If Obama wants to improve our economy he'll have a good health plan passed. If he wants to prevail in Afghanistan he'll repeal DADT.
Obama is either showing his true (corporate) colors, or else he is saying what he thinks will spark increased action towards genuine healthcare reform. Either way, this is a perfect opportunity for us to turn up the heat and force HIM to come around to choosing the right side on this (that is, the anti-corporate, public healthcare reform side). If he doesn't come around, he'll have squandered a huge amount of his political goodwill that he won't be likely to recuperate. But by then hopefully there will be a blossoming grassroots movement coming into its own and gaining momentum from the outcome on this issue.
Bottom line is that this issue marks a critical juncture for Obama as well as for us as a progressive movement. Whatever the outcome on this issue, by turning up the heat on him on it, given the large widespread public support and growing public impatience, fear and anger with corporate-friendly politics amidst intensifying economic hardship, a real progressive movement will come into its own and begin flexing its muscles nationally. Let's seize this moment to make sure that happens!
Nico
...and not just here, many on the left are done with the Democrats. Obama's behavior may be just what we finally need to return the finger they've given us and demonstrate that the left doesn't them; they need us.
This may sweep them from power, but maybe then they'll pay attention to what we're saying to them.
Wooooo!!!!!!!
(Can ya'll tell I was a cheerleader in high school??)
Now you're talkin' Nico!!
We need to start a major Money Bomb via Dr. Dean, or any organization that supports Single Payer.
I might suggest (as a member) Physicians for a National Health Program.
They support Conyers H.R. 676.
A little research is in order.
I wish John Amato and his troops at C&L would figure out the best organization that is FOR SINGLE PAYER, then get them to call for A NATIONAL MONEY BOMB!!!
Let's send Obama a message that will leave him covering his ears and screaming, "Noooooooo!!!!!!"
(After all....it IS "The Fourth of July"....right??!)
Anybody got some names we could look into?
I strongly suggest "Physicians for a National Health Program".
They support Conyers 676 and the best part is that they are DOCTORS!
One of their members (or more?) were among those arrested during the first Congressional committee hearings when Single Payer was taken "off the table".
I'm sure John Amato and his fellow C&L crew have their own ideas.
What about a MONEY BOMB for a COALITION of groups that support SINGLE PAYER???
(Forget AARP....they are total sellouts for big pharma/for-profit insurance).
It's important that we do our homework PRIOR to any MONEY BOMB so we don't end up getting hood-winked by some pseudo-group "claiming" to support SINGLE PAYER that really does not.
Dr Clark Newhall is an MD/JD who is passionate about single-payer. He attended the HCAN Rally in DC on June 25; he is actively finding ways to contact Reps and Senators by fax and phone. The members have sent faxes by the THOUSANDS. Sometimes they bring the fax machines to a grinding halt, and Clark gets a call. You can find his info here.
for the link!!
...but, I would not underestimate the influence of C&L itself. It is widely read by people in government and the press. In a way, C&L is like a think tank from which ideas that reflect the thinking of a great many people are born, refined and released to bubble up through the national dialog. Don't underestimate its value.
Obama sweeping in the public option or we sweep him out in 2012. I distrust and dislike republicans enormously but I would rather have the crook I know is going to stab me in the back than the so called friend who does it with a hug. I am getting more and more tired of his bullshit.
I agree. I’ve spent my entire life fearing republicans and voting democratic, often holding my nose. But Obama’s ‘solution’ to our various crises has purged me of my fear. At least with republicans in charge, you have a mobilized anti-corporate (et al.) movement. But the election of Obama has effectively stifled significant protest.
Obama is the perfect Trojan Horse proferred by Wall Street. Who would imagine, after all, that an intellectual black man—a compelling author who told us of his own struggles and argued for the building of a better and fairer society—would ever be working for the banksters and against the common good? Apparently, not enough people.
The deception has worked beautifully, especially with the clever little twist the banksters added: have the propaganda machine continually scream out what a socialist/communist Obama is, when nothing could be further from the truth. This moves the center into right-wing extremist territory while everything else is labeled, as per this article, ‘leftist.’
