Tweet
I taped with Congressman Kucinich for "The Daily Briefing" (5 to 6 PM PT on KPFK 90.7 FM Los Angeles and at www.kpfk.org). I was about to ask him to answer charges that he was the Ralph Nader of health care but he abruptly bailed to take a vote. My producer then sent him a text: "We just did a quick interview with you. Would you be willing to respond to charges you are the Nader of health care? Call this number." I was on the air running the incomplete interview when he called in, and we went live with the Congressman.
I was prepared to dismiss him like Marcos Moulitsas did as a suicidally self-righteous progressive in the Nader mould (see here and here), but after trying to pin him down on what he is up to, it appears Kucinich might be the only Democratic Congressman with the guts and brains to get something done about reforming healthcare, as opposed to health insurance.
As Kucinich told me, this is a matter of doing what an elected representative should do:
KUCINICH: I have a responsibility on behalf of all those people who want to see a public option to help the White House cross that divide. . . . If I cave in without any public option, that could kill any hopes of keeping it alive in the Senate.
I asked him what he thought of the comparisons to Nader. His response showed his appreciation of the consumer activist, but also his continuing loyalty to the Democratic party:
KUCINICH: If being the Ralph Nader of health care means I’m against consumer fraud and against monopolies, that’s OK. But if being the Ralph Nader of health care means that I’m scuttling the Democratic Party, that’s not true. I’m inside the party. I represent a voice inside the party that has helped to make health care an issue in three successive Democratic Platform committees and two national campaigns . . . I haven’t gone outside the party, and the party still has a chance to be able to deliver to the American people a health care bill that would be worthy of broader support.
After watching the Democrat’s Progressive Caucus dutifully roll over for the White House, Kucinich’s original House vote against the bill has meaning now, unlike Lynn Woolsey’s and others. Since the House has to vote on the Senate bill as is, without changing a comma, this is the only time to make a deal, not later during reconciliation when some Senate parliamentarian gets to slice and dice it. In taking a stand as the critical vote that the White House needs, Kucinich appears to be giving Democratic Senators cover as more and more of them declare their support for the public option.
I have a new show in drive time every weeknight at 8pm ET/5pm PT on KPFK, which is available via live stream here.
211 Comments
And what kos and the CMM seem to NOT want to comment on is Kucinich’s willingness to be a ‘yes’ vote IF the Obama Admin changes the part about States running their own health insurance single payer plans; “Or they could decide that they also want to protect the right of states to proceed with single payer, and not some place far into the future, but do it now. I mean, you have movements in Pennsylvania and in California, in my own state of Ohio, for states to be able to take responsibility for healthcare. I mean, create the possibility now. Let the momentum go in many different areas. But to say 2017 at best, and then it’s an if-come waiver to not permit the states to have legal protection against challenge by the insurance companies?”
From here.
So my ‘vote’ is for “the only Democratic Congressman with the guts and brains to get something done about reforming healthcare, as opposed to health insurance.”
Great point the Obama plan stops competition.
Ian, thanks for being politically and intellectually honest enough to change your mind and say so.
Oh barugh. Anyone knows where Kucinich stands and why. Didn’t need an interview to figure it out. Kucinich speaks in words of one syllable in simple declarative sentences. What was the mystery?
If ONLY Kucinich or anybody else was the Ralph Nader of health care. If so we might actually have a humane, functioning health care system.
Here is a list of legislation that Ralph Nader was instrumental in passing.
Clean Air Act
Clean Water Act
Consumer credit disclosure law
Consumer Product Safety Act
Co-Op Bank Bill
Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
Freedom of Information Act
Funeral home cost disclosure law
Law establishing Environmental Protection Agency
Medical Devices safety
Mine Health and Safety Act
Mobile home safety
National Automobile and Highway Traffic Safety Act
National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act
Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act
Nuclear power safety
Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA)
Pension protection law
Safe Water Drinking Act
Tire safety & grading disclosure law
Whistleblower Protection Act
Wholesome Meat Act
Wholesome Poultry Product Act
Not to mention all the books he has written, activist groups he has started and people he inspired.
How much legislation have YOU had a hand in passing Mr. Masters? How does it stand up next to Ralph’s? Dismissive, condescending lefty writers such as yourself nauseate me.
Anyone that’s been siding with Marcos regarding Kuch is a bit of right of center to begin with.
Thanks for being so ‘open’ Ian, but you smack of centrism and the powers that be. All radio, even KPFK and Pacifica (they’ve proven that in their past in Berkeley, haven’t they Ian) is corrupted by corporate interests.
I’m not buying this kool aid, Pups.
The White House and Senate cannot be trusted to make good on any fix-it-in-reconciliation deal that they make, especially when they can scapegoat the Parliamentarian. IMHO, the House must reject the Senate bill and tell Obama to start over. He has had more than enough chances already.
I will be whipping /calling as many as I can tomorrow to say just that!
You sound like another dittohead in disguise.
Heh, WW is a regular, yer not, yer the dittohead.
If Nader really had a hand in all the pieces of legislation that were listed above, then Kucinich might actually be worse than Nader.
Kucinich may be least useful Democrat.
Fire away.
Being the least useful D ranks pretty high IMO. Ds are thoroughly corrupt.
Oh, why bother?
Umm… Both?
Actually if Ralph said a Healthcare plan was the Best I would consider that a plus. Obama wants to pass a politically possible plans well his plan cost us Ted’s seat.
Lobbyist approved plan would be more accurate. Obama’s plan will cost us political seats.
I expect Joe the Plumber to be on tv soon as the Obama plan passes saying here is my Obama tax cut refund and here is what Obama is forcing me to pay for health insurance.
Never mind the insurance companies are raising rates ahead of the Obama plan.
Which to be fair to Joe Obama is not stopping.
The author (like the proprietor of the “Daily Little Prick”) ought to note, the labels we projectively apply to others reveal most of all the truths we can’t see or accept about ourselves.
Masters’ “suicidally self-righteous progressive” slur about Nader, like Moulitsas’ “always been a little prick, and that hasn’t changed” attack on Kucinich, simply reveals the inner truth about the speaker.
