Tweet
I watch as political talk show hosts ask Democratic operatives about the fabled enthusiasm gap and the depressed democratic base. The standard pat answer is most of the base don’t realize the universal republican opposition the President faced with his agenda and yet democrats were still able to accomplish a great deal, but were not able to get every little thing their base wanted.
Of course, this is a dodge, a non-answer answer. The reason they never answer the question correctly, or if they do it is framed to make it appear that the base cannot count to 60.
I will answer all pundits questions in the most blunt, stark terms possible, to perhaps give some understanding to the mind of the progressive base. Don’t get me wrong, I think Jane Hamsher has done a masterful job of highlighting this issue, but I plan to rip the meat from the bone.
Early in the process Jane pointed out that the public option had already been traded away, and yet President Obama assured everyone that he was still in favor of it, as he campaigned on it as a bedrock principle in health care reform.
Progressives went to work to see the President’s dream realized of a public option being included in health reform. See, as a default position, progressives see health insurance companies as increasing profits by denying health care–it is a money in, money out thing. For profit health insurance is no good. We can regulate and legislate all we want but the business model itself is incompatible with human health.
So a government health insurance program, a baseline competitor as it were, was the only honest way to hold people in the health insurance industry accountable.
Progressives kicked ass and took names during the legislative process. Since 70% of the American people approved of the public option, we thought it would be a good thing to pursue legislation that was both wildly popular and fiscally responsible.
We did head counts. Three or four Democratic Senators refused to budge on the public option and threatened to join republicans on a filibuster if the public option was offered.
But, through legislative alchemy, a Senate procedure called reconciliation was going to be used to fix the Senate version to match the House version. Now this is a long way around to get to the point that the public option was available without reaching the 60 vote filibuster proof margin.
Senator Straddle, Blanche Lincoln D-WalMart, who both endorsed and opposed the public option, or Joe Lieberman, who is a tool, or Baucus could not have stopped the public option. So here it was, hanging right in the middle of the plate, completely achievable using anyones math.
Health reform had passed. It was a done deal. There was no risk whatsoever to the health care bill by including the public option at this point. They were merely passing "fixes" to the law they passed already.
So now we come to it. Jane had been telling me Obama traded off the public option long ago to American Health Insurance providers for campaign contributions. President Obama had ben declaring he favored the public option. So when the "fixes" hit the Senate floor, the public option was not in it.
The President and every Democratic Senator had decided they would rather have the support of AHIP and Phrma than the most dedicated supporters of the Democratic party and elected to toss the base overboard. It wasn’t like amendments could not be offered. Tom Coburn R-OK tried to add an amendment to prevent convicted sexual predators from purchasing Viagra with federal funds.
The Democrats voted against that amendment. Seems they would rather fund dick dope for rapists than provide Americans with a public option.
So the next time some stupid pundit puts his toe in the sand and says "Gee whiz, what’s wrong with them libruls?" Or the next time some politician says "buck up," or "stop whining" it needs to be pointed out that they decided, with a vote, they needed the help from the corporations that have royally fucked up our health care system to get re-elected way more than they needed ours.
They’re just not that into us. Lay with dogs, you get fleas. Tell me why I should vote for a fucking fleabag.
92 Comments
November’s vote totals are gonna be REAL interesting, regardless if dems or thugs come out better n the other guys.
There’s gonna be a LOT of votes dems thought they had, that will disappear or go Green/Write In.
Dem’s won’t get my vote in ’10 OR ’12, less miracles happen and I’m mostly an agnostic kinda DFH.
Nice rant hoss and rcc’d of course.
Recommended. Jeez.
heartily recommended ofg… fucking fleabags
They’re not even competent sellouts, because they operated under the ridiculous assumption that the “stakeholders” they negotiated with (read: special interests they sold out the public to) would have nowhere else to take their money and would remain loyal to Democrats after they catered to them. Of course, that didn’t happen and now the special interests they sold out to are pouring their money to the Republicans anyway.
So now instead of having a good bill that people like and no financial support from AHIP and Phrma, they have a shitty bill that people hate and no financial support from AHIP and Phrma. They can’t even do political corruption competently.
LOL
Hell, I watched Obama stay home from his Asia trip because some of the Libruls in the Senate were talking they might still get a silver of a PO in.
Watching Obama sell US out has become a spectator sport and everyone is watching now.