I don't know if Obama is bought and paid for by the corporations, or has made promises to the insurance industry and the pharmas to keep them from derailing "anything," including real reform--but the answer I hear from every corner of the thinking blogosphere is, "No, we won't stop demanding real change," and "No, we don't need cosmetic change or bipartisanship. We need fundamental change." Hagan responded to our calls for public programs. Now let's make Obama do it. No more half measures. I don't give a damn if Lieberman likes it or not! Health care for everyone at an affordable price without blood suckers in the insurance industry making great profits off peoples health catastrophes.
.
!!!!!
What are they? Can't figure this one out. Thanks.
Dirty F#@cking Hippies.
A badge of honour, in my book.
Dirty forking hippies
Dude, there's already someone who posts here by the name of mudshark. Has been for years. I don't know how it slipped past the sitemonitors with your same handles, but the mudshark I know would be very pissed indeed to see something like that written about Barack H. Obama, especially only after 5 1/2 months in office.
Can you change your handle to mudshark.I.am or something like that, just so we know who's who.?
If you recall, I said I'd support the Dem nominee. I said I would do that, and I'm fulfilling my word. But that will only go so far.
I'm still willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.
But my patience is wearing thin.
Even still, he's better than McCain. Although, I'm beginning to wonder if HRC would have taken a stronger position on this.
I have a feeling that HRC would have seen the opportunity of the bully pulpit, and used it better than President Obama. At least on this issue.
Oh, BTW, nice to see you again. Thanks for the chuckle.
Very Clever:)
BTW, Happy 4th dennis.:)
You too, mudshark. If you really want put the fear of God in Bam, though, tell him you guys will start giving him the Sarah Palin treatment.
"Mr. President, will you help us - or the insurance lobby? History has shown that you can't do both."
Barack, if you say "F*** You" to the voters, you'll be treated the same way we treated Bush and McCain. And I don't think you want to be in that club, Sir.
one thing we know about bipartisan health care and
the public option.....the gop will not budge from
supporting the insurance and pharmacy corporations
and their greed.
the gop will stand in a pool of gas and throw
the lite match in themselves and just stand there...
they are that STUPID.
Don't give the right any ideas...
I wonder how they're going to "discourage" us? Cut off our internet access?
Well, then we'd all actually have to put down the Cheetohs bags, get dressed, walk up from our parents basements and go outside!
Nooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I can just see ysbaddaden now....
He's running out into the morning sun with his eyes closely covered by his hands, heavily squinting at the daylight while mumbling...."I.....need.....my.....You......Tube.....!!!!"
Ha!!
Well, it's the 4th of July in The Berkshires. The sun has set and the locals are goin' NUTS with their
fireworkssawed-off shotguns. The dog is barkin' and the Scotch is flowin'....Happy Freakin' Fourth of July Everybody!!!!!!!
Happy Fourth to all Americans and a big yee-haw!
Hey, forgive me, it's Stampede time here ... :)
Mr. Obama, Sir!
The DEBATE is WITH you and the health-care-industry-laden so-called "moderate Democrats" ..
If YOU don't want to talk with US then their IS no debate ..
If winning the debate means Americans don't have a public, not for profit option then there's nothing worth "winning." I don't think it's that hard to figure out, Mr. President.
If Obama and the corporatists are pushing the insurance industry's, big Pahrma's and the for profit hospital and for-profit HMO indutry's collective agenda, Obama and crew is not only focusing their collective resources against the people, they've outright declared war on us.
Okay - call me stupid. What is a DFH?
*
Somebody tell us what DFH is.
{ Dirty F*****G Hippies. SM}
Thanks to those who understand this ridiculous reference and enlightened the rest of us.
Bloggers want to be taken seriously, and yet they insist on using juvenile tactics like including acronyms and terms that are needless and remain unexplained in the story.
It's annoying and completely unprofessional. The headline would have been more useful and accurate if it said simply "Obama concerned about attacks against centrist Dems".
Concerned about doing the things WE elected him to do.
One termer.
I really do not think that our president, as intelligent as he is, really grasps all that is wrong with health care in this country. I don't think he's listening to the right people - US! Asking health insurance companies to keep the costs down is like asking the fox to watch the hen house. The average private health insurance premium is about $400/month/person. THAT is what employers are paying who pay for insurance and that is what those of us are paying out of pocket if we aren't covered by our job. THAT IS WRONG! 40% of my monthly paycheck goes to pay for my family's health insurance.
