you know, I am amazed a single person can mount a filibuster and wonder why the dems didn’t do this all the time

In my mind, it comes down to the fact that Republicans seek to prove, in every way possible, that government doesn’t work. Democrats keep trying to resist the temptation to help them prove it.

O has launched 51 drone attacks, more than the 45 during the entire W admin. I sure am glad we elected this guy. /s

Stupak is a D.

Yes, I know that. I was answering perris question, which was about “dems.” behaviour in congress. I have actually wondered why Republicans are confident that Democrats won’t use the same obstructionist tactics they are using, if the Republicans regain both houses in the near future. I keep coming back to the fact that the Republicans won’t care if the Democrats totally obstruct legislation and further demonstrate the government is ineffective.

IOKIYAD…….;-)

allegedly.

Since the Ds are now, in reality, Rs, I expect they’ll start to be just as nasty. Stupak may be the leading edge.

so 0 had a meeting with the house and claimed there weren’t enough votes for a public option, then he told them they need to look at the big picture and pass the senate bill

I sure hope someone came back with “the senate bill doesn’t have the votes and they need to look at the big picture and pass our bill”

I wonder if anyone has proposed removing that rediculous mandate

Glad to see my fellow scoldee did not abandon FDL. Good morning.

good point, there are very few d’s jayt, only criters pretending to be

Good morning eCAHN..read your diary at the Seminal. Good writing! Sorry about the other day. I was enraged and disgusted. I do not believe in throwing people under the bus for any cause and that was what that diary looked like to me.

I’m on your side.

That’s too general for me. I can’t go along with the idea that all Democrats are as bad as Republicans now, although Stupak and others are and may actually be covert Republicans. What are Republicans now, under your theory?

Thank you. I don’t understand how anyone could not logically have seen it the same way.

Rs are radicals or extremists.

Stupak is a Dunce.

Fixed.

While tax deductions and government subsidy payments may or may not be identical financially (and of course they’re not, deductions are biased in favor of those in higher income tax brackets), there is a big difference in their operation. A deduction reduces what the taxpayer pays in, the money never comes into to the federal Treasury, that’s a big point because once it does, it become public funds. Subsidy payments do flow out of Treasury out of public funds.

Think of charitable deductions, most people are OK with taxpayers deducting that portion of their income they donate to their church or temple However, if its a different kettle of fish if the government is writing subsidy checks to churches. Once tax money hits the public treasury, it becomes public funds both legally and politically.

Having said that, I believe this story has just placed a bullseye on a new political target for the religious right. wouldn’t be surprised to see conservatives start campaigning to revoke the tax deductibility for any health insurance policy that covers abortion.

Rachel may be right, but those employer based plans that cover abortion probably do not help most people who live in neighborhoods below the poverty line. I think the votes will eventually be there in the House to make it to Senate reconciliation, whether we like it or not. If the bill (big if) ultimately passes, the abortion provision will likely be the Senate one. Stupak is making noise again because that’s his primeval purpose in life.

Where is LBJ when we need him–imagine:

“This is your president calling. Bart, are you trying to fuck me?”

I can see both sides but think I couldn’t articulate the other side very well.

Appreciate it.

On any occasion where the choice is only between Republicans and “radicals and extremists” with a rightest bent, then, I guess I’ll have to choose the ones you call Republicans.

Hobson’s choice.

Mornin’, BT, pups

Does Stupak have a Dem challenger in MI yet?

“There is no Family”
“There is no Mafia”

See the difference?

Gods, I despise these “righteous” men

I work at a Catholic university, and our insurance coverage includes neither contraceptive devices or abortions. No surprise. I have no idea whether ED drugs are covered.

I am NOT excusing Stupidpak, I think Rachel nailed it (his 15 minutes of fame), but it is a fact that probably a lot of employer-provided insurance does not include abortion coverage.

It’s only that if you think it’s a free choice, meaning that there are no serious repercussions if you don’t make one at all.

Not gonna happen. He’s very popular in his rural district that is the largest Congressional district in MI.

Actually, O is radical at times, like applauding the firing of all teachers at a RI school, without plans for what to do with the students.

Diane Ravitch is next up on democracynow, describing how she’s done a 180. She now thinks that teaching to the test is causing important material to be dropped from the curriculum, and that charter schools are bleeding money from public schools. [duh]

That’s too bad.