I believe the new global model is totalitarian capitalism ala China and that’ where we’re headed.
I see they’ve resurrected bin Laden and are waving his corpse around again.
What the Dems gave us with HCR was more slavery to The Corporation. It’s pretty much accomplished now and I don’t think there was a mistake made. Obama’s a ringer
Correct. They “traded” away the public option for, well, nothing. Rubes.
great post, they could not have done worse then the deal the did
The GOP is worse is not an argument to vote Dem.
If Clinton was slick willy,
Obama sure is a not so slick obie.
Here’s the official bullshit courtesy of Tom Daschle, yesterday:
It’s always the same story: “We didn’t have the votes for the PO, but the ACA is a tremendous accomplishment.”
In fact, Jane published a list of 53 Democratic senators who had publicly stated their support for the public option. But Democratic leadership refused to put the public option to a vote, which makes it their doing.
Had they put it to a vote, four Democratic senators would have been revealed to be assholes, and our wrath would have fallen on them. But Obama, Pelosi, and Reid chose, for whatever reason, to bring it down on the party.
“But Obama, Pelosi, and Reid chose, for whatever reason, to bring it down on the party.”
I really want to hear what the reason was/is. We will one day.
I think the reason is clear. The public option would have passed, and the healthcare corporations would have donated generously to the GOP, which they are doing now anyhow.
Thank you for summing up the entire enchilada. They work for themselves first, last and always. I do not see anyway to make them work for us unless we hold them accountable. What has really pissed off the Gibbs/Obama/MSNBC crowd is we payed attention.
This is a very good diary. It’s so obvious why progressives are unenthusiastic about voting…what’s wrong with the Very Serious People? Are they f’ing re*arded?
It is hard to achieve solidarity within the democratic party. Republican Senators offered numerous amendments to the reconciliation fixes, including the aforementioned Tom Coburn stiff arm.
No Democratic Senator offered the public option as an amendment, not even Feingold or Franken or Sanders. Even our so-called progressive heroes have new BFF’s now. Trust is like virginity, once you lose it, you’re fucked. I just hope they enjoy the contributions they got for lock-step opposition to the public option.
My vote just can’t be bought.
Damn well said, Oilfield. Many of us argued loud and long, when this monstrosity was being birthed, that it was a sellout and a delusion; and the healthcare-denial thieves are showing exactly that now:
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/09/health-insurers-seek-rate-hikes-blame-healthcare-reform/
http://smd12364.newsvine.com/_news/2010/09/22/5157562-sick-insurance-companies-dropping-new-coverage-for-all-kids-to-avoid-insuring-sick-kids?threadId=1082583
As predicted, the thieves are using their corrupt Congressional puppets and “bought” regulators to destroy what little “good” there was in this bill to begin with. It should’ve been killed and the whole thing started over, because, as you so correctly put it:
“We can regulate and legislate all we want but the business model itself is incompatible with human health.”
Single-payer is the only solution to this mess. I read today that Reid is in trouble against Angle because We The Base are sitting home. Too bad, Harry. You should’ve supported us when you had the chance. I will NOT support a Blue Shit–and Republicans take the hindmost.
Rec’d
I thought those were bed-bugs!
So that is how the “process” works! To hell with the base!
Oh, and I saw Ed Rendell, the Democratic Governor of PA on the MSNBC new show “The Last Word” sitting opposite of Jane Hamsher. He actually said “get over it” twice. He was channeling Justice Scalia who said the very same thing about the Bush v. Gore decision.
That’s helpful. Scold the base with rightwing language.
It’s disappointing to see a graduate of an Ivy League college who went on to earn a law degree argue like a twelve-year-old on national television.
jeez. i used to like ed rendell. but i am over it.
“Get over it”? They still are so totally stupid — no, amoral — that they don’t even get that some of us have been passionate about the healthcare issue for decades.
The American people do get the Democratic Party. They get that it has become a moral vacuum. It stands for nothing and no one.
The right is wacky, corrupt, and delusional but some of them do give a damn, even if what they give a damn about are the wrong things and the wrong people.
Democrats have become icons of corruption — available at a price to stand for or against anything or anyone.
Get over it? I’ve gotten over being a Democrat.
There’s really no way to get over it without stepping in it.
I remember way, way back in high school Shakespeare having a long discussion about whether a character from King Lear, Edward I think, was amoral or immoral.