I agree with GDC707 that if we had more (say, even one) Naders on health care we might actually have a national health care system that cares for people and not corporations.
I’m glad we have people of principle like Dennis Kucinich in Congress.
Love Markos Moulitsas or hate him, his deliberately mispronouncing Kucinich’s name on Countdown was cheap and no different than when Republicans say “Democrat party”. It isn’t his opinion of Kucinich which caused me to stop going to Daily Kos, he has a right to that, rather it was that cheap shot. Classy Markos. Classy as Rove.
Markos Moulitsas is a millionaire Reagan republican and CIA candidate. Fuck him; he’s a Judas Goat to true progressives.
And why doesn’t he just come out of the closet already.
Markos is fishing for an appointment to the Obama administration. He wants in on the Village.
How can we help? I would like to suggest Ambassador to Centristan.
Burma, or Somalia, maybe.
You’ve said that before, and I’m still with you on it all the way, he wants inside the Village, like Ian Welsh and the WAPO folks newly hired there in the past year.
You must mean Ian Masters, no?
Nope, I care for Ian Welch about as much as today’s Ian Master’s piece. Welch sold out when he hired onto WAPO.
I guess Masters might have a longer history of street cred with progs than I’m aware of, but Pacifica and flagship KPFK are no less corporate interest based now than the WAPO is.
I think I spelled Welch’s name wrong in my orig comment, my bad . . *G*
Oh, no, I was right it’s Welsh, Ian Welsh, WAPO writer.
Well there must be a few Ian Welsh‘s out there.
I’ve always thought he was the same WAPO columnist . . . . ???????
Out of what closet? After listening to him and watching him for 2 minutes the door blows wide open..
You’re not helping by acting like him. Having a lisp does not make a person gay. No reason to focus on how he speaks, likely something he has little control over nor cares that much about, or even his sexuality.
A far more serious problem IMO was MSFOX giving Moulitsas a high-profile platform for his attacks.
But the value of that was it makes (even more) clear the collusion of MSNBC with the Obama camp, just like FOX with Bush before them.
Sort of like Rachel Maddow using Bill Nye to call those who questioned the government plan to respond to global warming (the left’s version of “the terrorist threat”) “unpatriotic.”
It’s not that they shouldn’t be allowed to say such things. It’s that we need to understand what they’re really saying.
Kos has always taken this approach with Dennis K. In 2008, during the Dem primaries, he repeatedly called DK “ugly” and whenever his name was printed in one of Kos’s articles, Kos put swearword marks next to it! For someone who is running a website supposedly addressed at social and political issues, those are cheap shots.
It would be sad if the most liberal Congressman signed on to a health insurance bill that forces everyone to buy private insurance and doesn’t control costs. Democrats have even co-opted a single payer study to make the dubious claim that giving everyone private insurance that they can’t use will save thousands of lives. We have much better ideas. If liberals support this bill then when it fails our ideas will be discredited. I’m glad Dennis is refusing to rubber stamp this.
“Suicidally self-righteous progressive”? Sure, that’s us. This guy Ian couldn’t help getting that little dig in. Fact of the matter is Nader has been right for 10 years, and people are waking up to that fact. Even Marcus Kos has been exposed as a possible CIA operative running a fake “progressive” blog. (Yes, I know get your tinfoil hat on. But the CIA does amoral things we can’t even fathom, so anything is possible!) And Obummer–well, the dude’s more right wing than Reagan.
So, in the end, who was right? Nader is looking more and more like a visionary every day.
Obama is owned by the insurance companies. The tip off was when only the insurance executives had a seat at the table for the first hearing months ago.
Obama is worse than a liar. He comes out and gives the sheeple a line of shit on “the fat cat bankers” and “the greedy insurance companies”, then sucks these very same interests off when he’s back behind closed doors.
Th-th-th-that’s all folks. There will be no public option, only corporate welfare for insurance companies.
Can we start an FDL pool on the issue Barry will capitulate on next? Or is there anything left?
My Q is why would anyone at FDL front page this garbage?
Agree…
I’m leaning your way, for the reasons in my previe comment.
Ian sounds centrist, and KPFK/Pacifica is purely corporatist.
When I was a kid in the Seventies Pacifica was considered radical. When I listen to our local DC affiliate, it is rife with programs hosted by committed Obamabots. Times have changed!
Yep, we are likely close to the same age, I had KPFK in Berekeley, it’s a shadow of what it once was.
I admire Nader and Kucinich. Nader has accomplished more for this country than most people could dream of. He didn’t scuttle the Democratic party. In my opinion, the Democratic party didn’t need his help to accomplish that.
So Kucinich has the guts to voice Progressive opinions and stand firm despite the corporatist Democratic establishment. For this, he should be considered “suicidally self-righteous”? I do not believe that any healthcare bill is better than no bill. And for a variety of reasons, I have seen no evidence yet that this bill is worth supporting. If there’s a public option, yes. But without one, I don’t approve. There are no good controls on insurance company practices, no shift from disease-care to wellness and prevention, no protection of a woman’s right to choose, & no elimination on the extra amounts women have to pay in their premiums because they were born female…
And why doesn’t he just come out of the closet already.
Cheap shots are not limited to Markos I see.
No, EDK is quite full of them, and insofar as I can see, has added nothing positive to any discussion.
Markos is a joke! I mean come on people, primary Dennis lol…
Talk about someone with an agenda, he is the king of the liberal media when it comes to having an agenda on everything that comes out of his mouth or off his keyboard.
Its like this the Ins. mafia owns the Health care territory in America just like The LA gangs own the LA area for drug dealing, this is how the Obama gang which now heads the Dem. mafia sees this. We have to STOP thinking these gangsters are really politicians, they’re NOT they’re really acting more like mobsters, so lets start treating them as such. This same way of viewing them works for every other issue where they’ve sold off the territory or franchise to $$ interests. The “People” can buy any of these areas if they have the funding, if not the People” can STFU as far as these Gang bosses are concerned and Dennis the “K” of the Ohio Territory is now a marked man for defying Da Bosses. Welcome to America now being run by Barack “Capone” Obama.