Sometimes you can be waaaaay too polite with the Stupaks of this world!

Good morning, all.

OT, but “interesting” …

Just happened to read about the shooting at the Pentagon, at the subway entrance …

From the AP story: “The well-dressed gunman …”

Chief Richard Keevil of the Pentagon police, “The was no indication from the way he was dressed that he had hostile intent.”

One wonders what clothing, would, on the body of “it”, indicate “hostile intent”?

Sartorial considerations, elegance aside, are obviously far more important than I had ever realized, apparently.

Wardrobes matter. And the term “dressed to k**l”, takes on new “meanings”.

This has been a … Curmudgeon Moment … and now, back to your regularly scheduled programing …

DW

Aren’t many educators around who haven’t figured that out. School boards and state/local govts, not so much.

Remind me not to show up at the Pentagon in cammys and war paint with an M-16.

She was on Never Provoke Republicans 2 or 3 days ago saying the same thing. No one could have anticipated….

That’s why I added my editorial duh. The importance of Ravitch’s 180 is that apparently she was an architect of NCLB. And it’s VERY rare for an ideologue to look at real data and outcomes.

She won’t be invited back to NPR after that interview.

NCLB created a system of institutional fraud, i.e., designing tests that kids can pass. Who coulda anticipated?

It amazes me that NCLB ever had ANY “credibility”, whatever.

It doesn’t “do” nuance.

What else comprises actual education?

(Guess I’m stuck in curmudgeon gear this morning …)

Political reality: This is a bad bill that is hugely unpopular with the American people. Most want to start-over or do nothing.

Obama will NOT face this political reality.

“Obama reminded the assembled Democrats that doing nothing would be politically disastrous. “To maintain a strong presidency we need to pass this bill,” the President said, according to Grijalva.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/03/obama-to-progressives-31-million-people–and-my-presidency–are-on-the-line-if-health-care-fails.php?ref=fpa

He is MOST concerned with saving his presidency and he will cut deals, twist arms and provide ‘incentives’(like giving away judgeships for votes)to fencesitters, true to Chicago-style politics.

It’s all about Obama for this president. Always has been.

Off to swim in the great capitalist cesspool.

US KIA Irak: 4,380

US KIA Afghanistan: 1.013

Iraki and Afghan casualties: estimates vary to over 1.5M

US MBS 2010: 7,812 and counting

Be good to yourselves, and all other living things.

Namaste

New teachers will be hired.

You’re sounding more like a lefty, every day, Indie.

Ya know that, don’t ya?

DW

What effect do you imagine “this” has on the children?

New post up top…

Shooters rants here.

http://www.archive.org/details/JPatrickBedellDirectionstoFreedom20061125

Most want to start-over or do nothing.

Prove it

Hannity and Limbaugh said so.

When progressives, independents AND conservatives unite in opposition to this HCR bill and the president has to essentially beg progressives to vote for his proposal, you know we have a weak executive.

Obama is in over his head. He does not know how to lead. He does not know how to manage. All he knows (or knew) is how to advance his own interests and power.

Why would a Blue Dog or progressive ‘no’ vote even consider switching their votes? They would OBVIOUSLY be ignoring the will of the people they represent. And for what? To allow Obama to save face?

HCR will never succeed in this country WITHOUT the broad support of the American people.

Left and Right have very different ideas about the direction meaningful HCR should take but it is nice to see the American people being ‘bipartisan’ in their opposition to this horrific bill.

exactly where I was goin.

heh

What do you imagine “meaningful” health care reform would look like, Indie?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/02/25/fox-news-poll-sharp-division-health-care-reform/

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/81185-most-americans-think-congress-should-start-over-on-health-poll-says

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2010/01/should-the-house-pass-the-senate-healthcare-bill/34231/

I am sure you have heard of ‘google’.

Opinion and editorial comment aren’t “proof.”

Fox News and blogs are not considered primary sources of factual information. Man, that’s some lame shit.

LOL, Fox news. i rest my case.

Indie,
Your sources are far short of proof of anything other than your inability to sort fact from fiction.

I’m curious, SD, or oldnslow, what is the “argument” about, specifically?

Do I understand that it is about Indie’s assertion that “Most want to start-over or do nothing.”?

Hear about the Utah law on the governor’s desk yet?
ABC News Examines Potential Impact of Utah Bill To Prosecute Women for Illegal Abortions

I am sure you have heard of ‘google’.