I think we can have the same discussion now vis a vis the Democratics — do they subscribe to our moral values and just break them (that is, are they immoral) or do they have no moral values to break (that is, are they amoral)?
My initial thought, and the reason for the comment, was that they are immoral, but I’m beginning to come to your side of the argument — they act as they do because they have NO moral compass.
Senators aren’t elected to service the interests of the national population. They’re elected to service their state constituency. Theoretically anyway, because there’s a fair argument to be made that they don’t even do that much. However, given that framework it doesn’t really matter if 70% of the population supports something if the other 30% are low-population states with Democratic Senators. Now that split condition isn’t obviously as clean as that, but using a nationwide number for popularity is functionally useless when you consider that being elected to the Senate isn’t a nationwide popularity contest.
To the extent that Senators, who represent comparatively nobody, are extra-enabled to stand in the way of anything interesting; that’s the problem we should probably be attempting to solve. Though to be fair the point is effectively moot in this case, because the President signed the thing away from the outset.
Why Trying to Improve Healthcare Reform is a Waste of Time: President Barack Obama
What you say is correct, but as was noted in the comments Jane had compiled a list of 53 Democratic Senators who favored the public option. But none of these champions offered the amendment–we received no “upperdown vote.” Not even Senators in populous states offered the amendment, so the claim of an “extra-enabled” Senator blocking passage is a diversion.
How can a President, whom apologists declare powerless, prevent every Democratic Senator from offering the public option?
Henceforth any Senator who declares they favored a public option bears false witness. If they did, they would have offered the public option and voted on it.
Of those 53, how many were from Red or Purple states? Where’s the list to check?
I’m just saying that it’s not implausible that there were real Senate impediments, but if there were any, they were clearly also fully enabled by the President and Democratic leadership, and the complicity of Democratic Senators in “safe” seats.
I’m sorry Nathan, but I don’t have a link to the 53 Senators who claimed to support, and would vote for, a public option if they only could. I recall another guy–I think he was on the MSNBC show with Ed Rendell and Jane Hamsher, hosten by Lawrence O’Donnell. It seems like he was actually circulating a petition on the Senate side while Jane focused on the House side in regards to the public option.
Yes, their were real impediments in the Senate. Hell, the Senate is designed to be an impediment. The public option would’ve topped the 60 vote bar, so the President felt confident giving the PO his full-throated support to the public, confident he could blame Lieberman.
But reconciliation exposed this farce out loud. Bernie Sanders is a self-proclaimed Socialist and yet even he did not offer the amendment. It isn’t one or two or maybe ten stubborn Senators blocking good legislation–they were unanimous, all 100 of them, in their opposition. The amendment was not offered, therefore none of them have unclean hands.
Were they openly defying the President or doing his bidding?
IIRC, Weekend at Bernie got more Public Health Clinics in VT in exchange for his cave-in vote.
IIRC, Ben Nelson got increased Medicaid funding in his state.
I don’t know what Dennis Kucinich got for his cave except a ride on Air Force 1.
I think part of the Senate fixes in the reconciliation process was to remove the “Cornhusker Kickback” from Ben Nelson, and I think the Sanders Health Clinic deal was national. The health clinics were a tremendous positive for the overall legislation, and it is a sad day if he did have to promise not to add the PO as an amendment as the cost for what should have been an automatic addition.
.
Dennis got to land with the plane /s
I’d say it’s obvious they were doing his bidding, or more than likely the bidding of the D Party leadership at large.
If it ever comes down to someone saying there were 53 who would vote for it and someone else says it was 49, you will never be able to prove it. No one is now going to stand up (except of course Joe, and Blanche, etc) and say I would NOT vote for it given the anger on the left.
Here’s a list of 51:
http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2010/01/29/list-of-51-senate-democrats-who-support-a-public-option-whats-stopping-them-now/
I believe that there were other lists on FDL, but this was the first one I could find quickly.
As a conservative who casually visits this site, I don’t know that I would agree with this – just too many instances where the Dem pols voted against the wishes of those they represented. Perhaps they bought into Obama’s claim not to worry because the difference between 1994 and now was that they have HIM.
I would try to understand what happened to the guy from my state who appeared to have been a stalwart champion to your cause – Dennis Kucinich. If this guy falls, you could have expected the same from the others.