There’s also the matter of Obama taking out the provision for the states to be protected if they try to institute single payer. Dennis K championed that. To me, that’s more important than the rest of the crap bill. I think he asked that it remain in the bill and they said no.
Single payer for the states is the way around the useless fed gov’t, imo. We should be all working toward that.
I wouldn’t judge Masters too quickly by this one post. I’ve been listening to his show for years and consider it to be one of the finest public affairs radio programs on the air. The guest list never ceases to amaze, including Jane Hamsher (you’re heard of her, right?) in a very provocative interview just about six hours ago. (She’s been on his show a number of times before.)
As for Nader? He’s been reasonably consistent about the dangers of an encroaching corporate state. However, he did screw up by staying in the race in 2000, thus making it much easier for BushCo to grab the reins. While not presuming to defend the utterly corrupt Democratic party, does anyone really think that we’d be in this byzantine mess – especially on the international stage – if Gore had been elected? Really? Show your work.
Moulitsas? An ambitious little twit.
If Masters is so great, why did he choose this piece of garbage to introduce himself to FDL? (I haven’t seen him here before, but perhaps I’ve missed it.)
why did he choose this piece of garbage to introduce himself to FDL?
Maybe because Jane was on his show today? Maybe because this HCR reform is (theoretically) coming to a head this week? I have no idea. What I do know, however, is that, in the main, he’s fighting the good fight – and has been for a very long time. And as I said before, the guest list? Big time.
OK. I’ll keep an open mind, but he has some makeup work to do with me (not that I matter in the slightest).
I’m certainly not introducing myself to this group for a long term dalliance; just a few comments. The ideology of this group is exactly the mirror image of those commentors on redstate.com; one left/one right–both ultimately not useful in evolving toward the desired outcome therefore irrelevant. Some good ideas here hidden behind the immovable rhetoric of ideology!!
I think you’re overreacting considerably to what Masters wrote. The comment about “the Nader mold” raised my hackles a bit, to be sure, but what Masters wrote was far more diplomatic and fair-handed than most of you would find on the “Daily Kos” web site. I don’t know if you saw how Moulitsas and his crappy web site treated Nader and Nader supporters, but I did and they were over-the-top obnoxious, slogan-chanting creeps. Masters in comparison is sweet and open-minded.
I don’t do kos. So my reaction was to Masters as he came across here.
He may not have understood that his audience here at FDL consists of people many of whom have a sympathetic disposition towards Nader, and some of whom have even been abused online and in person in public events for supporting Nader or similar. The “suicidally self-righteous progressive” line would have played better at “Daily Kos”.
(I haven’t loaded the “Kos” site since shortly after the end of the Dean For America epoch. It just got too overrun with idiots, and Moulitsas just pandered to them for the obvious self-serving reasons!)
I’m a leftist, but no one said liberals were tolerant. In fact, sectarianism is rife within any political faction. Human beings, as a whole, are an intolerant bunch. But liberals always advertise how tolerate they are–blah, blah, blah–but they are just as bad as the right wing.
I couldn’t agree more! Human nature has xenophobia and intolerance built right in!
What crap.
Tolerance is an elitist insult to begin with, – hate that term, no can tolerate.
Tolerance is an elitist insult? Wow, connect those dots if you will. Essentially, what you said there makes no sense at all.
Do you prefer to be accepted by someone or is being tolerated good enough for you?
Tribalism, my friend, is the ultimate problem with human beings. Of course, I’m guilty of it myself. I’d also add hierarchy, as well, to be true to my anarchist leanings!
OK, so you are an anarchist. That does bring clarity to your position. With such nihilism as the starting point, what gives meaning to your life other than being negative? Is that the only source of your joy, that you can bring others down? That is a question I ask in all seriousness.
Well, I like the folks here. I consider them good, decent people working toward the same goal, though we may disagree on how to get there. We are all for freedom. That’s what it is all about, my friend. Human freedom.
I have multiple goals. Freedom is one. But some who focus on that single-mindedly think that means that real living people can’t agree to take care of their fellow real living peeps. And I disagree that is what freedom means. In fact, I think there is no real human freedom unless a minimum standard is met for all peeps.
Oh I agree completely. That’s why you need to merge the libertarian with the socialist to get a good mix! In the US, we have neither.
You will never merge libertarians with anything socialist. The only merger between libertarians with lefties is on civil liberties, and especially especially anti-war.
And drug wars… particularly Cannabis.
Good catch, ES. Makes me think we ought to join forces, fraught with probs that may be.
“Libertarian socialism (sometimes called socialist anarchism,[1][2] and sometimes left libertarianism[3])[4] is a group of political philosophies that aspire to create a society free of coercive hierarchies.[5]”
“Libertarian socialists generally place their hopes in decentralized means of direct democracy such as municipalities, citizens’ assemblies, trade unions, and workers’ councils.[8] Many advocate doing away with the state altogether, while others propose that a minimal, non-hierarchical version is unobjectionable.[9]”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism
Well, thanks for the explanation and the links. Seems oxymoronic to me. For example, what’s the diff between organizing nationally vs. organizing locally?
the scope of bureaucracy which ultimately concentrates enormous power in the hands of the State.
OK. But the end game seems to revolve around the idea of what’s good or bad for the peeps. And the scope of bureacracy is good if it advances the peeps and bad if is doesn’t. Right? So what’s the solution? Letting privates usurp everything or letting govt usurp?
Noam Chomsky-Discussion with Libertarian Socialists
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwr2x3TiQ5E
Very cool. Thanks! The black and the red all over that video.
anarcho-syndicalism, kindred spirits.
I think the key to whether you want private sector to “usurp” or government to do so depends on the situation. To keep on topic, with healthcare, it’s quite clear that a market based approach will lead to a poor outcome:
Too many mismatched incentives among the players in the system. Health care violates just about all of the basic Ricardian efficiency assumptions.
Hey, no one wants to say anarchist because it implies bearded bomb throwers or punkified kids hurling Molotovs at windows. Ha, ha!