While he attributes support for single payer from the liberal left, in reality, the case for the current approach is an ideological opposition for "socialism".
I think the support for single payer also comes from people not interested in economic ideology, and instead, are looking for the most economic solution. The data and evidence indicates that the health care approaches undertaken by our allies is much more cost effective. There is no need to invent the wheel when one has already been invented abroad.
You've earned the historic 60 vote filibuster proof Senate and a strong Democratic House, maybe proof there is a God. Use your power to bulldoze the people who have selfish interests at heart, don't betray those who voted for you, and earn a place in history as a great president.
Thanks Susie - great analogy.
An estimated twenty-Two THOUSAND Americans die every year for want of proper health care. And Obama wants us to stop picking on the poor moderates?
The magnitude of the problem does seem to be beyond Obama's understanding - which is very unfortunate.
But we should shut up?? To that I say to Obama - "YOU shut up - you're being stupid."
*
some suffer before they die -- pain of wrecked body and no solace from a rigged system. (thanks corporates! and your congress critter buddies, too)
re: "An estimated twenty-Two THOUSAND Americans die every year for want of proper health care. And Obama wants us to stop picking on the poor moderates?"
why aren't these people in jail?? corruption/bribe taking is a crime...oh right, they write the laws.
......or perhaps, no, he won't.
The appropriate response is" No We Won't"
The American people will continue to sit on their hands and absorb yet another cruel blow to their personal freedoms.
"No We Won't" do anything about it, which is why I stated 'No, he won't'. And it wouldn't matter if there were 70 Dems to vote.
But on this..............no. He needs to step up. otherwise..................can't go there.
why not demand the best?
By John Buell
http://www.bangordailynews.com/detail/109073....
some canada care links in the comments also... although i didn't get that far...
Good government ONLY comes from holdng its representatives' feet to the fire. Our backs are already against the wall having to combat the power of money and special interests.
Message to Obama - Do you want a be president for a 2nd term? Put up or shut up.
come on....give it to me
another repuke will finish this country
we will become a banana republic
AND I WILL BLAME THE LIBERALS WHO HAD NO FUCKING PATIENCE
If a dem with a dem congress cant get whats needed done, then we are finished. We're just playing out the string. One of the things that put Obama over the top was first time voters. They may not vote again if disillusioned. Also, swing voters swung hard for Obama. Again, they may not swing that way if disillusioned. Even a % of conservatives, disgusted with what Bush had done to the party and repelled by what McCain/Palin offered voted for Obama because of what he offered. They will not vote for him again if disillusioned.
the ship is sinking fast, do we try to take some bold action or just focus on furiously polishing the brass so it at least looks respectable as it sinks? done with that crap, felt pretty guilty for sitting out the '00 elections because it all seemed quite pointless, but now.......right back there, and if he doesn't start taking some bold action, I'm out, I'd rather just have a Repuke get it over with......
I'll correct it:
I don't think this matters too much, though, in the great scheme of things. Obama wants to save the for-profit insurance industry, and so do the public option advocates. They're just a little bit softer about how they want to go about it, that's all. Single payer is a real solution, but Obama took that off the table, adding insult to injury by claiming the process was open and transparent. Oh well.
Umm, what the fuck do you think liberal advocacy groups are doing when they attack democratic lawmakers? They ARE trying to get lawmakers to pass comprehensive legislation! You ASSHOLE! Geez, that one comment kinda makes it look like you've no interest in passing comprehensive legislation and are merely interested in passing some kind of legislation that just makes lawmakers look good. Don't fucking stir up the pot of reform if you've no stomach for the fire.
If exactly who owns Washington wasn't clear before, and isn't now, it will be soon. When government legislates that citizens who don't buy private for-profit insurance will be penalized, taxpayers are are going to opt out of the federal tax system.
In a democracy, the government is afraid of the people. In America, the people are afraid of the government.
In a fascist state you fear the govt. In a capitalist state, you fear the corporation.
Well put.
