Same story, different day.
What’s got your interest today, Prairie Pops?
Filed under The Public Square
Tagged as blogging, common man, communication, discuss, free thinking, Populists, Progressives
In a tactical move designed to push a Senate vote on health-care legislation past Christmas, Republican lawmakers attempted to filibuster a major spending bill that funds the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The move, which came in the early hours of Friday morning, was ironic given that Republican lawmakers often accused Democratic lawmakers of jeopardizing troops by voting against funding the wars in previous years. “They are prepared to jeopardize funding for troops at war,” Senate Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) told the Washington Post. “If Democrats did that, there would be cries of treason.” Hoping to quickly end the filibuster, Democrats secured the vote of antiwar liberal Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) in order to overcome the GOP’s obstructionist tactics.
A New Mark Fiore Animation: ‘ Happy Bonusmas!’
One thing I am firmly convinced of — the current Republicans in Congress are the exact ones who rubber stamped bushco, the exact ones who haven’t participated in anything that might get America on better footing economically, environmentally…
So no matter how discouraged I am (and I am!), I know those same yahoos who got us where we are haven’t had a single idea, narry a suggestion of a solution and their obstructionism is all they’ve got.
They will run for reelection on what? What will they say? Is ‘being against’ enough to get them the votes of their constituents? Are voters truly that stupid?
Sadly, they only have to say God, guns, and gays.
What’s even sadder, wicked, is the fact you are 100% correct.
Hey Wicked! I’ve been wondering where and how you are. I hope all is well with you and yours.
I just found out that if you cross something out with a sharpie, it never existed. Thanks Sarah.
She has an explanation for everything!
An interesting and quite cynical ‘take’ on the health-care reform issue.
I didn’t read it as cynical, rather I read it as realistic.
May we agree on cynically realistic?
Put aside the propagandist label “ObamaCare,” and the other propaganda about increasing healthcare costs and the propagandist poll numbers that are being quoted, and I must say that I agree with the writer completely.
This is a very bad bill. Healthcare was an issue at the top of my list in the last Presidential election and it looks like the Dems are ready to make things far worse where that is concerned.
As to why the Blue Dog coalition seems to be quitting en masse, I don’t understand it, but it sure as HELL isn’t because the Obama administration is forcing them to support a socialist policy. If Obama was a socialist, he would have a completely different cabinet, the banks would be on their knees to him and socialist medicine would be a done deal. If the policy that he is supporting were a socialist one, it would not be being written by the corporate health care interests.
The fact that her conclusion is heavily based on the hallucinatory, paranoid, conservative kool-aid that she has obviously gulped by the bucketload, does not make her earlier observations incorrect. Democrats, if they pass this bill as it stands, are about to commit political suicide and are about to make things far worse for the working people of this country.
Sock puppets… Would be hilarious if it wasn’t so true.
I wish I thought it was only Lieberman that was holding us hostage on this issue. It is a farce, though.
What if the corporate interests decided that they weren’t making enough money in this tough economy and that they needed reform to make even more? How could they use their pawns in Congress in order to do that without alerting the general population to the fact that they are completely running things? A nice melodrama will do the trick…
You want reform, you know what works and what doesn’t and you are pretty sure that you know what fixes need to be made. But, oh no! Look out for those nasty Republicans! They are going to put a bug in the works! Well, let’s start out by not asking for too much, then maybe we will get SOME of what we think will work. And then just when you think you might be able to get SOME change, oh no! Here comes Senator Lieberman; that bad, bad fellow! He is holding up the process! We will have to capitulate to him! How very interesting that all the things that we had to “compromise” in order to make Repubs and Liebe happy, are the VERY SAME things that the healthcare syndicate DID NOT WANT to see in the final bill. Hmmmmm….
Funny! He usually doesn’t make me laugh, this column did tho.
Oops, My Mistake
by Christopher Buckley
Is Christopher Buckley the son of William F.?
Got this link from the WEBlog, 2010 is supposed to be the voting year for the “Angry White Men” – vs. soccer moms, etc.
Who are these angry white males gonna vote for? Are they going to go with one of the two major party candidates? Will the teabaggers decide what they’re most angry about and coalesce behind a candidate?
Sad to say, these angry white males will follow whatever voice will be telling them they lost their job because we have a black president.
Yeah, right, let’s not remember that both Republicans and Democrats have allowed illegal immigration to go untouched for years.
Let’s not remember that Republicans were the ones that pushed through all that deregulation of the banks and brought about one of the worse economic disasters.
Why look any further for the real reason when we have a black man in the White House to blame?
I would be interested to know if most of the angry white males are from the Southern region of the country.
See the deal is — if those angry white men are mostly from southern states or red states, that doesn’t get them anyplace with the electoral college.
So they’re motivated, what does that indicate? Exactly what we’ve known all along — if the economy doesn’t get lots better, including the jobs returning — then the Democratic Party will suffer losses in the next two elections. Voters will forget that easily all the reasons behind this worst recession since the Great Depression and only see that progress didn’t happen overnight.
Voters aren’t very smart, are they?
I’ve a feeling that this group will not be geographically limited as hereinabove suggested.
Interesting article about David and Charles Koch.
I just loved it when Sen. Al Franken told Lieberman that he, as a Senator for Minnesota objected to Lieberman taking one more moment.
That was a classic moment. Did you see Lieberman’s face? And then John McCain jumps up and defends Lieberman.
The Senate may be considered the Gentlemen’s Club but it looks that club needs a good enema.
Perhaps Franken is just what the doctor ordered?