Boy, did we ever get off topic. Sorry, my fault.
Well, there is unfortunately some truth. I think it’s more that anarchists are seen as somewhat anti-social outside their own kind. There is a lot of pressure to conform to a lifestyle and look (subculture) to truly “fit in” and not be treated like an outsider or even an agent. Conversely, “libertarian” has a largely positive association and has no affiliation with a type of subculture (or similar subcultures). The term “libertarian socialism” largely negates the negative associations people have with the word “socialism”, that it’s a top down, highly centralized socio-economic order, in which everything is in the hands of the government and the bureaucracies. It also leaves one far more open to various viewpoints and theories.
Not to blogwhore or anything (edit: ok I guess it is blog-whoring, though the post is old and closed…), but my first Seminal post Liberals and Libertarians was on exactly this subject.
Though I guess we have different conclusions about the overlap as I would call myself a left libertarian….
Then you are most definitively an anarchist, my friend!
Perhaps at times, but I truly believe that there is a positive role for government. And a primary element of that role, is limiting the power of corporations. What frightens me is that it is being used for the opposite purpose. Concentrating power and enabling it to be used to forcing the entire populace into a twisted non-functioning health insurance system.
…which brings us right back to the topic!!! DK is out there advocating for a plan which will bring positive outcomes for people…increasing choice (liberty ;-) ) and limiting the ability of a set of rapacious corporations to lock people into suboptimal healthcare solutions or, to use eCahn’s term “murder by numbers”.
we have Chomsky!
I’m all for Chomsky!
I’m not for Nader.
I’m for Studs Terkel and U.Utah Phillips, but they’re dead.
Sadly, so’s Eugene Debs.
*G*
You’re wrong. There have been libertarian socialists since there have been libertarians or socialists. Anarchists technically fall under this label as well. Check out ZNet. Search Wikipedia. I personally consider myself one as well (libertarian socialist).
The perfect illustration.
Oh, because I said you are quite wrong, that validates your point? It is the old the only thing I cannot tolerate is intolerance canard.
If by “canard” you mean truism, yes.
Nite folks, have kiddos to attend to, but it has been good fun, and thoughtful as well. Bye now.
That is sort of a definition of liberal=tolerant. The online dictionary says
Liberals may be as bad as the wingnuts but you need not worry about them. Liberals have no power. The right wing wage their perpetual wars and disaster capitalism quite effectively. Liberals cannot even get universal health care.
Really? Yeah, really.
Two words: Joe Lieberman.
Had he replaced Gore as prez, or succeeded him, we’d probably have had WWIII in the Middle East by now.
Other than that, there’s no logic or math you can supply that supports your claim that Nader “screwed up” the 2000 election; even DLC head Al From and Gore himself have stated that Nader didn’t cost Gore the election, an election that GORE WON! Blame the SCotUS, Katherine Harris, Gore losing Tennessee, or 300,000 FL Dems voting FOR BUSH, plus perhaps millions of stolen votes (purged voter rolls, voter caging, voter intimidation, electronic ballot manipulation, chads/butterflies/overvoting, etc.), but after ten years, enough with scapegoating Nader!
A lot of people have been re-evaluating their negative view of Ralph lately. About time.
And why pray is questioning Makos Moulitsas sexuality relevant or better than him questioning Kucinich’s motives? Republicans do that kind of thing.
The phrase coming out of the closet can be used metaphorically to refer to a side that someone wants to keep hidden. Perhaps you missed the metaphor.
Dennis is one of the few in Congress (I hope he’s not alone, although I haven’t come across another) whose contact widget doesn’t reject non-constituents. I’m sure he’d appreciate notes of support, and he must be remembered in progressive campaigning activities.
Obama’s HCR has, I believe, two objectives. One is the obvious mandated transfer of wealth from us to them. The other, – the time hole between passage and implementation is aimed at keeping the public occupied with hypothetical virtues and vices of that legislation, is aimed to keep our attention off of Wall Street, the epicenter of American Fascism and a cesspool of corruption.
Let’s not pay attention to the savvy businessmen behind that curtain.
This bill is essentially the Wall Street Bailout for the sickness industry.
I call it “the sickness industry” because health is last thing it wants for people. If people were healthy they’d have no customers. They make their money (and remember, we’re talking about ~1/6 of the entire economy here) when people are sick.
So what we’ll become if this happens to be forced upon us is a nation of the chronically ill – forever, by design.
There was a time we called it the “murder by spreadsheet industry.” Has something changed?
Oh, you beat me to it. What are you drinking?
Water. I’m a cheap date tonight.
Tap or bottled? Still or sparkling?
Spring, bottled, please. Chilled or not, no matter.
Call it the death industry, because by all their restrictions, they make the most money if their customers pay premiums but are precluded by restrictions from collecting, and therefore die.
That’s true about insurance companies as a subset, but it’s not true of the entire rest of the sickness ecosystem, the hospitals, the doctors, the pharmaceutical industry.
When the customers die those people are screwed. So they, like drug dealers, want customers who are healthy enough to keep paying but sick enough to never leave. Sickness is the addiction that keeps the money rolling in.
That’s not to say that every doctor (or even, for that matter, every for-profit hospital administrator) goes to work salivating over the prospect of making a buck off of people’s suffering.
I am saying that making a buck off of people’s suffering is what makes the system run.
And like the politicians we allow to lie us into war and the soldiers who are “just following orders” and the civilians who support and promote it and the civilians who don’t do enough to stop it, we’re all responsible.
I want to make sure that we all address the real problem here – otherwise all the good intentions of everyone are wasted.
The real goal is not profits, not health insurance, not even single-payer medical care.
The real goal is personal and national health.
Let’s talk about incentives, not goals, as incentives are more objective to evaluate. As a caveat, I’m not saying that incentives are determinative, only that they are powerful. The incentives in the U.S. medical insurance industry are to collect premiums and to pay out nothing. The incentive for docs is to keep treating no matter what. There is a clash between those 2 parts of the industry, and the outcome is not determined by any straightforward economic analysis, since there is no real market, but rather by power plays.
If we can’t talk about goals then what’s the point of doing anything?