Is that a new soft drink?

Personally, as a rule, I want LESS, not more government spending and intrusion into our lives. I believe that Washington is broken, entrenched and corrupt. Why should I trust the government to bring me better, more affordable health care insurance? They can’t.

Not yet.

Meaningful reform would focus on controlling costs. Not expanding coverage.

One wonders what universe the sponsors of that bill(?) or law(?) inhabit?

Utah, you say, Kassandra?

Somebody is getting way too much sun on the salt flats, or something.

If this bill was popular with the American people it would have passed by now.

So you have no problem with having people with NO reasonable access to health care, share your nation with you?

If this bill were popular it would have passed by now and Obama would be on his way to being the greatest president EVAH!

Most folks would not buy sausage at the meat packing plant, but will purchse it at the grocery.

I think HCR will work the same way.

Well, I hope HCR will leave out some of the “stuff” they put in sausage, oldnslow, the nitrates and so on …

No, as has been well documented here, it will be far from perfect.

The reason the HCR is poling down is because it is so middle of the road. For the Right it’s socialism, which is laughable and sad, and it doesn’t go far enough for the left. It has all the dynamism of toast in milk and yet it provokes screams on the Right about ‘paths to Stalinism’. This embrace of fear on the part of conservatives is so paradoxical. They like to portray themselves as the hard-bitten realists, yet are scared of seemingly, well, everything.

Wish the progressives had the strength of Stupak’s conviction.

Hmmm.

oldnslow says “… it will be far from perfect.

and davidd says. “… toast in milk …”

So, we are going to have soggy toast in sour milk with “sausage”-like additives.

Um … yum?

Sounds perfectly awful, but it is “something” and that is better “nothing”
and everybody is going to get the same “meal”, so this is Obama’s “New Meal”?

I “hoped” for an entirely “New Deal”.

Well, all of this is food (of a sort) for thought.

Reminding me, that we must not let the perfectly awful defeat the sausage.

DW

“The reason the HCR is poling down is because it is so middle of the road. For the Right it’s socialism, which is laughable and sad, and it doesn’t go far enough for the left.”

I would suggest the problems with HCR are really a product of the overall strategy Obama adopted, strategy decisions largely based on the reasons for the failure of Clinton’s efforts.

In 93-94 the Clinton’s took the course of writing their own bill, largely behind closed doors, bringing the stakeholders into the WH for various conferences that were not open to public view. This was profoundly alienating to Congress, its committee structure, and arrangements of various power blocks, and once the Clinton plan was produced virtually all of them (at in those days congress did include a few reforming progressive Republicans) jumped in and chopped up the Clinton plan into sausage, and it could not even get a vote. It killed any comprehensive reform effort for 15 years.

I would suggest that one very clear interest Obama’s administration has in all this, is avoiding the fate of the Clinton effort. Given this, they made an early decision NOT to write their own bill — just to provide guidelines as to what a comprehensive bill would include, and offer generalized as opposed to specific support (or opposition) for committee efforts as the NORMAL congressional process moved forward. The point was to leave it to members of congress to settle their own hash, and not to put the power of the administration behind too many particular approaches. This openness got them considerable buy in — at least enough that they got both Chambers to pass very comprehensive bills.

I believe they successfully mastered why Clinton failed — now we have to see if they can round up the votes to finish the process. I think they can.

At the same time I think everyone has points of objection to what this process produced. Many of us would have preferred a single payer system, or at least a non-profit public option — but if we are informed critics of our political systems, we understand something called POWER, and how it is exercised. The fact is the weight of knogeable and educated voters and citizens in favor of these approaches simply is not strong enough to overcome the power of those who have commoditized health care, and turned it into a profit center. But we also need to understand this is only really round one in a long term process — and the opening to deal with what we now see as shortcomings will present itself in the future. If we stink up the Progressive House with nasty name calling, pouting, inability to see the forest for the trees, those profit centered powers will, in the next few years, eat our lunch. On the other hand if we consider our weaknesses honestly, we can build a stronger movement, and down the road get vast improvements beyond what this Bill, plus its modifications, allows. Assuming it passes, we absolutely need to take the attitude that it is a huge achievement compared to the current broken system, but that as the reforms move forward, they will need to be modified. In otherwords we need to TAKE OWNERSHIP of the reforms, knowing that to make them work we have to build a stronger citizens and voters movement to preserve and extend them.

