Sunday Roundup: The Stakes
* The historic health care bill that passed last night ushers in the final push to complete what may constitute the defining domestic achievement of this Congress — and of this presidency.
The vote puts Dems within striking distance of an achievement that could rewrite the relationship Americans have with government and deal a serious blow to the anti-government ideology that has done so much to define our politics for at least a generation.
There’s unquestionably a long way to go. And it’s still anything but assured that the bill will become law, and if so, whether the public will judge it a success in the long run. Either short or long-term failure could spark a severe political backlash. Those are the stakes.
*******************************************
* Here’s a group to watch: I’ve compiled the list of 35 House Dems who voted for the Stupak anti-abortion amendment and then in favor of the final bill. They’re key because if the final measure comes back from conference without the Stupak amendment, the final vote could be a tough one for them.
* We are now about to find out what the Senate, as an institution, is made of. (Again.)
* All eyes on Harry Reid.
* Don’t know much about GOP Rep. Joseph Cao, the only Republican to vote for the bill? Check out our big profile.
* Here’s a list of all the House Dems who voted for the anti-abortion Stupak amendment but still voted against the final health care bill. One imagines they’ll be the target of a fair amount of liberal ire.
* Video of final passage:
* Here’s a useful chart detailing all 39 House Dems who voted against the bill, with an analysis of their districts. Key conclusion:
Nearly all of the fourteen freshmen Democrats who voted “no” represent districts that were previously Republican and are considered vulnerable in 2010. Geographically, 22 lawmakers from southern states formed the largest opposition bloc.
* One other point worth noting: The vote yesterday constitutes something of a victory for Obama’s outside political operation, Organizing for America, which went all in on the push to get the bill passed in the House. The jury’s still out on whether Obama’s campaign organization can successfully be used to get his agenda passed, but yesterday’s vote suggests it has already had an impact of sorts.
* And here’s one more thing that Obama told House Dems in that private pep rally yesterday:
“When I sign this in the Rose Garden, each and every one of you will be able to look back and say, ‘This was my finest moment in politics.’”
This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.
Greg,
About you talking to the software overlords;
I expect that the censoring software is used company wide, so it might be hard to get them to modify it, just for your blog, therefore;
What I would suggest is to insist on getting a preview feature, so that we can see what has been censored, and revise it, before posting our comments. As it now stands, we do not discover what words are censored, until after they have been posted. That is absurd.
If we can get this passed and the Senate doesn’t butcher it, it really ought the Ted Kennedy Memorial health care reform bill.
It seems funny that he hasn’t even been mentioned lately.
Liam — thanks. A preview function is, in fact, in the works, as is (wait for it Tena) threaded comments!
Tena-
I don’t know if you caught Pelosi’s statement on the floor last nite but she did memorialize Teddy.
If thats even what you were referring to?
Greg, all I ask is for comments to work like they have been. As long as comments appear when they are posted and they post immediately like they do now, je suis content.
“I don’t know if you caught Pelosi’s statement on the floor last nite but she did memorialize Teddy.”
I was at a birthday party last night. I checked in to see what happened when we got home but I didn’t get to follow it while it was happening. I didn’t know that – and yeah, that is basically what I’m referring to.
Thanks for telling me that, by the way.
I believe Louise Slaughter also mentioned Kennedy at length.
And 3 big cheers for Madame Speaker Nancy Pelosi!
Hooray! Hooray! Hooray!
She’s going to leave a hell of a legacy. History will take note of Madame Speaker Pelosi, the first woman speaker and she’s one hard working Speaker.
I’m glad to know Kennedy was talked about. I should have checked before I posted that.
Reality Check.
Those Anti Abortion Politicians claim that they want to outlaw the procedure because it is the taking of life. They claim that it is murder.
Last night all those Anti Abortion Republican Congress members voted for to allow Abortions. They are a bunch of sanctimonious hypocrites.
I always believed that Dennis Kucinich was just a self promoting grandstanding little weasel. His vote against the health care bill confirms that I held the right opinion of him.
Liam – I just think Dennis is wack – he’s a contrarian.
I’m Feingold didn’t follow Kucinich down that wholly dead-end of a path – cause I’ve about had it with him, too.
TPM has a clip up of the obstructionist GOP (so what else is new…) during the debate yesterday. Man, my blood was beginning to boil just watching the lack of decorum and downright b.s. they were engaging in. Apparently all the teabagging has gone to their heads and they were acting *just like the idiots* shouting down their reps at the town halls in August.
Effing hypocrites.
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2009/11/just_ugly.php#more?ref=fpblg
When we do get preview, maybe I’ll actually use it and will realize before I post that once more I failed to type my verb. I wish I knew what it was about my brain to finger action that causes me to think but not type my verbs so often.
Can’t figure that one out -
“. Apparently all the teabagging has gone to their heads and they were acting *just like the idiots* shouting down their reps at the town halls in August.”