Without agreement on goals then nothing else matters.
Why is discussing incentives less than nothing iyo?
Discussing incentives isn’t less than nothing. It’s very important.
It’s that discussing incentives without first agreeing upon goals is pointless.
It’s like discussing what kind of car to drive and what route to take without first agreeing on where we’re going.
“We’re have no idea where we’re going but we’re making good time.”
So I said what I said because the energy you would invest discussing incentives would be wasted unless we first had some agreement and understanding of what were the goals those incentives were intended to help us achieve. I want your investment in time and energy here to be used in the best way possible.
Perhaps in this case the better metaphor might be us as passengers on the Titanic. Better to understand the big picture and head for the lifeboats than simply run to the end of the ship that’s not yet in the water.
The thing is if this is an organized smear on Kucinich I wonder if Rahmbot put Lawrence O’Donnell up to asking Marcus Kos the question. Or did they all meet together–Rahmbot, Macus Kos, O’Donnell–to plan this.
Again, get yer tinfoil hat on, man!
The details of who might have specifically colluded and communicated with whom are for the most part a distraction. Interesting, but not systemically meaningful.
By the time someone like Olbermann or Maddow or whomever reaches their post, they have either been selected and promoted because they’re willing to internalize the values of the ownership, or they didn’t need to internalize it because they already agreed with it.
Worrying about just what Emanuel may have said to Dana Milbank or O’Donnell or whomever is sort of like worrying which of the 10,000 fans at a sporting event may have talked to each other about attending. “Surely you’re not suggesting a conspiracy between all these people? That’s ludicrous!” Of course it’s not a literal conspiracy between all of them – though many may have talked to each other. A far simpler explanation is that actors who have the same set of values and goals will tend to have similar actions and will work to support those shared goals.
That’s the classic way in which logically-unfounded claims of “you’re promoting a conspiracy theory!” are used to hide things we chickens aren’t supposed to discover.
“American Green is made out of people!!!”
Great post. Chomskyesq, BTW. I agree. They’d never allow a dirty hippie in front of the camera. The elites are crafty, aren’t they?
Or, as I put it, anyone who graduated from kindergaten knows what to say and how to act. It doesn’t take outside instructions from an overt conspriracy to instruct them.
That I discovered when I, a woman, was advancing myself, an understudy to the chief econ at Goldman Sachs, to replace him as he was retiring early. He was obsessive compulsive, took detailed notes of all the candidates, left them on his desk at night. I still have copies in my attic. There was only one oblique ref to my gender, nothing I could sue on. But the working assumption was that I was not a serious contender. Even though I worked my way up in his ‘objective’ evaluation as candidates came thru.
That’s how most ‘conspriacies’ work. There is no orchestraction. Because of shared, unexpressed values, there is no need to meet to discuss them.
Seems to me you have internalized cynicism to the point that nothing cannot be twisted into conspiracy.
Excellent.
Tactically, I don’t see much difference DK and Stupak. Both are sincere in their motivations, aren’t they?
But one of their values is against the wishes of the voters and one of theirs favors the voters. Or did you miss that?
OK, I give, what did I miss?
The polls.
Tactically, both could kill the bill. Their motivations obviously differ. One guy wants to help American citizens get health care, the other wants to impose his Religious beliefs on the rest of us. Whether or not Stupak is sincere is a rhetorical device. I don’t care whether Stupak is sincere or not. IMHO, he is an asshole either way.
Well, I quite agree with your characterization. But let us remember, many of the clergy engaged in the Inquisition truly believed they were saving sould from eternal damnation, a truly noble goal as they inflicted excruciating pain on their victims. Point is, having a noble goal does not preclude having a foreseeable bad outcome.
If Kucinich tanks Obamacare in its current incarnation, I will be pleased. If Kucinich can break the will of Rhambama Sunstein Pelosi to include a viable Public Option and States Rights to compete with Big Insurance, I will be more pleased. Ergo, I am pleased with Kucinich. Kucinich is – like Jesus – the son of man.
Oh geez. Anyone can evaluate the bill wrt to goal. Plz eliminate the sophistry.
Point hit to close to home?
Not at all. Please explain your views instead of reacting to comments. Thanks.
Forgive me, but I get really frustrated when folks get things half-right because they aren’t looking at the whole picture. OK, the worst thing that ever happened to medicine is when it became a business; that is, when medical practices began to be run by MBAs. That is when profit became the primary goal rather than practicing good medicine. Compound that with the invention of HMOs, wherein the physician had a direct financial stake in whether s/he made referrals, and you have the complete corruption of the system. I should note, that most hospice are HMOs and are highly profitable because they make their money by minimizing services provided. And, I know a lot of caring people who work for hospice. I have no problem with a physician or other health care professional being fairly compensated for their work; what I do have a problem with is the wildly excessive compensation, even after the corporation has taken their cut. When I worked for CIGNA in managed mental health, our profit margin was 30%.
Oh, but bidness is sooo much more efficient than anything else. So a bidness run medical industry must be the cat’s whiskers. /s
Huh?
The defense of the U.S. status quo is that business is more efficient than any other organization, like govt. If I am still not clear, huh me again. Plus notice my end of snark tag in the comment you huhed.
Well, snarkiness is difficult to miss, and may well provide catharsis, and that in itself can be personally helpful, but rarely promotes rational discussion. Well, of course, you and I both know the argument that business is more efficient than government is nonsense. In part, because of the myth of competition. All large corporations are skillful at playing “prisoner’s dilemma,” and thus can collude with one another with no smoking gun available, because it all implicit. The oil companies have been getting away with this for years, and more recently big pharma and insurance companies as well.
So if competition is an ephemera, why should anyone favor O’s HCR?
…and you know more than most here at FDL about bidness: it’s efficient at making money.
Now whether it’s efficient at keeping people healthy, I think there’s also a clear answer. Nope.
Nicely put.
At this point I really don’t care what he has done in the past. This is not the 7th grade debate and promise society, this is for big time stuff. He may have the guts but if he does not vote for HCR because it does not “go far enough”, he will not have enough brains. I for one could not support anyone who would decline this opportunity to support a 30 year old effort because of imagined pragmatic offenses.Watching this stuff percolate for 45 years is enough.