What the hell happened to him during his short flight, with Obama, from Ohio to DC that caused his shocking reversal. He was safe regardless which way he voted. I can’t recall, where in the process this happened, but I would imagine it would have had a chilling impact to the rest of the crew.
Obama’s powerlessness is selective. When dealing with recalcitrant members of Congress, he’s a complete milquetoast; but when it comes to national security questions like warrantless surveillance, he’s George War President Bush on steroids.
A – freakin – men.
It’s a bit like this. Here’s a guy, let’s call him Heath, with gangrene that has set in and moved up past his knee. Libruls consult with specialists and do research and decide that he needs an amputation of his whole leg to live. Conservatives say – nope, he doesn’t need anything but a positive outlook. Dr. Obama shows up, rolls his eyes over the positive outlook, asks the libruls to hire him for the surgery, then, once he has the gig, decides to “compromise” with the conservatives. He cuts the leg off at the knee, well below where the gangrene has progressed. So now Heath has had to go through an amputation that won’t do him any good and Dr. Obama is very very angry that people aren’t giving him credit for cutting off the lower leg – after all, the other guys wouldn’t have cut off anything.
You got it. I wish I could have said it that well.
gorgeous analogy!
Someone’s cutting off Heath Schuler’s leg??? /s
Now, you went and sent me to da google. imagine that! he’s representing n.c.
Hey, OFG –
You da’ man. Nice diary.
Thanks for the diary!
The most interesting thing about it, looking back, is how stupid the President and Congress think Americans are. Totally transparent Kabuki, and they think no one will notice.
Great stuff, OFG. Recommended.
Remember kiddies, writing in “PUBLIC OPTION” in all congressional contests this fall is your civic duty – NOT validating IncumbaDem capitulation.
My long-promised diary, “Retaking Our Party: One, Two, Three” is nearly in fighting shape. It details the steps I believe we must take across the next six years, beginning November 2, if we are to have any chance at returning this co-opted Democratic Party to its core mission and beliefs. Look for part one over the weekend – and thanks for tolerating this shameless plug.
What about PUBLIC OPTION as the name of a new political party? The PUBLIC OPTION Party.
Grrreat idea!
You hit the nail on the head.
Whenever a party apparatchnik asks me if I will relent and vote for the Democratic slate, I say I won’t. When they ask if I want the Republicans to win, I ask how it would make a difference? What would any of the current crop of Democrats-in-name-only do or not do that their Republican incumbents would not do or not do? They never have an answer.
The Obama years now look like a slightly smarter version of the Bush years. Unless we punish the Pseudocrats and beat the Party into an opposition again, things can only get worse.
Agreed!
Well said, Oilfieldguy! I keep noticing tha tthey never mention the real complaints the base has when they discuss lack of Demo enthusiasm. I know I tell the DNC and the DCCC whenever they call (and they continue to call) that the party chose the AHIP and Pharma dollars over mine so why don’t they ask them. I feel very unforgiving on this.
Proof once again that I have no original thoughts. If I see things a certain way, surely others do as well. That is the whole point of this post. They used the old DLC trick of using private corporations to achieve progressive goals (universal coverage) for the benefit of the private corporations and corporate blue dogs.
This was not about reforming health care–it was about controlling campaign contributions. Right out in the open, where anybody who was paying attention could clearly see, elected democrats chose corporate contributions collected from the profits of denial clerks, over the wishes of the voter forced to pay the bad actors of AHIP.
So, now they want my vote to send them back to DC, because, well, the republicans are worse. So, I support and vote for them and send them back to DC to yuk it up with the AHIP lobbyists.
“Thanks for all that cash dude. I was able to tell those stupid rubes who voted for me to go to hell in such a way, the stupid MoFo’s are actually looking forward to the trip.”
Oh, what a great line!!!
Mind if I steal it?
When we voted in the Democratic Congress and this President, we elected conservatives. Not as conservative/reactionary as the Tea Partiers, but not much different than the average Republican. The neocon imperialist, neoliberal fundamentalist, and corporate-subordinate-society push continues. Not as forcefully as it would be under a Tea Party govt, but not much different from an average Republican one.
Taking a long view (like, to 2012), I don’t think voting ‘Conservative’ again, now that we’re aware of what voting for the Democrats generally means, makes good sense. On a retail basis, however, here in Chicago, I’ll likely vote in November for a few Democrats, but mostly for other parties and protest candidates.