So what do I think will be the next big fights?

I think Progressives have to attack the for-profit insurance model. I think efforts need to be made to develop business models for non-profit insurance plans and move to require they be offered at all the exchanges. Non-profit doesn’t mean “cheap” or not comprehensive. In fact well into the 1970′s, Health Care was dominated by not-for profit structures. It is only in the last 30 so years that Health Care has been financialized, and made into a commodity. I believe not for profit can be made very attractive to those who purchase insurance — either as individuals or as representatives of larger purchasing groups. But ordinary people really don’t understand the difference between for profit and not for profit — and one of our missions has to be massive public education on this difference.

What this bill accomplishes is to significantly minimize the tendency of the last few decades of using exclusion from the Health Care System and its services as a core element in the commoditized business plan. In major ways, this bill makes illegal that business tactic. It isn’t as if we have won everything on this — there will still be perhaps 8% of our population still outside the system. Getting them included will be the next big battle, and we need to be ready for it. We also need to be very atuned to efforts to return exclusion to the system — and be prepared to fight every effort. (our opponents will not lay down and die.)

We have done a damn poor job of answering the opposition’s arguments that these Health Care Reforms are Socialistic, or part of a strategy for income redistribution. They are quite the opposite. A decent and affordable insurance system that is inclusive is an income and wealth protection plan. A decent system exposes everyone to less risk. It insures you won’t go bankrupt if a member of your group or family has extensive medical requirements. We ought to have been shouting that from the rooftops. Likewise we ought to have been asking the opposition to HCR to define Socialism. And we ought to have had our own defination in hand. We should have been able to make the point that the current system socializes costs for the excluded, and appropriates the profit for the smaller and smaller universe of the included. We haven’t done that well, and it hasn’t become currency in the debate — we need to understand why not.

Much more to say….

I’m afraid, DW, that you’ve confused Oldnslow with a kool-aid binging, full Democrat, full throated, all the time, D supporter.

Name is the only thing that is similar between those two.

You say we should understand POWER, yet you don’t seem to. Because if you want to talk about POWER, then let’s talk about the POWER of the health insurance industry today to block everything (pretty respectable power there, doncha think?) versus the health insurance industry POWER AFTER THIS BILL is law, where every living, breathing, American is required by law to become their customers, with no real cost controls whatsoever.

Not THAT will be POWER. There will be NO MORE reforms. Single Payer will be dead forever. So, for those that support this bill, they support ending all hope of Single Payer. Own it.

Medicare-for-all will not be dead forever. Nothing is carved in stone.

I agree. The system is barely hanging together. I have friends in the medical profession, doctors, nurses and several work at Grady Hospital in Atlanta. One fellow is an ER Doc and he tells me he doesn’t see how things can go on as they have been for much longer. The thread on the seams is stretched to the limit. If Grady were to fail, it would start a regional chain reaction as surrounding hospitals would be besieged and overwhelmed. The health care system is close to collapsing, if that happens there will be little choice other than Government intervention. We’ll see.

On Bart Stupak…

We need to comprehend exactly what Stupak — and if he were not there, some other congresscritter really represents. And once we comprehend, then we can be properly critical of those parts of the Progressive Universe who have failed to thwart what he represents.

Stupak is the spokesperson for the Roman Catholic Bishops, who have an agenda developed in Rome — and that secret leadership cadre in the Evangelical Protestant Community that we begin to understand as we inform ourselves about C-Street, The Family, and all the other names the same core power center operates through.

He is NOT necessarily the spokesperson for American Catholics or for all Evangelicals. Since Abortion became legal in the 1970′s, there are any number of polls and studies that have been conducted that show that the ordinary citizens who identify as members of these large groups — American Catholics and American Evangelicals simply do not behave as their leadership commands. The general approval of legal abortion with some relatively minor restrictions has been in the 57-60% rate since legalization. It has hardly changed at all.

When reproductive health clinics studied their clientel, they discovered the religious identification of patients did not meaningfully differ from the distribution of religious identity in their service areas. If 1/3rd of the population of a service area were Catholic, about a third of those seeking Abortions were also Catholics. Likewise, approval of actual practice of some sort of birth control (not necessarily always effective) is at about 80% of the fertile population — and among Catholics there is virtually no meaningful difference when compared to the non-Catholic population. These studies have been done over and over again, beginning in the 1980′s, and cover all areas of the country, and they replicate each other. You can’t follow these over time and conclude that all the efforts of the anti-Choice powers have changed anything. To be specific, all the teaching and preaching against abortion and birth control have been profoundly ineffective in accomplishing their objectives. Because they haven’t been able to accomplish goals of getting their own members to follow dogma — they need Stupak. They need to exercise what should be called by its right name, AUTHORITY…SECRET AUTHORITY.