I have no time left!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
How about not voting for HCR because the senate bill is nothing but a giveaway to insurance corps?
How about not voting for HCR because the senate bill is nothing but a giveaway to insurance corps?
Now there’s an idea.
I get so tired of going over the same material over & over. Had dinner with my progressive-from-the-cradle niece a week ago Saturday. Unlike me, she has a real life (enrichment & teacher development in NYC public schools), and she is completely unaware of how rightwing O is and how much the media has been corrupted. Made me despair, especially when she accused me of being a conspiracy nut.
Keep on keeping on. Some ears are always closed, some are always open, and some open from time to time, and maybe when you least expect it.
It sucks to be the enlightened one. /s
Speaking for yourself, I suppose. *g*
You are a treasure. Your niece is, unfortunately, a low-information progressive.
*blushing* Treasure I’m not. My niece, yep, heart’s in the right place, but she doesn’t have the time to figure out what’s really happening. And she’s on the right side of history. Imagine how those on the wrong side are regarding current situation.
I suggest you try to do better than that. Of course, we can blame the R’s and Goldman Sachs and AHIP and libertarians and tea partiers. Pres. Obama has not shown that he even has any influence over this quagmire to deserve blame.
Your quote is not from me.
I apologize, my computer is quite insubordinate. And your post on the Fed was quite excellent.
Thanks.
What do you or anyone else stand to benefit from Obama’s Health Insurance Mandate? You do realize that there are no cost controls to be found anywhere. Anything that would have been good was taken out. Drug reimportation from Canada for example. The bill has become nothing more than a gift to AHIP.
No time left, and you’ll get nothing out of what DOES come into law if the Senate bill passes.
You’ll get access to coverage if you don’t have it, but you’ll pay up the wazoo for co-pays, deductibles and the lifetime cap will be so low you’ll exceed it with ONE year’s worth of injury/illness needs.
Good luck, though. And tell Rahm to change the talking points, these are getting as stale as any Rove still uses.
It’s sickening that they’re attacking Kucinich. This is an orchestrated thing, I really believe. The White House is behind it. The one decent leftist in the Congress and they have to tarnish his reputation.
Of course it’s an organized attack. Has all the hallmarks thereof.
Bingo, we are seeing rite before our eyes that the so called left media is a mirror image of it’s rite wing counter part!
Ian Masters? Are you trying to grab headlines with your lead in?
I have great respect for Nader and for Kucinich. Why are you editorializing before anyone has a chance to listen to the interview? Are you trying
to tilt the scales to your way of thinking? If so, I have no respect for you as a journalist. Facts, please, nothing but..
Masters,How can you expect listeners to have an open mind, when you are shoveling in your sound byte.
BTW, SD, the minimun order of 10-grain would have kept me in breakfasts for years. So I gave one package away, and yesterday made 3 batches of the muffin recipe on the package: one the recipe way, one with whole wheat flour, one with whole wheat flour & brown sugar. All are good. Holding the plate out for takers.
You mean to tell me your natural food store doesn’t carry it on the shelf?
Oh, muffins, yes, please. Thank you.
I don’t know if it’s carried in the local health food store. Since I have so much that I got mail order, I won’t need to check for quite some time. (Mail order is my friend.) Take as many muffins as you like. And here’s the spring water too.
Steak and wine!
Water??? C’mon. How’s about some heavy duty Torpedo IPA from Sierra Nevada?
Somebody told me about Health Savings Accounts. You pay an outrageous premium which the Insurance company gets to keep. Then you get to put more money in a bank account to spend on your doctor visits and other medical needs. After you give them all their premiums and spend $6000.00, the Insurance Company pays anything over the $6000.00.
These plans are such a gift to the Insurance Industry they should be illegal. Its no wonder that they are favored by Republican Congresscreeps.
You know, TPM is as bad as Marcus Kos’ site. But if I remember TPM was for the Iraq invasion. Lots of Dennis K hate over there.
Have caught on to TPM being Obamabots for ‘HCR,’ but don’t remember them being cheerleaders for Iraq war. Not saying it isn’t so; could be my memory.
Sorry, meant to say that Josh was for the war. My bad.
Hans Blix must have been a figment of my immagination. As Dubya sent all the ships into the Gulf, I could have sworn I heard Blix say that Saddam was cooperating with the UN inspections.
LOL. My memory is that Saddam Hussein complied with every possible demand. He did play a few games with inspections, but really petty compared to 1998 games, and even those were surmountable. SH released all his docs, and W said that was an insult because it wasn’t good enough. Couldn’t understand what the flaplette was all about. That was long before my FDL days, so I had no community of interest to bounce my thoughts off of.
Mostly
True
True
For awhile I believed Colin Powell
Then after the invasion, there was all the fuss about the Baathists in power, but, what was left out by the moronic media was the fact that the CIA put the Baathists in power in the first place
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/51/217.html
Since you jog my reminiscences: I was on the train from Manhattan to Greenwich during most of Powell’s UN presentation. When I got to the interview at the hedge fund, Powell was still at it, so we watched it till the end. I remember Powell projected a bunch of rectangles with red ovals drawn around them and declared that they were mobile biological labs. I had all I could do to not burst into giggles. The hedge fund interviewers were all agog, however. Needless to say there was no job for me there.
What? You blew a chance to roll with the fat cats?
(The only hedge fund in my future is what I can save up to plant some bushes on the border of an eventual plot of land ;) )
I worked on Wall St. for a quater of a century but in a position where I could forecast whatever I wanted without censorship from on top. By the time of the interview I mentioned, I was well out of the loop. And the big incompatibility was that the hedge fund expected me to unearth macroeconomic opportunities that would result in leveraged money making possibilities in nanoseconds. I can’t do that. So no deal. I wouldn’t even try to fool them to collect a couple of months salary.
Do you mean Shrubbery? ;-)
Have you ever listened to this from ICH ‘The Incredible Lying Bushco’?