Good diary. Yeah, I get pretty fed up hearing the Dem defenders putting up straw men and then telling us to “get over it.” So, they still don’t get it, which means nothing will change.
And as for that argument that Obama fought for it until it became clear the votes weren’t there…well, by now no doubt you’ve all seen dday’s link to Daschle’s admission of the hospitals deal.
We knew it all along, but now it’s been confirmed. Yet they keep lying to us.
Tell me again why I should vote for Dems??????
You should vote for the Dems because they don’t suck as much as Repubs. So I’m told. And I say: HEY!! STOP TAKING MY FUCKING VOTE FOR GRANTED!!!
Good stuff OFG. You just don’t hear enough about how they could have but didn’t use reconcilliation to get PO passed -and gave every excuse there was – but eventually used it anyway.
Of course it not just the Public Option that was dangled in front of us and snatched away. If we want to take the meat off the bone…we were sold hope and change in 2008, but what we’ve been fed is an unpalatable pile of the status quo sprinkled liberally with excuses.
And they wonder at our lack of enthusiasm. *gah!*
I thought about that when I wrote this. EFCA, FOCA, DADT, DOMA, just to name a few of the alphabet soup of epic progressive fail for this firs two years. I picked the PO because it was so clearly documented how compromised the democratic party is as a whole, and even down to its individual members. They flipped us off and now they treat us like the nine-year-old girl who swings her cat around by the tail while screaming “YOU WILL LOVE ME.”
Reminds me of working conditions at some of the less-pleasant jobs: “The beatings will continue until morale improves.”
Something tells me none of the 53 Senators, nor anyone else inside the beltway is going to lose a wink of sleep over the millions they’ve consigned to an early grave. They all have solid Gold Health benefits paid for by the rest of us, so we can all go fuck ourselves as far as they’re concerned. Taking care of the “base” has never been and will never be of any interest to the Dems. The Gopers on the other hand cater to the most radical members of their mentally deranged base.
Good piece. It is hilarious that the DCC and the rest of the leadership refer to the problem as a “lack of enthusiasm.” Most true progressives are enraged, not unenthused, by the flood of Dem cave-ins because, as you say, we can see it unfold clearly, day by day.
With these “dogs,” you’re likely to get mange and rabies as well.
LOL. And true, too.
Thanks, OFG! Recommended.
The only reason they don’t get how we feel is because (choose one):
1. they do get it, but won’t admit it in public.
2. the kabuki must go on.
3. as mentioned above, they are f***ing retards.
4. all of the above.
http://www.correntewire.com/interview_paul_street_author_%E2%80%9C_empire%E2%80%99s_new_clothes%E2%80%9D_part_ii
That pretty sums it up, doesn’t it?
Specifically on health care now, congress is going to have to decide what to do, and I expect before 2014 when much of this goes into effect. The bill has no cost controls or real competition that I can see and that will become obvious to everyone as rates are hiked up, as they already are. Certainly, one option is to repeal the bill,as the republicans may do if they have the majority. They may even be able to override the veto, since many dems will join them. So I think there is an ongoing “popularity” contest about this bill. What is it we want? Or do we let congress take a stab at it?
The bill is a piece of shit disguised and sold as real reform. To most of the U.S. public, however, they don’t know the difference between a turd and pate.
Re the only current cost control – the minimum claims ratio of 80%
The New York Times finally picked up the HHS waivers of all those “reforms” that Obama is giving out – saying it was because the 2014 date for alternatives must – despite the law – be controlling as to when the rules must change for individual rules that were to go in effect in 2011.
As to 2011, they picked up the NAIC claim ratio situation but saw it as not FLEXIBLE ENOUGH to help the poor ins companies with there low benefit high cost policies – and they dids not mention how the NAIC is about to recommend to HHS that the HHS rule allow actual claims paid to be padded with non-claim expense – such as ads and the cost of folks putting the ads out – when the checking of compliance with the rule that companies must pay 80% of their premium as claims.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/07/business/07insure.html?_r=1&hp
interesting how everything including cost controls must wait until 2014
Nate Silver has a different take on the enthusiasm gap.
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/06/understanding-and-misunderstanding-the-enthusiasm-gap/
It is an interesting analysis.