Change of pace: http://www2.kusports.com/news/2009/dec/18/smiles-all-around/?mens_basketball
We need an activist president like FDR. That is not Obama’s strong suit, at all.
FDR even seized gold from people as it was gaining too much value. Can you see Obama do that? Not likely.
Will the prediction that Obama will be another Jimmy Carter coming true before our eyes?
I have a feeling the answer to your (perhaps rhetorical) question is “yes”, and if I could think of an apt analogue, so would John McCain, had he been elected.
The FDR move to take the U.S. off the gold standard and outlawing the possession of gold also involved the banking failures, IIRC.
FWIW, I don’t see how any president could, in today’s time, be as activist as FDR was in his (particularly) second term. The advent of media concentration, etc., would prevent that. My $0.02.
I believe you’re correct on the media question. And, yes it was due to failed banks that FDR seized gold. He was an “under the hood, with his sleeves rolled up” kind of president that Ross Perot talked about.
FDR did not believe in sitting back and letting congress solve problems that it did have the political will to so do. Different story with Obama.
Not to mention he (FDR) had a super-majority of Congress by the time he really instituted his programs (how else can the attempt to expand SCOTUS be explained other than he thought he had the needed votes to do it irrespective of what anyone else said) without the need to compromise with those of his own party who do not share the same vision.
I keep going back to the 2008 election results and notice the thin margins in the popular vote Mr. Obama received in the states he won, and contrasting these to the 1932 and 1936 elections of FDR. These, to me, explain to some degree at least, the caution.
I like Jimmy Carter. He is my favorite ex-president. He did more with his ex-presidency that he did with his active duty four years.
This is not intended as a criticism of Harvard’s strategy, failed as it might have been, but as a warning about what could happen to USD 259 with its bond issue, if it contemplated this strategy, as well as the city, et al.
Is there anything Lawrence Summers has been involved with that went RIGHT?
“Most of the wrong-way bets were made in 2004, when Lawrence Summers, now President Barack Obama’s economic adviser…”
That says a lot, doesn’t it?
Actually, when one reads the entire thing, Harvard hurt itself grievously by not waiting a few weeks more. Had it done so, it appears to me that the bets would have been good, once again showing that hindsight is indeed 20-20.
“Let’s Not Forget That There Are Republicans to Hate, Too:
If the Rude Pundit was in some Karl Rove-like capacity advising the White House, he would right now be telling President Obama to have the Justice Department start investigating the crimes of the Bush administration, with an eye to prosecutions beginning sometime in 2010. Because amidst our vastly justified Lieberman-hating and Obama-doubting and with rending ourselves asunder on the left, we cannot forget that one of the major reasons that we are at this point in the health care reform debate, with a bill that seems to do as much harm as good (and that’s the generous take), is that Republicans simply refused to engage in the process (beyond begging Olympia Snowe for her vote). It was far more entertaining for them to watch the Democrats eat their tail.”
continue reading —
Today, with the failure that will be labeled “health care reform” hanging over our heads like a lead weight in a Road Runner cartoon, I can only say that we need to stop and think about things, not in the context of what we have been told and what the media and punditry are saying, but in a bigger picture way that takes into account ALL of the players and all of the layers of fact.
Blaming recalcitrant Republicans for their role in this debacle is fine as long as we acknowledge that Democrats played a role too. They were all playing a role that was scripted in advance.
Health care reform was actually motivated by the health care syndicate that was watching its losses rise as the number of uninsured grew. With no intention of lowering costs or profit margins, they needed a bigger market. So, they very kindly agreed to insure those with preexisting health conditions, as long as they could charge whatever exhorbitant rates they wanted, in exchange for a government mandate that everyone buy their product. And the providers and manufacturers put their two cents worth in and will get what they want as well.
If you are looking to blame someone, blame the corrupt government, all of it, both parties. And blame the greedy corporations and the lobbyinst that work for them; soulless bas*a$ds!!!
We the People need to come together. Bridge our differences and begin to speak to each other, instead of at each other. To listen and find common ground. It’s not going to be easy, but I don’t see another way.
The syndicate did a masterful job in coopting the plan, to turn it into something from which it could benefit.
I agree w/what Paula posts in her final paragraph. That is indeed what needs to happen, and soon. Former President Clinton and former Senator Dole said the same thing (Paula said it much more simply and elegantly IMHO) at the dedication of the Dole Institute at KU a few years back. No one seemed to hear either of them then, nor any of the other public figures who have made similar statements subsequently. It (politics and governance) has become a form of combat, where there must be a winner as well as a looser, which weakens the Republic.
So everybody is angry now but the insurance companies and the Rs?
Feels more like hurt, disappointment, disillusionment…
No one wants what this has become (well other than the insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, fat cats). Meaningful health-care reform is once again just a dream, an illusion…
Poll: Voters Reject Health Care Mandate Without Public Option, Medicare Buy-In
Voters are not keen on the idea of health-insurance mandates without a public option or Medicare expansion, according to a new survey conducted by Research 2000 for the Progressive Change Campaign Committee and Democracy for America. The poll shows only 33 percent of likely voters prefer a health-care bill without expansion of Medicare or a public-health insurance option. With those two ideas included, however, 58 percent of people surveyed support the idea. “This poll shows voters in full-blown revolt against the Senate bill,” said PCCC’s co-founder. “This will be a disaster of epic proportions for Democrats in 2010 if it’s not fixed—fast.” Another recent PCCC and DFA poll found that a third of Democrats are less likely to vote in 2010 if the health-care bill does not include a public option.
Hoping against hope, I am not counting out meaningful reform just yet.
Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.
Sign me up!