Still makes me sick every time I listen to their lies.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5115.htm
Saddam Hussein is not disarming, he is not disarming…..
I don’t remember that either, but as I said, I don’t remember a lot of what I lived thru. Was it because a lot of otherwise librul Jews fell for the WMD propaganda?
Difference would be in the sites popularity. I’m sure we can find some blogs even harsher towards progressives, Kucinich, the left as a whole. They may have 1 reader though. DKos on the other hand is one of the most popular “liberal” blogs on the Internet. I think this is largely due to a much better, and more addictive, web design that keeps people coming back for discussions.
there are no discussions at DKos, bumper sticker slogans, and Democratic talking points mindlessly regurgitated, is all.
I love Dennis Kucinich. In a manly, fraternal way, of course.
To get back to the original post for a moment, I find it sad that some can’t see
“Nader”
and
“The Only One with the Guts and Brains to Do the Right Thing”
are the same thing.
If THE DIRECT STUDENT LOAN BILL can be combined with this HEALTH CARE REFORM BILL, then a robust PUBLIC OPTION, or a MEDICARE BUY IN can be added too. An individual mandate without a public option benefits no one but PRIVATE INSURERS and CONGRESS MEN & WOMEN with their hand out.
Goals?? We are the only Western industrialized country to not cover all of our people under a gov’t run/single payer/whatever you wanna call it system. It is beyond tragic. It is disgusting. This bill will do nothing of the sort. It is a moral question. Obama, if he had balls, could have made the case.
I blame Obama. He’s at fault. He didn’t use the bully pulpit to do what’s decent and right. He’s to blame. Not the Republicans, not Kucinich, not Stupak, etc. He’s the president. He should be leading. He has failed in an epic way to frame this as a moral issue. End of rant.
It’s really hard hard work to support corp sponsors while pretending to do what’s right for voters. Give O credit for trying really really hard.
lest we forget… The bad rap on Nader re 2000/Florida was the excuse Florida and national dems used to cover up their own inability to design a decent ballot and fight the repub stormtroopering ballot bashers. Post the election givaway ballot analysis showed
1. Gore had the vote
2. Nader/Buchanan pretty much took equally from Bush and Gore.
Still, it make a wonderful ‘stab in the back’ mime for all the dem poobahs who really didn’t give a shit about Gore, many who actually like Bush more. Remember how Gore was constantly portayed as an insider sissy compared to Bush? And how many congressional dems were out stumping for Gore?
And after 9/11 remember all the dems rallying to the dimwit in chief? It wasn’t until after Iraq that we started to hear “.. out, out damned spot!” as the pelosicrats tried to wash away their complicity. I don’t know anything about Ian Masters, but anybody that continues the lie that Nader cost Gore the election gets no repect from me.
Plus, a hell of a lot of Florida Dems voted for Bush! Far more, than voted for Nader.
“We have met the enemy and he is us.”
I agree with Markos and Glen Greenwald of Salon.com Kucinich is ridiculous. I read an post on kos by, I believe Mcjoan. Or, it could have been Markos. Anyway, there was a list of Obama’s initiatives that Kucinich voted against and it stunned me. The Hate Crimes Bill, the President’s budget, and there were several others that I can’t remember right now. Personally, I find Kucinich to be the Left’s version of that nut bag, Ross Perot. Just go away Dennis. And take your lack of policy and pragmatism with you. You’re a joke!
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/03/10/kos_kucinich
Pity that integrity has become so rare that many mischaracterize it when they see it.
While I don’t agree with Kucinich on everything, on this, I have never been more grateful to any politician. He is the only Democrat telling the truth about this hideous bill and standing strong for the People.
To those falling for the DLC demonization and clownification of Kucinich, have you even read the bill? Do you truly understand its ramifications?
Really, what’s at stake with this bill and its contents is the answer to the question “Can the modern US government act in any way that directly benefits people in the country who are not rich?”
The answer looks bleak, so far, I’d say, the answer will be “No, the US government must premise its every act and policy first and foremost on how the act or policy will prioritize the wealth of figures atop billion- or trillion- dollar incorporated business and financial sectors.”
Well-stated. What is frightening is how many otherwise intelligent people think this bill actually constitutes even a shred of real reform. It’s also an interesting statement about how quickly we forget even recent history since it is little more than a slight re-write of the 1993 REPUBLICAN faux health reform counter-proposal to the Clinton bill. We have Democrats rooting for a 1993 REPUBLICAN faux reform bill. Then on top of that, we have Democrats demanding lockstep conformation from other Democrats to back this 90′s REPUBLICAN bill. What’s next a neofeudalist Democrat Purity Test? Sigh…
Way to plug your show and insult Nader, I’ll make sure I don’t listen to your show.
Point of fact…I worked my ass off for the Nader 2000 campaign. In the streets. The liberals literally screamed at me. Trust me, don’t get a Dem Party partisan mad. It is VERY ugly.
There was a saying in California about the difference between San Francisco/NorCal (a very “liberal” place) and Los Angeles/SoCal (a very “conservative” one).
In Los Angeles, you can think whatever you want as long as you look a certain way.
In San Francisco, you can look however you want as long as you think a certain way.
“We all agree to reject and hate the forces of rejection and hate!”
Oh no doubt. My experience in a coffee house rcently arguing health care and O in general with a paid Dem operative emonstrated that. How dare I question the sainted Obama and all he is trying so hard to do for us.
I am just always suspicious and resentful when someone uses the word “Nader” to denote someone who torpedoes the ship. I don’t care how cool the guy’s radio show is, his use of Nader’s name in that fashion simply indicates that the events of the last year (indeed the last 16 years) haven’t taught him an effin’ thing. That the Democrat Party is no friend to the working citizen of this country and indeed may be worse than the R’s in that the Dems are able to cause more damage in their role as a Trojan horse. The R’s could never get away with this giveaway to the health cartel. And as Selise says it is the Dems not the R’s who will spearhead the attack on SS and Medicare.
I “got” all this about 20 years ago and believe me, so did Ralph. It’s time for Masters, Jane and all the other Nader Haters to get a clue too.