It ignores, completely, the reality on the ground that proggies feel . . . as always Nate’s Veal Penning.
This is the same administration that said it would never put politics before science, as the previous administration had, yet today it’s revealed Obama’s WH did exactly that in trying to sell a lie that the Gulf disaster wasn’t as large as many scientist said. Obama’s a real piece of work.
That which stopped the public option is the same thing that stops the expiration of the Bush tax cuts, the repeal of the patriot acts and its successors, the withdrawal from Afghanistan, the independence of Iraq, the end of the bloodbath in Gaza, the full employment of U.S. workers and a life of peace and prosperity for the people of this land. It is the need for the owners of large corporations to make ever increasing profits at the expense of working people and the people of other lands.
The entire political process is a carefully orchestrated lie to keep you from seeing where the real power lies and what interests are actually represented in Washington and in the state capitols.
This piece and the comments are just more dancing around the issues. OK. Listen up. Burn this into your consciousness: The fundamental unit of political analysis is not party. It is economic class. Once you get it, politics will not look the same to you. It will make sense.
I am a disillusioned supporter of capitalism and a recovering Democrat. Most of you are upset but remain clueless. You look for deep meaning in the dance of puppets and paid actors. You believe that exposing the lies of your “elected” leaders are huge revelations. If you like, you can go to the polls and “elect” new puppets to betray your interests or you can start to organize alternatives to the so-called two party system that is designed to misdirect you and waste your time, money and political energy.
Please, enough of this pointless discussion of the obvious! It is time to get down to it. It is time to say “enough!” It is time to start supporting candidates that represent our interests. We don’t need a new party or any party. We just need candidates that don’t belong to the one party with two names and the energy to work for their election. We will need to monitor the polls. After all, elections can be rigged.
To hell with them. I don’t care which corporate selected bastards get to screw us next. It’s time to turn our energies in directions that offer real hope rather than a slick PR campaign. It will be a hard road but it is the only real alternative left to us.
It’s class war. Check out history for previous editions of how class wars turned out.
Hard road? Huh . . . . . the system’s impossible to maintain, history proves that. So it will collapse upon itself with or without the help of the people.
Hard road? How about worse than The Depression? Martial law?
The whole dance around the public option was nothing. The Dems started the Bush administration by having not one Senator who would challenge the election, cause “Gore didn’t want to.” Never mind the disenfranchisement of the mostly minority Florida vote. Then when the courageous Republican Senator gave them the majority, they continued to capitulate: the confirmation of Ashcroft, ala Feingold; the Patriot bill; the confirmation of Roberts and Alito, whose overturning of election financing regulation has caused so much vocal hysteria from the same folks who allowed their confirmation, amid the same old promises that precedants would by honored; and the absolute atrocity of Gebhardt and Daschle engineering the quick OK of the Iraq war, “before the November election”. We also saw the passage of the Dickensonian bankruptcy bill, supported by the likes of Debbie Stabenow (Goldman Sachs support in 2000.)
In every scenario there are the good and bad guys, with often alternating roles, and always the truth be revealed by “following the money”.
You’re right. We need to kick the bums out, and force those who call themselves progressive to, at long last, speak the truth about what the hell is really going on.
Whoa, just realized that you got FRONT PAGED at FDL!!
Great work OFG, and congrats to FDL editors for PUTTING him on the Front Page!!!
Worthy!
*G*
The New York Times finally picked up the HHS waivers of all those “reforms” that Obama is giving out – saying it was because the 2014 date for alternatives must – despite the law – be controlling as to when the rules must change for individual rules that were to go in effect in 2011.
As to 2011, they picked up the NAIC claim ratio situation but saw it as not FLEXIBLE ENOUGH to help the poor ins companies with there low benefit high cost policies – and they dids not mention how the NAIC is about to recommend to HHS that the HHS rule allow actual claims paid to be padded with non-claim expense – such as ads and the cost of folks putting the ads out – when the checking of compliance with the rule that companies must pay 80% of their premium as claims.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/07/business/07insure.html?_r=1&hp
Even Ed Rendell said to “keep pushing” while falling back on the party line. He’s not stupid, just a sell-out pragmatist.
But what’s been left unsaid in the comments so far is that while it’s clear that 53+ senators consciously decided in unison to sell their souls for AHIP/pHRMa money, I find it hard to believe that ALL 53 have managed to delude themselves that while they got 30 pieces of silver from them, that the same group has not spent ten times that on the opposition.