Except of course that it means we have a corporate fascist state.
you aholes gave him 6 fucking months to repair the ills of the past 40 years
you should all be ashamed of yourselves
the man walked into what now is recognized as the worst financial disaster in our history, two wars not of his making, a broken health care system and numerous other ills....and my god, he didnt fix it all in 6 months
leave it to the dems to cut off their noses to spite their faces
obama will not fix our problems...not in his first term and maybe not in his second (if he gets one)
but all this prattling on will cost the dems the house and senate and maybe the wh in 2012
and then you can bitch and moan till the cows come home...but that wingnut in the wh wont give shit one
Its about too many instances of failing to fix problems he could be fixing easily. Too many times he has supported Bush's policies of secrecy. Policies that directly undermine the ideal this country are founded on. Policies he could have fix with a simple say so. But chose not to.
on C&L now? How do you square your rant, with this -
"That said, there's a legitimate case to be made that we should focus on positive goals rather than negative attacks.
I'm not saying I agree (certainly not in all circumstances), but we could at least have a reasonable discussion about that. (In fact, I just had one the other day from a friend who's working in health care reform, and she said the same thing. But see, I trust her.)"
If you can appreciate the perspective, than what is with all the anger and vitrol in the post? Why do you claim Obama is setting a "right-leaning agenda" if you think it is arguable that focus on positive goals may be better than negative attacks? I mean, a right leaning agenda would be not reforming the health care system at all. We've had the same health care system for the last 80 years, but all of a sudden if you don't SCREAM LOUD ENOUGH, you are a right winger. The logic behind these posts are mind-numbingly bad. I hope that you get your own platform soon Susie, away from C&L. So I can stop reading your dumb posts.
That this isn't going to be a Clinton II-type administration for them. Lieberman and Hillary's losses were warning shots. And we will purge other party members if they don't fall in line, too. That's really the reason the GOP's able to pass what it wants: because its constituents threaten to give the reps hell, if they fold. And that's the strategy we need, too. The one thing the conservatives got right about Obama is that he's too "naive" when it comes to negotiations, and is more willing to "compromise" than do what's needed, which is why his stimulus bill isn't very stimulating. And even then, he had to fight to get it passed. If we want people to sit on their asses while Rome is burning, we'll vote Republican. But we voted for you to take action, now. So don't bail on us, man.
Look what kind of complete idiots as reps they ended up with. *shudder*
Obama is a hack, and a wimp...
got no hope
PATHETIC...
As far as I can tell, Obama supports a public option as part of the healthcare overhaul. Howard Dean's group, Democracy for America, endorces Obama on their site. Can anybody point out when Obama said he was not supporting the public option?
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/03/health/poli...
you are bringing facts into the conversation. People are here to whine...
my bad
Or they could be upset. If this goes through, and it isn't right, do you think you'll ever have another shot at healthcare reform? It's been coming for decades and the time is NOW. DO IT RIGHT.
If this economy continues to deteriorate, we're going to reach a point where we tell people, without insurance, your illness won't be treated, please die. (The overriding question, I suppose is whether, by that time, the Jack Kevorkian option is available). Please die, in support of our economic ideology that we must reject "socialism" in favor of "free market" solutions.
I think that free-trade, with its trade deficits, will assure that the economy will deteriorate. So long as the issue of consuming more than we produce isn't addressed, and the free traders are making sure that isn't addressed, this economy will deteriorate.
At some point, when the vast majority of Americans are uninsured, and we're still being told to cling to economic ideology, the issue of single-payer will be revisited. At that point, the Cuban health care system, one that operated under a 50 year embargo, will be considered for copying.
So, you can either push to get the job done-- correctly-- now, or wait for some time in the future when America has crumbled beyond repair???
I'd push for it now!!
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/07/w...
Krugman, in 2007, describing the "Demoplan". The Demoplan contains a public option.
I think what people are saying is that Obama doesn't support "single-payer". The "public option" adds choice to available choices, whereas "single payer" is substituted for available choices. The argument in favor of single payer is that the approach is considerably cheaper.
Love legal pot. Love legal prostitution. Love gay civil rights.
But these things have to be brought about in stages, not complete and all at once. America is one backwards country in a lot of ways. Public option has a chance, Single payer does not, at least not at this time. Obama knows this.
I can see that. But, the whole matter is complicated by the economic situation. Right now, Washington is caught up in trying to pay for health care reform. And China is now taking the Federal Reserve to task for using "quantitative easing" to buy treasury securities. Apparently, we can't finance our deficits at the auctions anymore.
