dakine01 @ 44

You know what would be shocking? If somewhere along the way, during these oversight hearings, there actually was one (don’t expect any though) pure truthful Executive branch Bush appointee. I think I would fall off my chair.

I am an unreserved Progressive Democrat and he’s an unapologetic Republican, but over the past 20 years I have come to know Robert “Moose” Cobb very well. And I can tell you that this is your honest man.

Whether you liked his style or not, Cobb was nothing but “pure and truthful” in his testimony yesterday. This may be the one Bush appointee who does not have “close ties” within the Bush administration. He’s not from Texas. He didn’t go to Yale. He’s not wealthy, or from a particularly wealthy or well-connected family. He is not a follower of extreme right wing ideology and he doesn’t take orders or “carry water” for anyone in the Bush administration. He is simply a highly qualified lawyer with a strong background in government ethics who was recommended to this President when Bush was first installed by the Supreme Court.

As I said, I know Mr. Cobb, and I can understand why some employees might have reacted negatively to his management style. But fortunately for a lot of people in management positions, it is not illegal to have bad management style.

The investigators in this particular case spent more than a year and a half aggressively trying to find something of substance against Mr. Cobb. That they didn’t find anything after all that time, other than a management style that was objectionable, is due entirely to the fact the Mr. Cobb didn’t do anything illegal or improper as IG of NASA.

Anyway, I did get the impression that many of the questions were aimed at trying to get me to change my mind about Clinton (I’m an Edwards supporter). However, I don’t recall many negative questions or comments about her opponents. I was even questioned about who I caucused for in in 2004.

After awhile I felt I was being interviewed.

It’s disgusting.

Ralph@189
Yes, I agree. Everyone should always ask the name of the pollsters and who is paying them, who they’re working for. I believe they have to spill, if asked. Sure, they could lie and anymore you just don’t know. I advocated fucking with the polls last year because they’re tailoring their campaign to win based on polls. Well, if the poll data is screwy they’ll all start bumping into each other.

This may or may not have been Hillary’s people. Could have been Gooliani’s or Mitt’s seeing how they could be more like Bill Clinton…. or even Hil. It could have even been Edwards or Obama. Who knows. Nothing is as it was.

You can also look up the number who called at “whocalled.us”, and record the instance and make a comment about it. Mostly, it is telemarketeers listed, but I listed one poll last year. The site gives a nice map graphic pinpointing all the calls that number made. They change their numbers all the time though.

Another site you can pinpoint the city called from is at the North American Numbering Plan site. http://www.nanpa.com/nas/publi…..QueryModel

Hope this helps.

Single Payer Health Care based on a Value Added Tax, (which is how the Danes, Norwegians and Swedes finance it). It has been on promise since 1938. Time is Nye.

Wellstone came to understand that you could not do it unless you somehow blessed the Insurance Industry — too powerful. His solution was to divide Health Care. Feds collect the money, finance public health and education and training of all medical professionals, and medical research. Feds set the menu of required services. The rest of the money is divided to the states with they being required to establish a quasi politically sensitive Health Regents Board that would plan and deliver all services, mandated by the feds, and perhaps extra mandates from the states. Over a short (like ten years) the state Regents would take ownership of all Health Care Facilities, and plan service delivery — meaning they would put all Doctors, nurses and all the rest on salary and describe jobs and allowcate resources so as to meet needs. They would eventually own the whole system as a trust. Terms of Regents would be fairly long — perhaps six years with a two term limit, and distributed among regions and stakeholders in the system. State Regent Boards would be rewarded if they could improve quality while lowering unit costs. R & D would gravitate toward cost savings while preserving quality. But if a state wanted to hire a former insurance company to administer — fine, if they could do it within cost requirements.

No tie to employment at all — but all transactions that represent value added would be taxed. (In Denmark you get something like 18% added to a bill in a restaurant for value added — higher in really fancy places.) Imports would be so taxed so as to diminish the advantage of low cost manufacturing sites off shore with credits for quality health care for off shore workers. It would be a universal citizen’s system — non-citizens could buy in at a cost plus rate. All other policies would be abolished — when system costs go up, then the value added tax goes up. When the systems find economies, then that tax goes down. Paul thought Vet Medical Care ought to be a community expense — thus he would have eliminated that organization as well as Indian Health Service and much else we hardly see. States would be required to plan and partially finance medical, nursing and technical ed based on projections of need perhaps 40 years out, and they would be totally responsible for facilities — hospitals, clinics and how they are organized. The goal would be a fully non-profit system, but for some years a cost controlled profit should be allowed. (gotta deal with Harry and Louise one way or another).

Anyhow, that would be my first big thing with a mandate, and I guarentee you Democrats would get elected for 40 years if they can do it.

Second Mandate matter — Education.

Full funding of Headstart, make it full day, and cover 100%. Currently we cover about 35% of those elegiable.

Rebuild all inner city schools built before perhaps 1945. Make them Green.

Subsidize teacher salaries so that they equal the entry level and more advanced private sector salaries. The cost of a BA to teach and a BA to do business is the same. Income ought to track. Over time forgive all teacher’s student loans.

Establish a national curriculum for basic and general education. (more or less like the French Model). Then teach to it using no more than half of any school day. The remainder of the day would be for music, art, and creative or sports activities. School should be full day — similar to parent’s work day. Mama isn’t at home any more with the milk and cookies.

Third big project — Higher Education. Needs a thorough going audit, and reduced in price either through subsidies or economies. We should be moving at least 60% of 18 year olds into Higher Ed, and providing late entry avenues.

Sara @ 180, do you really think Bill Clinton doesn’t know how the system works?

A big mandate will be to clean up the Bush mess, starting with Iraq.

I don’t mean to jump over Sara here, but I’d like to answer this.

Yes, Bill understands. But, Hillary and her campaign staff might not manage it as well as he would.

A big mandate would be very useful, but I don’t think we’re going to get it — not like LBJ got it. There’s still election fraud to consider and the Repubs are excellent in elections, so I wouldn’t expect more than a 5% win. Don’t be surprised if the national polls show a Repub lead at some point. The press just can’t be trusted to be fair. And, that could push some voters toward the Repub candidate.

The question of which Dem candidate knows what to do with a mandate is intriguing. It’s also very important. I think fixing Bush’s mess is only part of it. If we only relegate ourselves to fixing Repub messes then they’ll just keep making them bigger and bigger. We have to imagine a much bigger picture of what America can be and a dynamic which will get us there. Sadly perhaps, this includes finding a way to relate to Repubs so they won’t go so far off the reservation that it causes constant Constitutional crises.

Which candidate can or wants to see a hopeful future? Dunno. We have to listen to them and hope we’ve got a winner or two.

It’s awful to have to be so suspicious, but this push-poll does sound like something Karl Rove might fake.

Note, too, that polling organizations are not supposed to reveal who their client is. The caller supposedly admitting it was the Clinton campaign sounds very fishy to me. If this were a dirty trick, of course then the caller would “admit” that it came from Hillary.

If this is really Hillary’s campaign, shame on her. That would worry me a lot. Maybe someone could ask Hillary if the poll was indeed hers?

Also, if anyone else experiences anything like this, I suggest the person receiving the call ask for the name of the polling organization.