Politicians continually pride themselves on being pragmatists, just like Ed Rendell and Biden and the rest are all saying along with the obnoxious “buck up”, and to not *recognize*–even if not being public about it–that they’ve been had, is the equivalent to political suicide and they know it.
To quote one of their apparent heroes in all this, “trick me twice…won’t get fooled again!”
I’m still voting straight Democratic Party ticket in about a month.
I’m aware that a corporate coup has occurred in America, land of the free and home of the brave, a coup financed by conservative billionaires and multi-millionaires, with all Republicans being compromised along with more than a few Democrats (of the DLC kind), a fascist-oriented coup in the works for decades that was almost finalized in the criminal Bush/Cheney years, with their “permanent Republican majority” led by a hoped-for permanent Republican “unitary executive.”
But then Bush and Cheney went proto-Tea Party on the Republican Party, going so radically to the right, into Fascism Land, that concerned (and more sane, patriotic) American citizens first voted Republicans out of control of Congress in 2006 and then voted Republicans out of the White House in 2008. Karl Rove got his “math” wrong both times.
After the 2006 shellacking of Republicans by the Democrats, though, conservative coup leaders shifted to Plan B…DLC Democrats would be placed in charge of the “new” Congress, ones who could “work” with Bush and Cheney, ones who would take impeachment of these Republican criminals off the table, while extending retroactive immunity to all the telecom companies complicit in illegal, warrantless wiretapping of American citizens, ones who would block desperately-needed, constitutionally-required congressional investigations and hearings into the numerous crimes committed by Bush and Cheney and other top Republican officials in their corrupt administration.
Then the 2008 presidential elections approached, with the conservative coup leaders wondering how they could “rig” the Democratic Party primaries so a corporate-friendly, coup-friendly candidate would emerge. By the time the primaries rolled around to my state, I could only choose between former Goldwater Girl, Hillary Clinton, who as a senator from NY was a regular at right-wing prayer breakfasts, and a relative unknown, Barack Obama. And yet, I still voted in the Democratic Party primary and for Barack Obama in the subsequent general election in November 2008, along with all the other Democrats on the ballot.
Why? Because I viewed any vote for a Republican, or even not voting at all, as a vote for Bush and Cheney and the fascist billionaire and multi-millionaire corporate crackpots responsible for all the damage done to our democracy and America’s working-class citizens. Yes, I’m highly disappointed in President Obama (and all the coup-facilitating corporatists in his administration), so probably won’t vote for him to have a second term, hoping that a more liberal, progressive Democratic Party firebrand (like Alan Grayson) will challenge him in the 2012 primaries.
But I refuse to vote for any Republicans, third-partiers, or not vote at all, simply because I view these “options” as handing the conservative coup leaders another chance to do even more damage to our country. At least with Democrats, there’s some hope that we can save our country, save our nation’s middle-class and struggling poor, and save the future of our nation’s children, no matter from what walk of life. The “options” mentioned above offer no hope, and actually show support for what Bush and Cheney did, and the corporate “slaveowner” class is still attempting to do to our liberal democracy. I’ll stick with some hope over no hope anyday.
I sincerely do not grasp the logic of your argument. The lesser of two evils is still an evil. Some of us are opting out of voting for evil. Sometimes, doing what is right is the right thing to do.
And good luck to you with your plan to limit yourself to the choices served up by fascists, i.e., voting for corporatist Democratic candidates. That course is bound to help us out in a couple hundred years.
shorter TheOracle:
“The Dems can be as rightwing as they wanna be. I’ll vote for them anyway because Sarah Palin is scary.”
Simultaneously funny, sad and true.
Winston Smith, are you proud of the work you do? preventing heresy from tainting your firepups? protecting those who utter the True Faith, to continue to vote (D), no matter what?
Larry Odonnell and Chris Matthews are the worst of the smirking scumbags.
Chris the republican fetishist who bashes dems every episode while expressing his love for republicans keeps trashing us and talks about how liberal Obama is being and how dems can’t win unless they become more corporate….which could only be possible if they go to congress naked wearing only tatoos, brands and slogans of the mega corps they represent.
Odonnel is just as bad with the “Left is perfectly equal in every way to the right.” He’s responsible for gems like, “The rights get billions in corp money? Well the unions give money too so they’re just as bad…maybe worse.”