The sad fact is, that it may be that we can only afford the single payer option. Society would yield a net savings if all insurance premiums were redirected towards the single payer option. However, "single payer", versus "public option" is not a show stopper for me. I remember that the only realistic alternative in 2008 was McCain, pledging more wars, advocating an end to employer based health insurance, and who had a plan to provision health insurance like credit cards are provisioned, through a deregulation approach.
Obama is throwing the towel on single payer before the fight began. With the proper roll out and some twisting of arms a single payer system could get passed. Remember most people did not care or want to go to war with Iraq and Bush and his minions pounded every day on why we needed to go to war. Before you knew it a vast majority of Americans supported war with Iraq.
So, the US spends about 15 of GDP on health care while most industrialized nations spend less than 10% of GDP. We spend double per capita compared to other industrialized nations and we don't cover everyone. The public option is going to cost billions more from our gov't and it won't cover everyone. So, in order to fix an incredibly inefficient "health care system" the Obama answer is to spend more money? It is not the amount of money we spend on health care, it is the way it is spent. THE SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM IS A CUT OUT THE INEFFICIENT INSURANCE COMPANIES. The single payer will do that.
The public option will end up costing more than they expect. This stepping stone approach will fail and how many more years must we wait? How many more people must die and go bankrupt because Obama doesn't want to push too hard?
not one person could point to anything where Obama didn't say he supported the public option...
I agree with you that consensus based politics is valuable but also remember LBJ, who was a political pragmatist that sometimes just had to knock heads together to get where we needed to be. There is a time for all things--and sometimes you just need to play rough. 47 million people need healthcare---now.
Above all remember---if not us, who? If not now---when?
Where is single payer in the debate? He has called for single payer before, so he must understand how it works. If you do any reading on health care reform and are a liberal, there is only one conclusion you can make. A single payer system needs to be in the health care reform debate. Why didn't Obama insist that it be a part of the debate. Why was it taken off the table before the debate began?
Obama and the Dems sold their soles to the insurance lobby. Obama knew a single payer system would be difficult for moderate Senate Dems that took money from the insurance lobby. So to protect them from making difficult votes on a single payer system, he and the Senate leadership took that option away. Since the majority of Americans have no idea what the difference between single payer and a public option, it was simple to taut and promote the public option as a the way to go. They have the best of both worlds. They can keep the insurance industry checks and at the same time offer something that sounds like reform.
Their strategy also allows for a plan that will be less vulnerable to Republican attacks. The talking points talk about people keeping their current insurance but also giving everyone a choice. Notice how Obama referred to the idea of competition in his news conference. This makes it difficult for free market Republicans to attack the public option plan. Meanwhile, they can design a system to makes it impossible for the public option to really compete.
Obama is not thinking about the best plan the will help Americans, he is only concerned about keep power for himself and others in the Democratic Party. Well I got news for you, pass a single payer system and you will keep your power. If Obama had cared about the American people he would get single payer passed and go down as one of the top five Pres of all time. Instead Obams only cares about his short term prospects, so he will go down as another Bush. How very sad, he gave us the audacity of hope, and he is delivering the same old shit.
DLC!
DSCC!
DCCC!
Part of the problem with the discussion of the health care disaster in the USA is insisting on using the mythological phrase "health care system" as if there were any such thing in the USA. There isn't!! There never has been. And if the owners and operators of the current disastrous health care disaster have their way, there will never be a rational and systematic approach to health care in this country such as there is in Germany, France, Sweden, and every other western democratic country.
These people, the insurance companies, the owners of hospital chains (McHospitals), and especially the drug companies like it the way it is because it wildly enriches a few thousand people who contribute absolutely nothing to health care for anyone but do take care of their bank accounts, off shore stashes (money and who knows what else), their country club memberships, their private planes, and regular visits to rehabilitation spas to dry out from drug and alcohol addictions.
I worked for a Blue plan as it was changed from a semi-public, not-for-profit corporation to a private for profit corporation. I won't say which one, but it was located in one of the most populous states in the union and has a governator who should have stuck to making stupid movies. That company had enjoyed tax-free status for years as a not-for-profit enterprise. It had built up great resources which were taken over by a private (pirate - even notice how private and pirate sound a lot alike?) entity using sharks, crooks and thieves imported just for that purpose.