That’s alright – they’ve signed their own warrant to stay the minority from now on.
As far as I am concerned; Dennis Kucinich is our Michele Bachmann.
Couldn’t this make Reid’s job easier? Would you really want to be the Dem or Ind Senator who stands with the teabaggers? Or is the one who has to go in front of the American people and explain why you want to take a pass on this historic moment.
Comments this morning from Joseph Cao. Gotta respect this guy, at one point right after his election, Boehner said it was guys like him who were the future of the party. Ha Ha.
“The president and I, we have had a very good relationship, and I thank him and his administration for their hard work in helping me to rebuild my district after the devastation of Hurricane Katrina,” Cao said. “I’m pretty sure that if I were to vote no against the bill the president would still continue to work with me to address the needs of my district. But I felt it was important of me to support the president in this matter because, like I said before, based on my own conscience, it was the right decision for my district.”
Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/08/joseph-cao-voting-for-hea_n_349929.html&cp
“Couldn’t this make Reid’s job easier? Would you really want to be the Dem or Ind Senator who stands with the teabaggers?”
I would think so, myself, Andy.
The right is so doomed. Their Loonytunes base hates them as much almost as they hate us. This is not going to make the Tea Baggers happy and they will blame the Republicans and possibly get disgusted enough to quit voting altogether (please god!)
They work-up this group to a fever pitch while totally ignoring what was really going on there – those people do not like anybody and the only reason they show up for the Republicans is because they frakking cannot stand the fact that Obama is president – not because they love the GOP.
Greg,
Do you have any current poll results on where Independents stand on the Afghanistan Troops request issue?
Thanks for all the lists of which Dems voted how Greg, I agree with you the ones who voted for the Stupak ammendment and then for the bill are the ones who bear watching.
The ones voting for the ammendment and then against the bill are just a bunch of cowards. They may be targeted by progressives in primaries, that’s the way Jane Hamsher surely will see it.
BTW, I’m not necessarily agreeing with that, we should be a more inclusive party. But sometimes you just gotta try.
Sorry, I’m on a jag here about that clip I posted above…
I think the average person would be disgusted by that behavior, no matter the issue or politics b/c folks just want to be treated fairly.
The Democrate are the only adults in the room.
“that’s the way Jane Hamsher surely will see it.”
Imsinca, that’s like saying bears defecate in the woods. You know – obvious.
I know, she’s a trip, and Bilegeman thinks I’m never happy. HA! I’m downright giddy compared to her. I respect her opinion though on some of these issues, just don’t want to cut off my nose to spite my face.
Then have become the American Taliban Party, so of course they want to stop women from having any say in how the nation is run.
“The Democrate are the only adults in the room.”
Well yeah. All the Hitler silliness and the “nyah nyah nyah” is so childish.
Where the GOP is is to analogous to where the Democrats would be if they were down to a voting base consisting of nothing but the most rabid leftist progressives.
You can’t count on those people to be loyal or patient or understanding of compromise. Same with the far right base the GOP is down to.
Which means we will have to continue to bring the Independents into OUR tent, so compromise is still going to be the prevailing ethic. But we just got almost every damn thing we wanted in the House bill.
I’m ecstatic.
Chuck
I watched that vid a couple of times yesterday and it was truly amazing, and then conservative men wonder why some of us don’t like them very much.
Where the GOP is is to me analogous…
I haven’t watched it yet because I know it’s going to make me mad but I guess I better.
Re: Stupak Amendment-
Interesting exchange between Boehner and Stupak last nite: Boehner asked Stupak if he would guarantee that he and other Dems supporting the Amendment would still vote for it/support it later (in conference, I assume) and Stupak replied that “as the Minority Leader knows, you cannot guarantee a future vote or support”, to which Boehner said that the Democrats cannot even support their own amendment. Or something similar.
I apologize if I have some of the wording or details wrong, but what I find interesting about that is that perhaps it leaves a slight indication that it’ll be stripped later?
Anyone else have any thoughts on this?
Tena,
You might want to read Frank Rich today. He has a good take on the teabaggers and a whole lot more.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/08/opinion/08rich.html?_r=1
Has the United States been captured by a foreign army? The reason why I ask that question is because I keep hearing a lot of Right Wingers saying; “we want to take back our country”. Of course I know that we have not been invaded, but I just wanted to make the point that those Teabaggers, and their so called leaders, in the Republican ranks, are using tht meme, to smear Progressives as not being real Americans.
The Republicans are the very same ad the Taliban in that regard.They both operate from the same principle that only their Ideology is to be allowed, and all others are Infidels/Non-Americans.
Ok, I’m mad. That was unbelievable.
edit:
Has the United States been captured by a foreign army? The reason why I ask that question is because I keep hearing a lot of Right Wingers saying; “we want to take back our country”. Of course I know that we have not been invaded, but I just wanted to make the point that those Teabaggers, and their so called leaders, in the Republican ranks, are using that meme, to smear Progressives as not being real Americans.