They keep arguing for dems to go further and further right and how anyone with a lib agenda is a starry eyed naive dreamer while the radical right are god fearing concerned americans who they can’t stop fawning over.
Maddow might be pretty bad with not challenging Rendell and Biden but Chris can barely contain his man crush on Boehner.
Maybe it’s time for this:
**********************************
Congressional Reform Act of 2010
1. Term Limits.
12 years only, one of the possible options below..
A. Two Six-year Senate terms
B. Six Two-year House terms
C. One Six-year Senate term and three Two-Year House terms
2. No Tenure / No Pension.
A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.
3. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security.
All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people.
4. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.
5. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.
6. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.
7. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.
8. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/11.
The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen.
Congressmen made all these contracts for themselves.
Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.
~~~EDITED IN MODERATION~~~
It makes too much sense with not enough cents~~~EDITED IN MODERATION~~~
But I’m all in for it – in fact, can I borrow it from you guys and post to my conservative sites?
~~~ModNote: Stick to the issues, please.~~~
Rook!
How’s things in RedStateVille?
Tell us: Is the GOP really down with Angle and O’Donnell, or are you guys just playing the hands you are dealt?
I’m serious.
Regardless what the GOP thinks of Angle and O’Donnell, they won their primary – so get over it and move forward. Crap like this contributed to the formation of the tea party as much as anything else. It’s the people’s choice, like it or not. But they are more than down on it, they have been publicly reacting like hysterical babies.
Now, as for Angle and O’Donnell – how embarrassing was that? Even if they were to win (NOT, nor should they), still an embarrassment and hopefully a lesson for the next go around. You know it’s not too tough to vet someone these days.
O’Donnell, the worst of the lot, is a bit unique. Replaces a dangerous RINO. Dangerous in the sense that pols like him can be the critical vote and can hold a bill hostage. At least with Coons you know where the vote is going.
Go for it
I think it might be the only place where you conservatives and I can agree.
tcwj,
There’s probably more common ground than we realize, but thanks. Since Boehner is in my district, perhaps I can present it to him – since he truly believes he will soon be sitting on the left side of God. It would certainly be the best thing he’s done in all these years.
If Obama loves the public option so much, when will it be back on the table? How can he justify meeting with “stakeholders” in secret like Dick Cheney did with oil industry execs??
So the next time some stupid pundit puts his toe in the sand and says “Gee whiz, what’s wrong with them libruls?” Or the next time some politician says “buck up,” or “stop whining” it needs to be pointed out that they decided, with a vote, they needed the help from the corporations that have royally fucked up our health care system to get re-elected way more than they needed ours.
The post and even the thread are good – to a point, and that point is that the default discussion is how something affects men, usually middle class men. For poor women and women who cannot travel, the health insurance reform creates a de facto repeal of Roe. While I would never vote for a Republican because they uniformly work to erode my rights, how can I now say something different about Dems?
I can’t, and no amount of dancing around polls and how hard things are for the president and political facts makes a damn bit of difference. The conversation is over at the point of “Yes, but…”
Indeed, Buck up Farack!
Personally, I’m stuck on the phrase “Only Nixon could go to China”
I didn’t realize until recently that insight was “an old Vulcan saying” delivered by Mr. Spock when advising Jim Kirk he was just the guy to do something because he was the last guy people would expect to do it. Fascinating.
But the underlying assumption seems to summarize the Obama administration in 5 words. Only President Obama with his accomplice Dems could:
*Pass Romneycare with mandates
*Pass toothless financial reform
*Dismantle public education using the Republican playbook
*Expand and preserve the “unitary executive” practices of W
and other horrors waiting in the wings -
*Futher dismantling the social safety net by undermining and eventually privatizing Social Security and Medicare?
*Find a way to eliminate Net Neutrality in some Keeping the Net Neutral bill? a la the “affordable” healthcare bill that does nothing to rein in costs.
The Republicans can’t pass their agenda as sucessfully as the Democrats can as their surrogates. I am at the actual point where I wonder if the Democrats don’t serve the populace better as a minority party. Could the Republicans pass successfully as many screw the common man bills as the Democrats(the party of the common man) do?
So who knew the Dems were such big Star Trek fans.
meat ripped from bone…
recommended