At its heart the pro-choice movement has always been ANTI-AUTHORITARIAN. It posits that decisions on reproduction should be made privately, by the individual or individuals concerned, informed by counsel individual women and couples select to participate in their decision process. If one wants to include religious counsel in that decision, it is up to the individual, if one wishes to exclude, that is also a private decision. We have lost the whole flow of this understanding of what reproductive rights really means, and much of our problem with Stupak and what he represents is caused by our failure to hold on to the core meaning of anti-authoritarianism.

Instead, our national lobbies for reproductive rights have chosen to root themselves in Washington Culture, and spend their time and money (which they collect based on fear every time a Supreme Court Nomination is on the table, or a case is moving through the courts) on support for a relatively few players who participate in the DC Kaboki Dance. They distribute the campaign funds, sometimes stupidly. They quietly try to negotiate bit by bit — largely without much feedback to the fertile women of the country regarding decisions on the table. Virtually nothing is invested in creating a meaningful mass voting block opposed to authoritarianism, nothing is being done to educate younger women about the politics of the issue set. (After all, those who won reproductive rights in the 70′s need to replace themselves.) And yes — this is the so-called movement we depend upon to go up against the politics of secret power Stupak, or whoever they lift up to play that role, represents.

Rachael Maddow, perhaps without knowing it, picked up on something last night that is fascinating. She talked about Stupak’s efforts to transfer a retired Coast Guard Station in Cheboygan Michigan for free to a non-descript church organization, and when that was questioned, he withdrew the bill and instead substituted one that gave that church organization the right of first refusal to bid on the site. I can just guess what is up.

For years my family had a summer home just outside of Cheboygan on Mullet Lake, and one of the BIG ISSUES at the time was a cheap grant of land by the State of Michigan on Mackinac Island (no moter vehicles allowed, just horses and bikes), to that nest of organizations we now know as “The Family” or whatever. In the late 1950′s they built a huge retreat center there, all fenced off from the rest of the Island. Because trucks were not permitted on state roads, they had to bring in their building materials and supplies on ferries, and then hook horses to the bumpers to pull the trucks across the state road, throwing the trucks out of gear as they crossed. Local people hated this crowd, and there was always someone out at the site making sure only horse-power was used in moving trucks on the state road surfaces. Big fines could be assessed for violations. When we used the Mullet Lake summer house, one summer activity was to spend a day on Mackinac, rent a bike, pack a picnic, and ride around the island. Someplace I have pictures of the horses pulling the trucks, and I always talked with the local watcher who was making sure trucks were out of gear when on state roads. I have long understood that the big money behind this “retreat” — always a religious retreat in the literature, was the Voss and Prince Family in Michigan, and that the initial sponsor of the program was the Oxford Movement and Up With People and the remains of Frank Buckman’s operations, all of which are earlier renditions of “The Family.”

So what Rachael discovered in her search for legislation Stupak has introduced found probably is an effort to add on to the property, at public expense, of the Family — namely an old Coast Guard site on the opposite side of the Straits of Mackinaw which will provide them with a private ferry landing that connects to their Mackinac Island secret retreat center. And I would imagine it is all off the tax rolls (in a county that is quite poor, totally dependent on the tourist trade) because it is a private “Church.” I know that old Coast Guard site well — during the 1950′s it was available to a group that ran boat tours out to watch the construction of the Mackinaw Suspension Bridge — it was a place to stop and ask about whether it was safe to take your smallish Mullet Lake boat out through the channel into the Straits on a seemingly calm day. They even had public picnic places, and the Coast Guard guys were fun to discuss stuff with. So I suspect what Stupak is about is some sort of private exclusive church ferry dock, that will be fenced in, and off the tax rolls. I hope Rachael knows what she found.

Why the Dems didn’t do this: G-U-T-S, lack thereof. That was simple.

The mandate is the rope Ds have given to Rs which will be used to hang Ds out to dry in coming elections, twisting slowly, slowly in the wind.