The Republicans are the very same as the Taliban in that regard.They both operate from the same principle that only their Ideology is to be allowed, and all others are Infidels/Non-Americans.
@ChuckinDenton.
That exchange was not with Stupek.
http://republicanleader.house.gov/blog/?p=678
Imsinca – I like Rich, but I liked him better when he wasn’t trying to base national politics on NY. If you see what I mean.
“Only if the district were situated in Dixie — or Utah — could it be a more perfect fit for the narrow American demographic where the McCain-Palin ticket had its sole romps last year.”
Frank, Utah has got an amazingly progressive governor. There are also actual, you know, liberal districts in Dixie as you call it. And thanks for that, too,Frank – you make it exceedingly clear where you’re coming from when you call it Dixie. I get your point, Frank – you didn’t have to underline it by calling it Dixie.
Sorry Im – don’t mean to go all bitter on your link. LOL!
*sigh*
I got my filibustering hat on guys, and I can’t wait.
And I still have $50 that says that Lieberman isn’t going to join a filibuster.
I just don’t have any takers for that bet.
All in all, a pretty weak performance.
Given a 75 vote majority in the House, and a full year to work on this, Pelosi could barely drag out a 5 vote margin. And that after caving on abortion coverage.
Opposition is much more bipartisan that support. One wonders about the bribes offered and and threats made to get the last few votes.
Its clear that the bill in not primarily about health care, its about power. As Greg admits above … rewrite the relationship Americans have with government and deal a serious blow to the anti-government ideology . Its mostly about securing a permanent increase in the size and role of government.
One can readily see why the Democrats have been pushing to get this passed before it was understood.
The Senate is where bad ideas go to die, and one hopes that will be the case for this bill.
And money talks, bull*s*h*i*t walks.
“. Its mostly about securing a permanent increase in the size and role of government.”
[rolls eyes]
Yeah yeah yeah – it’s creeping damn Socialism – I hope.
I wonder if there is more to the story of the dems who voted no. Like… were they told we don’t need your vote, we have 218 so cover yourselves in your districts. Or if the whip needed their votes he was assured he would get them. Maybe we will never know or maybe a journo will find out.
“The reason why I ask that question is because I keep hearing a lot of Right Wingers saying; “we want to take back our country”. Of course I know that we have not been invaded, but I just wanted to make the point that those Teabaggers, and their so called leaders, in the Republican ranks, are using that meme, to smear Progressives as not being real Americans.”
I am sorry, but the hypocrisy is just too much in the above paragraph. The left used “Take back our country” all the time during the Bush years.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060731/take_back_our_country
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1022-13.htm
http://my.democrats.org/page/community/group/TAKEBACKOURCOUNTRY
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132×536983
It took me all of three minutes to find those links and there are many, many more. Liam, you are a freakin crybaby and a hypocrite. What next? Are you going to claim that the left didn’t compare Bush to Hitler. You are a clown.
PS I will be thinking of you when I filibuster the Health Care bill into the ground.
Tena, that was Andy’s link, I read the Rich article and didn’t think much of it.
Here’s my latest link, Joe the Schmoe doin his thang. Here’s our next hurdle to overcome, but I’m quite certain his “conscience” can be bought.
LIEBERMAN: “A public option plan is unnecessary. It has been put forward, I’m convinced, by people who really want the government to take over all of health insurance. They’ve got a right to do that; I think that would be wrong.
But worse than that, we have a problem even greater than the health insurance problems, and that is a debt — $12 trillion today, projected to be $21 trillion in 10 years.”
“It isn’t really Lieberman’s “conscience” that is driving him to oppose the public option — more likely it’s his ego (since he told reporters that he likes feeling “relevant“). After all, Lieberman opposed the Senate Finance Committee bill even though it didn’t have a public option, and in 1994, his “conscience” told him that the filibuster was “unfair” and shouldn’t be used to block major legislation. He has also asserted that the public option would raise premiums and increase the debt, even though the Congressional Budget Office has disputed those claims. Furthermore, 60 percent of his constituents support a public option, but Lieberman has dismissed them as just being “confused.”
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/11/08/lieberman-filibuster-public/
“All in all, a pretty weak performance.”
I guess you could see it that way OR this way:
“That is more than has ever happened before. More than Truman or Nixon or Carter or Clinton managed. More than Rayburn or O’Neill or Gingrich managed.”
Lieberman is doing his thang. I don’t think he’ll join a filibuster, but I don’t think there’s going to be one.
The Senate is not the raucous at times obnoxious place that the House is. They have all that phony decorum frontin going on.
That was Andy’s link = sorry about that, Andy, and Im.
“And I still have $50 that says that Lieberman isn’t going to join a filibuster.”