It became big and rich in part because of taxpayer support in the form of massive tax breaks. Private investors walked away with millions subsidized by the state taxpayers, who never got so much as a shrug in return.
The only system to the health care disaster in this country is a systematic looting of the working class pockets by yet another class of kleptocrats.
System? WTF - there is no health care system in the USA.
We need to go to whitehouse.gov enmass and at least express our disgust with what we are hearing and tell them once and for all what exactly we want and expect to come of the debate now taking place.
If we fail to do that, we have no-one to blame but ourselves for the outcome. Never has it been more important for us to get involved both with the whitehouse and with our congressional leaders.
In other countries, they would be hitting the streets screaming to the high heavens. The least we can do is get off our lazy asses and write some strongly worded emails to everyone concerned regardless of whether they are right left moderate centrist progressive neocon or whatever!
Wait 'til it comes time to throw the bastards who would rather prostitute their offices on behalf of those who bought and paid for them instead of serving the People. He is seriously misreading the desires and will of the overwhelming majority of Americans. He is doing everything it takes to be a one term president. There is nothing that he and his corporatist cronies in Congress can do that cannot be undone and fixed once they have been ejected from office as their election numbers come up.
BTW, I do not think that we are doing our national paradigms any favors by calling crooks and prostitutes "centrists". They're no more centrist than is the PNAC. The true center of this nation is the Constitution and the People. A true centrist politician is going to be dedicated to protecting the Constitution and looking after the well-being of the People. The folks that are commonly referred to as "centrists" do neither and are, at least from my perspective, indistinguishable from the typical corrupt Republican. Every one of them needs to lose their office, their power and their influence.
If Obama doesn't like what he's seeing from the People, he should change himself. He might start by reforming his own allegiances.
After reflecting on this, I must say that even though I love you like a brother, you are as wrong as a human being could possibly be on this issue. Not only that, but you are wrong on so many levels. The only thing I have to say in response to your comment is the only one that is appropriate: Fuck you, brother man. Just fuck you.
that is abusing the office of the President by protecting felony and capital criminals from justice all I can say is:
FUCK HIM!
Rahm Emanuel has put liberal advocacy groups on notice that the Obama
Administration will use it's influence to make sure these Groups receive no Financial support from Obamas biggest Donors.
That is if they Don't follow the Official White House Marching orders.
We are not their whores. We have our own organizations and we can just break free of the DNC. We can become a REAL liberal party if we just stick to the OTHER groups. Take your pick there are about 15 or 20 out there that are NOT DNC connected. Why give THEM your money when THEY don't give a damn about you any more than the RETHUGLICANS do?
When oh when will everyone get it?
NOT THE PRESIDENT.
WE give THEM the marching orders.
So, how do you break a movement? Like the one Howard Dean built at the DNC to spread out the training and set up Democratic Party Outlets in every state? Why, you run for office and ask your enthralled child voters to give to YOUR CAMPAIGN INSTEAD OF THEIR OWN. It's not like the DNC wouldn't support him with that money. Then when you get elected you put Rahm Emanuel, the EX DNC boss who was soundly kicked to the curb in favor of Howard Dean BY THE MEMBERS OF THE PARTY. And as a final coup you throw Howard Dean out of the party position as a thank you for getting you elected and insert a NOBODY THAT NOBODY EVER HEARD OF, who wants to go back to the Rahm Emanuel model of the DNC, which is to get money from CORPORATIONS.
Then you sell out to the corporations and tell the people to quit squabbling.
So, how long is it going to take for the generations under 40 to grow up and "get it"? Are they going to be taken for a 30 year ride only to get vacuumed clean like the BABY BOOMERS are currently being wiped out? I mean is THAT what it will take? Or will they then find themselves facing ANOTHER selfish lazy generation who only wants their own career no matter who has to starve or live on the street to give it to them?
God bless America huh? Right.
This is not the first time Obama has been "Bushian." The secrecy, the Plame situation where he wants to protect Cheney, the wiretap laws, you name it.
I don't get how he feels highlighting the Dems. who won't support the public option is not working to get his plan passed. He's got some wires crossed somewhere.
Login or Register to post comments.