As for Kucinich, I wan’t him to be emperor.
Most important point of the thread.
Judging from this current jihad against the teachers and teachers’ unions, the next thing the Obama people are going after is the tattered remains of the New Deal safety net. They want to privatize anything that’s been socialized. In fact, that’s why Obama won’t help out the state and country gov’ts. It’s a total jihad against social services, IMO.
Yep.
All the points here about one side or the other are especially valuable and important when one also starts to see, as the comments towards the end of the thread here reveal, that the “other” side is just the rejected part of ourselves.
Huh?
Could you be a tad more specific? When I read what I wrote I see it as succinct and perfectly clear.
More humorously, I respond to your “Huh?” with my own “Huh?” :-)
Or, if we’re playing comment poker, “call.” ;-)
To be more specific, I do not understand what you typed. If you wish, plz try to repeat more clearly. Otherwise, I’ll ignore your comment.
What I don’t get is what part you don’t get. All of it, some of it, none of it?
Try none of it and start all over.
Then try something like this:
Seeing only separation, without also seeing connectedness and union, is incomplete. Like seeing a glass as either half empty or half full, without realizing that while they both exist they are also two parts of a single whole.
Anything I reject as “other” is simply a part of myself I don’t yet know. (This goes back to my initial comment here about the nature of projection.)
Thus the fighting over R’s vs. D’s, or left and right, or tolerant and intolerant, or any split between anything, is also missing the point that the two halves are not only always connected – they are part of each other.
It’s like seeing one’s reflection in the mirror, and somehow thinking it’s something or someone else. The separation is both true and also completely illusory.
The world and the universe are infinite (as are we). What we believe we “see” in the world is just parts of ourselves projected out upon it.
So the path to union and wholeness is, when we see something we feel we need to reject, to understand that we reject it because we have projected upon it some part of ourselves that we can’t accept, or don’t yet know. So when we see and react to someone or something, we learn the most about ourselves when instead of simply continuing to reject it, we instead ask “where does this also exist within me? It must exist within me, otherwise I wouldn’t, couldn’t, react to it. So where do I that, where am I that way, too?”
In the case of the “tolerant” liberals mentioned earlier, for example, one would then get to the koan of “I am intolerant of intolerance.” Which then allows me to see that what I see as the intolerant “other” is actually just a mirror for my own intolerance. And once I accept it in myself, I then am not only less reactive to it in others, what was once a point of separation now becomes a point of similarity, of union, of identity.
The other and I might then have a discussion about what each of us do or do not tolerate. But that’s a conscious discussion, and not merely unconscious rejection.
That’s what all these little metaphoric koans lead back to, ultimately. Consciousness.
And the struggle to unify what seem to be two opposites is the sign of seeing the world from inside ego consciousness, which sees everything as separate (left, right, liberal, conservative, libertarian, socialist, male, female). It’s not wrong. It’s just incomplete.
The trick, the way to solve the unsolvable problem, isn’t to unify opposites.
It’s to shift one’s own internal consciousness to the place of wholeness, from which they’re no longer seen as opposites, or even disconnected.
Does that make things more clear?
(P.S. If this is the conversation we’re having, you’re on the verge of a big breakthrough inside.)
So now yer diagnosing therapy outcomes?
Very clear. Called solipsism.
If you folks want an excellent example of libertarian socialism at work, read about the Spanish anarchists during the Spanish Civil War. They actually achieved it, albeit for a very short time.
Oh that seems so like a goal to try to attain. /s
Obama health care – penalties if you or your employer don’t pay a health insurance company and no teeth to enforce payment of claims by that company.
Top Blue Cross salaries soar: report-by at least 48 percent, CEO by 62%
Top Blue Cross salaries soar: report
As President Obama rails against insurance company abuses in an effort to bolster his health-care reform bill, the salaries for top officials at Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Illinois’ corporate parent will almost certainly add fuel to his fire.
Crain’s Chicago Business says the 10 most senior executives of the nonprofit Health Care Service Corp. saw their compensation jump last year by at least 48 percent, thanks to huge bonuses. Compensation more than doubled for six.
CEO Patricia Hemingway Hall’s compensation spiked 62 percent to $8.7 million. That was $2.2 million more than Humana CEO Michael McCallister earned — even though Humana’s $31 billion in revenues last year was nearly double that of the Chicago-based Health Care Service.
“It’s greedy and outrageous,” Wheaton business owner Linda Cherrington told Crain’s. Her company switched insurers when Blue Cross premiums went up 45 percent.
http://www.suntimes.com/business/2101711,CST-NWS-bluecr...
Dennis is 100% correct. Kucinich for President on the Independent ticket. YEAH.
I’m switching to I as soon as I see the final outcome on HCR.
And I’d spend my vote on Kuch, but I’d rather Kuch primary’d Obama.
How is it that the pre-election Democrats seem to support the very same ideas that Ralph Nader does, but then suddenly after the election, these same ideas are too purist or impractical? I have heard of people who say that Communism, for example, is good in theory but not in practice, BUT those people do not go around saying they are Communists. I don’t see how the Dems get away with this. Kucinich apparently is the only one who did not get the memo from the Dems that their stated positions are only pretend positions.
The ol’ Lucy pulls the football bit.
Masters seems like a dick. I don’t watch his show and have little intention of changing that based on his Nader smack talk.
Only a dip ship would insult the very audience he’s trying to reach.
You criticize Nader and I will NOT be your friend. Seriously! Watch how you talk about the greatest American of the last 40 years.
Right on Jimbo. I tell Progressives all the time: THERE was your candidate. The one you always say you want but savage when he steps up to the plate.
DailyKos represents the last of the “Obama Democrats”–the ones who helped put a neocon in the White House. Their favorite trick during the primaries was to call their fellow Democrats racists. And now they’re attacking the one good Democratic Congressman.
The party is dead until we get the Kos types out.
It would have been an indication of intelligence if they’d chosen someone who would correctly pronounce the English language. I guess they didn’t make that a priority in CIA mole school :)
I kept wondering if FDL was going to defend their firedog or not. Better late than never I guess.