I will bet you everything you own. The filibuster is on. And I won’t be the only one. Ben and Blanche will be by my side. The bill passed in the House has about as much chance of becoming law as the Washington Nationals have of winning the World Series.
““All in all, a pretty weak performance.””
Of course you’re goingn to say that. The Democrats just passed historic legislation and legislation that we’ve worked on passing for damn near 100 years. This really began with a Republican: Teddy Roosevelt. Man, Republicans sure were a different species then.
Freehold, just because something does not come easy, or without compromise, doesn’t mean it isn’t worth doing. That’s where I am on the entire thing.
We all knew it was going to be difficult and it’s not a perfect bill by any means, but it’s a start and the whole “government takeover of healthcare meme” has been debunked so many times it’s not even funny.
You sound a little depressed this morning, you’ll see it will be okay when all is said and done. And if you think the WH will let this die in the Senate you couln’t be more wrong. They’re just getting started.
I almost always bet on the underdog and I’m pretty lucky, I won about $550 Friday night and I’m going shopping.
“I will bet you everything you own. ”
I don’t want everything you own. I simply want an actual $50.
Well Tena, I’m still waiting for the news that you’ve sold your summer home in the mountains and given the proceeds to the poor. Social justice and all, don’t you know.
“I almost always bet on the underdog and I’m pretty lucky, I won about $550 Friday night and I’m going shopping.”
AIIIIIGHT! I love that for you.
“Lieberman is doing his thang. I don’t think he’ll join a filibuster, but I don’t think there’s going to be one.”
For **** sake, the Dems filibustered judges. Decorum? Give me a break. I don’t remember any on the left complaining about the filibuster when the Republicans were in the majority, and the Dems in the Senate used it “liberally”. Hahahaha, like the pun?
You people can put your wishful thinking into words on this blog all you want, but my interview on Fox News (I know, you didn’t watch it, can’t venture out of your echo chamber)just this morning, in which I reiterate my filibuster PROMISE (not a threat) is sincere.
I tried to warn you people yesterday about premature celebrations. You didn’t listen.
We are newly energized Freehold and it doesn’t matter the number of votes, it matters that it passed, and we’ve waited a long time. This from Tim Kaine.
“Despite the overwhelming support this legislation has received and despite a strong mandate from the public for action, the Republicans have held tight to their just-say-no approach, firmly rooting the GOP on the side of the insurance lobby and the status quo that is breaking American families and small businesses. It is evident from their obstructionism that the Republicans are more interested in protecting their own reputations and political fortunes than ensuring that our generation and generations to come have the best possible access to health care. Unfortunately for the Republican Party, their misguided and shameful campaign to kill health reform looks doomed to fail – something all Americans should be thankful for.
“Today, Congressional Democrats put opponents of reform on notice: the status quo is unsustainable and inaction is not an option. This vote doesn’t mark the end of this process – we still have a ways to go – but it is a critical milestone on the road to passing health insurance reform. The American people want reform – they need reform – and Democrats will not rest until we pass comprehensive health reform legislation.”
http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11/kaine-this-day-has-been-a-long-time-coming.php?ref=fpa
“Well Tena, I’m still waiting for the news that you’ve sold your summer home in the mountains”
Sounds like you and I have talked at Eschaton and not since.
You need to keep up, dude. I sold my Colorado place and bought a house in Taos, New Mexico. We still own some property in Colorado.
I do not apologize to anyone for anything I have. And you have no idea what we may or may not be doing for social justice with our time and or money.
You don’t know me.
So don’t be a groupie, keep it movin, dude, you don’t know me.
If you want to bet on the health care bill go to intrade.com. They have a bet going now on whether a bill with a public option will pass by Christmas. That position is losing badly.
@Imsinca
Depressed? No. Its what I expected. I expect it will pass in the Senate. And get much worse in coming years.
I’m planning based on that.I think we’ll see higher structural unemployment, lower growth. If cap-n-tax happens, much higher unemployment and lower growth. Went to cash a couple of months ago.
Did a 25K trail run in the woods yesterday. Beautiful weather. I’ve been off having a life. May check back in a couple of weeks.
Thanks, Liam.
This was posted earlier, but since I included multiple links, it was stuck in the moderation process, so I am posting it again, and will be putting the links in separate posts so it won’t be moderated away.
A crybaby wrote: “The reason why I ask that question is because I keep hearing a lot of Right Wingers saying; “we want to take back our country”. Of course I know that we have not been invaded, but I just wanted to make the point that those Teabaggers, and their so called leaders, in the Republican ranks, are using that meme, to smear Progressives as not being real Americans.”
I am sorry, but the hypocrisy is just too much in the above paragraph. The left used “Take back our country” all the time during the Bush years.
Link 1:
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060731/take_back_our_country
Link 2:
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1022-13.htm
Link 3:
http://my.democrats.org/page/community/group/TAKEBACKOURCOUNTRY
Wow.
He tried hard, for some time, to pass as not being like the rest of those Right Wing Lunatics, but now Freehold has let loose his inner Teabagger.
Link 4:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132×536983
It took me all of three minutes to find those links and there are many, many more. Liam, you are a freakin crybaby and a hypocrite. What next? Are you going to claim that the left didn’t compare Bush to Hitler. You are a clown.
PS I will be thinking of you when I filibuster the Health Care bill into the ground
It is a desperate cry for attention.
Only someone with very low self esteem, would think that pretending to be Traitor Joe would enhance his image.
“He tried hard, for some time, to pass as not being like the rest of those Right Wing Lunatics, but now Freehold has let loose his inner Teabagger.”:
And the links above prove that not only is Liam a crybaby, whining little hypocrite, but the quote above this also demonstrates that he thinks a joke that would be juvenile for a 12 year old, and was old months ago, is still funny.
Hey Liam, why don’t you make a post about how horrible it is for the protesters to use Hitler imagery so I can provide links to pictures of the left doing it for eight years. I know you are intellectually challenged, but you almost make it too easy to demonstrate what a pathetic hypocrite you are.
“Only someone with very low self esteem, would think that pretending to be Traitor Joe would enhance his image”
Nope, this is Joe Lieberman. And once again, thank you for calling me a traitor five seconds after you called others with whom you disagree “anti-American”. I suppose next you will post something about how the left is so much more tolerant.
PS. Seems my impending filibuster is driving you nuts. All I can say to that is HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.
“I am sorry, but the hypocrisy is just too much in the above paragraph. The left used “Take back our country” all the time during the Bush years.”
I actually agree with this – I said that a lot. The motives were different,but the fact it you’re right about that.
I was in the minority of people when I said that. Most people I knew, even if they disliked Bush, didn’t feel like that about it. But I did say it, a lot and since the right has been saying it, it’s made me think one thing: this divide in the country isn’t going to heal any time soon and that bothers me.
“Interesting exchange between Boehner and Stupak last nite: Boehner asked Stupak if he would guarantee that he and other Dems supporting the Amendment would still vote for it/support it later (in conference, I assume) and Stupak replied that “as the Minority Leader knows, you cannot guarantee a future vote or support”,”
That was Boehner confronting Charlie Rangel. Boehner asked him to guarantee that the language would stay in the bill and then that Rangel would guarantee his vote. Of course that’s insane, so Rangel totally showed him up and threw in a secret jab about Boehner’s past ethics problems. Boehner basically had a tantrum and walked off defeated.
And just in general, the Neo-Confederate party last night looked like pathetic losers. They acted totally disrespectfully to the institution of the government of our country. It’s bad enough on the Mall with their grotesque hate on display. But in the Chamber. They truly will bear the scars of their behavior politically going forward.
“I’ve been off having a life. May check back in a couple of weeks.”
Much the way I took the previous 8 years off while Bush and company ran us into the ground with their awesome economic policies and never ending war machine.
“Freehold has let loose his inner Teabagger.”
Yeah and just totally revealed itself to me cause it couldn’t resist the personal attack.
.
“ran us into the ground with their awesome economic policies and never ending war machine.”
That’s the difference between our anger and our protests against the Republicans and theirs against us, right there. We were right. We had a point and then some.
The Republicans worked for 40 years to get the majority and the White House back. Hadn’t had it since Herbert Hoover and I’ll be damned if they didn’t turn around and just repeat Hoover’s frakking administration right down to the damn stock market crash.
Agreed Ethan and they took a lot of heat from the left for their Non Reform plan. I thought Hoyer rocked as well last night. I don’t remember who he was but the rep who nailed their “Tort Reform” proposals was really good as well. Just casually referred to the fact they never once bothered to mention patients or their rights.
t is a desperate cry for attention.
Only someone with very low self esteem, would think that pretending to be Traitor Joe would enhance his image.
Update. Since I posted this, it has become clear that he is far worse mental case than I had suspected.
He actually believes that he is Traitor Joe. I hope that someone in his family gets him back on his Meds!
Plus, you know, Bush didn’t clearly win the 2000 election – the SCOTUS gave him that office so things begin well.
We had legitimate reasons to be angry right from the start. Bush lost the popular vote in 2000.
It’s way different no matter how many times the right claims it’s equivalent. It’s not.
things didn’t begin well.
goddammit
I am going to watch some NFL games. Have a good day all.
“* All eyes on Harry Reid.”
Tupac is laughing his a*s*s off in heaven.
Yeah Imsinca, I agree that Hoyer was great last night. He was awesome. I think the guy you are talking about re: tort reform is either Bruce Braley from Iowa or Rob Andrews from NJ. Both were GREAT. And I missed a bunch of the general debate, but I did see some of John Lewis and man he was allll fired up. Incredible. Really nailed the civil rights argument for HCR.
I think more pressure needs to be put on Snowe and Collins. Both voted for TARP and Stimulus so for them this can’t be about spending. Same could be said for Lieberman, but we don’t need to pressure him his vote is a lock.
Andy-
Thats interesting: I didn’t see the Rangel/Boehner exchange. Apparently Boehner asked more than once.
Can I just say this to Freehold even though he’s apparently gone off to the woods again. What he should have done is convert to cash in 2007 (we did) and then buy back into stock early in 2009 (we did) and made a nice tidy sum because of it (we did). Republicans aren’t the only ones who know a little something about money.
Ethan, I saw Lewis as well, no one in the House does Civil Rights better than our very own Veteran of that war.
“Republicans aren’t the only ones who know a little something about money.”
LOL!
Y’all are making me wish I’d been around to watch all that last night; almost.
It was a damn fine birthday party I was attending.
And here’s why I think we may be on a bit of a roll. Words from Glenn Smith at FDL.
“Moonshine, a fine word for unreal or laughable lies, shines on. Our political sphere is positively aglow with it. It is never eclipsed, and its source never sets.
The debate over health care reform, for instance, has been bright with it. Just about every word uttered by the opponents of health care reform has been moonshine. Every word, and everyone knows it. The House managed to shield its eyes from the glare just long enough to pass a health reform bill. And in retrospect, the attacks on reform look all the more ridiculous.
We were told that freedom would be destroyed by our better health. We were told health care reform was communism, or fascism, or socialism, or some other non sequiturism. We were told we’d go broke. Or maybe die. Well, at least if it makes us sick we can afford to see a doctor.”
Have a nice Sunday all, I’m off to spread a little money into the economy, shopping!
Imsinca – I sure think we’re on a roll. Why else has the right been throwing every kind of fit, plus all the appliances and furniture, at the Democrats right from the jump?
Because they’ve known all along that when this passes they are effed.
Ooo – have fun, Imsinca.
Lieberman this morning on Fox: “I think we ought to do health care reform this year…”
Ok then let’s do it, here’s one way to get it done:
- The Senate passes HCR with no PO (to get Lieberman) or with a PO + trigger (to get Snowe).
- Then House and Senate bills go to conference committee (dems have majority in committee so they can do whatever they want)
- Final conference report only includes House PO and maybe no Stupak amendment (hard to tell)
- Final conference report is approved because you only need an up or down vote
I think the President must follow this blog:
“Given the heated and often misleading rhetoric,” Obama said during a brief statement in the Rose Garden, he wanted to recognize the “courageous vote” and add his own gratitude to the House “for taking us this far.”
Freehold said:
“All in all, a pretty weak performance.
Given a 75 vote majority in the House, and a full year to work on this, Pelosi could barely drag out a 5 vote margin. And that after caving on abortion coverage.”
This could be a compelling argument if one removed from the equation the influence of corporate monies into the system via lobbying and electoral financing. It would also be more compelling if something like a serious and honest appraisal of issues was followed by an honest and serious debate by members. It would also be more compelling if we did not have access to Kristol’s memo on how and why Republicans must go about killing this program (or any like it) because of the damage he perceives it/they will do to future Republican electoral opportunities (because it would deal a perhaps critical blow to libertarian ideology and presumptions). Such real institutional factors in American government are what brought about a near century-long battle to get this done. That it finally got done (at least this far) ought more properly be understood as the opposite of “a weak performance.”
“One wonders about the bribes offered and and threats made to get the last few votes.”
No more than one wonders about the offered bribes and threats made to have members vote nay.
“Its clear that the bill in not primarily about health care, its about power. As Greg admits above … rewrite the relationship Americans have with government and deal a serious blow to the anti-government ideology . Its mostly about securing a permanent increase in the size and role of government.”
Again, something close to the precise opposite is the actual case. “Power” is clearly at issue but let’s think about how so. The majority of American citizens wish to have the choice of a public option (for example) and a bill that reflects that majoritarian wish is one which shifts power to citizens rather than maintaining it as the property of corporate and ideological elites. Further, the goal or motive is not to secure a permanent increase in government but rather to use government in a manner which benefits the majority even if a consequence is larger government. The motivation is to help citizens rather than adhering to some absolutist political ideology which is not shared by the majority of citizens.
“One can readily see why the Democrats have been pushing to get this passed before it was understood.”
Probably nothing else you’ve said here is so obviously false. Where such programs are in place (every other industrialized country) those citizens clearly have understanding of such programs from actual experience (rather than from fear-fomenting corporate/ideological propaganda campaigns) and they, as I’ve noted before, utterly refuse to turn to something like the US presently has. And this was not done quickly – that is simply a talking point crafted by Bill Kristol and Frank Luntz to facilitate delay so as to aid chances of killing the bill.
Bernie,
I am glad I took a brief break from football to read your post. I could not agree with you more, well done!
I second that Bernie. Thanks for explaining it all so well. One added thought, I believe it is the shift in power that bothers our conservative friends and the fear associated with it.
Late to the partay.
Hurray. Well done Madam Speaker and President Obama. Would have been happier if the margin was in double digits.
Kudos to Cao. Hope you switch parties soon. Fvcking blue dawgs should borrow his cajones.
Now show us what you got, Harry.
“The vote puts Dems within striking distance of an achievement that could rewrite the relationship Americans have with government and deal a serious blow to the anti-government ideology that has done so much to define our politics for at least a generation.” – Well done, Greg.
Strangely the trolls, including sbj, seem to be absent today. But then, freehold replaces now sbj as the dishonest troll.
Greg, Good for you for giving OFA its due credit. Sure as sun rises, expect the repugs to paint OFA = ACORN soon.
Bernie – Nice analysis. Thanks.
Good Booman piece
“Some people wonder why I am not a fan of Dennis Kucinich and don’t take comfort when I look along the trench and find him fighting by my side or, especially, carrying my banner. Well, he voted against health care reform tonight. He can provide any reasons he wants, but I’d note that the only Democratic women in the entire House to vote against the bill (Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin of South Dakota, Suzanne Kosmas of Florida, and Betsy Markey of Colorado), are from very conservative districts. The women of the Democratic caucus swallowed hard when the Stupak-Pitts amendment passed, and they voted to go ahead with reform. So, please don’t try to tell me that the pro-life-’til-the-day-he-decided-to-run-for-president Kucinich voted no because he was standing up for women’s rights.
…
I am really disturbed that allowing the abortion amendment didn’t result in an avalanche of support from so-called moderates. It appears that nearly every southern and border Democrat voted against reform. And this despite the fact that this legislation will disproportionately benefit southerners.”
…
Given the odds, I should be ecstatic. But, I’m not. This just reminds me how pathetically conservative my country is, even with 60 Democratic senators and 258 members of the House.
And then there is Kucinich. He can bite me.”
http://networkedblogs.com/p17090294
‘Good Booman piece’
I love Booman and thank you for that piece. It rocks – I totally agree about Kucinich.
Because it’s Sunday and I love Frank Schaeffer, here’s an entire interview with Laura Flanders on Grit TV. It’s sort of longish, but worth watching if you think having some understanding of the fundamentalist right wing fringe of the Conservative movement is important. He also has some criticism of the extreme left and BTW really admires Obama.
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/grittv-frank-schaeffer-fears-fundamentalis
Went to the toy store this morning and had a blast buying goodies for all the little ones.
amk
That Booman piece is good, especially the bit about Kucinich, but it’s a little too negative regarding the possibilities of passing a bill. I don’t think the country is too conservative but that our representatives are too timid. I’m hoping this will inspire a little more fortitude on their part but we’ll see.
re the above…thanks, guys.
Josh writes on yesterday’s event… http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2009/11/there_are_many_events_in.php#more?ref=fpblg
Politico (via think progress) reports on Palin’s speech in Wisconsin…
“Palin had remarks prepared but frequently wandered off-script to make a point, offering audience members a casual “awesome” or “bogus” in discussing otherwise weighty topics.
As in: “It is so bogus that society is sending a message right now and has been for probably the last 40 years that a woman isn’t strong enough or smart enough to be able to pursue an education, a career and her rights and still let her baby live.”
Other Palin touchstones included: praise for the military, jeers for the “the liberal media” and a general manner of speaking that often veered into rhetorical culs-de-sac.
While she drew applause during her remarks, Palin’s extemporaneous and frequently discursive style was such that she never truly roused a true-believing crowd as passionate about the issue at hand as she. Not once during her address did they rise to their feet.”
Two interesting points. First, that veering into unscripted and awkward/incoherent cul de sacs…Palin’s future public events risk exactly these failings and it’s why she’s been kept out of site and has had writers composing her facebook pages. Whatever goals Kristol and crowd have for her re bringing in voters from outside the base will be thwarted (and the Republican brand further damaged) any time she’s interviewed or allowed to go off a script.
The other point is that Mary Matalin riff on how horridly oppressive liberalism has been for females.
“I always believed that Dennis Kucinich was just a self promoting grandstanding little weasel.”
Shows how little you know. Kucinich is a great man. He would have voted to advance the bill if his had been the deciding vote. I strongly disagreed with that decision and felt he should vote against the bill in all circumstances. The bill is not progressive. It is a poor cousin of the bill Mitt Romney passed in Massachusetts. Plus, we were completely screwed by Obama, Pelosi, Miller et al. on the state single payer amendment. How *dare* any DC Democrat tell my state we can’t have single payer if we vote for it?
This one’s a special for lawyer Tena:
http://supreme.justia.com/us/268/5/index.html
Linder v. United States,268 U.S. 5 (1925).
I draw your attention to pint #2 in the syllabus, to wit:
“2. Direct control of medical practice in the states is obviously beyond the power of Congress. P. 268 U. S. 18.”
Don’t you moonbats even think that this isn’t, if passed and signed, NOT going to be litigated.
From my, IANAL, reading, it will be unconstitutional on its’ face.
Bernie Latham:
“This could be a compelling argument if one removed from the equation the influence of corporate monies into the system via lobbying and electoral financing.”
Is this your latest “bogeyman” you moonbats seem to NEED when you don’t get it all your way?
Funny, though, I seem to recall Big Pharma signing off on Socialist Utopiacare, and there was scarce a peep of protest about “corporate monies” then.
Besides, McCain-Feingold took care of all that, did it not?
lmsinca,
Thanks for the GritTV link, it was worth watching.
We knew Cao was in for this sort of thing but knowing it makes it no less repugnant… http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/11/right-wing-unleashes-racism-on-rep-cao.php
Bernie, I love how the media managed to get into the “Closed to the media” Palin event by merely buying a ticket.
Funny how a ruling that’s been on the books since 1925 has not been used to kill Medicare, Medicaid and the VA.
“Strangely the trolls, including sbj, seem to be absent today. But then, freehold replaces now sbj as the dishonest troll.”
I’m all up in that little head of yours, ain’t I?
I don’t know Bernie about that Yglesias comment today. Isn’t that just a quote from some blogger, we get some pretty nasty ones here sometimes as well. I don’t think it’s fair to draw too many conclusions from a comment in cyberspace.
I have a neighbor who yells ni**er lover everytime he drives by my house which says a whole lot about him but nobody else.
The problem comes for the Repubs when they have a rally or whatever they want to call it on Thursday and act all excited about the people who showed up when they’re clearly deranged and out of touch with reality. I know not all of them were, but I was always taught you need to be careful who you hang out with for that very reason.
@Andy
Yes, I know. It demonstrates the difficulty these folks are going to have as soon as they allow Palin out in public even where attendees have to go through metal detectors to prevent any recording of her performances. Using the ghostwritten Facebook entries and editorials facilitated an absolute control over her image – and that had some workability as the media now just presume (in phrasing at least) those contributions are hers and forward the strategist-desired notion that she is one of the top three or four Republicans on the present scene. But now the problems start.
As I noted a few weeks ago, the interview on Oprah will be key. She’ll be briefed and practiced big time but as we see in the Wisconsin event, the Wasilla just seeps through. My earlier prediction…any tough spots for her on Oprah will be spun as an attack from an Obama loyalist (who is black).
““2. Direct control of medical practice in the states is obviously beyond the power of Congress. P. 268 U. S. 18.””
A. I have no idea if this is still good law. It’s a 1925 case and I’m not about to go do any research on the basis of a troll comment.
B. Since when is Health care reform “direct control of medical practice”?
@Imsinca… indeed, we have our share of scurrilous fruitcakes too.
Tena:
“B. Since when is Health care reform “direct control of medical practice”?”
I believe that the House just passed a bill that stated that the HCR would not pay for elective abortion, did it not?
You and lmsinca seemed to be pretty upset over it.
Are you now going to turn around and argue that the government is now NOT exercising direct control of medical practice in a state?
I also have another post directed to Andy that is in moderation.
For brevity’s sake: Bill of Attainder and Unjust Enrichment.
I do so LOVE the awkward silences here.
Lets one hear all the crickets.
Digby notes Aravosis’ post… http://www.americablog.com/2009/11/pro-life-congressmen-taking-abortion.html
“The House passed the anti-choice Stupak amendment last night. Basically, the amendment stops any government money from funding insurance plans that cover abortions. The twisted logic being that any money connected to any insurance company covering abortions is “abortion money,” i.e., profits earned from “killing babies.” We can’t have the government touching that.
So I sure hope that no pro-life members of Congress are accepting political donations from any insurance companies that cover abortions. Because if they are accepting such donations, they’re accepting profits that came from “killing little babies.”
http://www.kansascity.com/105/story/1556149.html
Third paragraph:
“Would I have to have health insurance?
Yes, or pay a penalty of 2.5 percent of your income. Hardship and religious waivers would be available, and some very low-wage earners would be exempt. The requirement would begin in 2013.
People who don’t get insurance and don’t pay the penalty face fines and possibly jail time.”
The right winger Bilgewater is an anti-American extremist.
But he demands that his absurdly false claims be accepted.
Trying to fact-check right wing frauds like Bilgewater is pointless, they’ll tell more lies in a minute than can be corrected in an hour.
Bilgewater, why don’t you and your fellow anti-American thugs just leave the country? Haven’t you already renounced your citizenship?
You can spend the rest of your life in the Libertarian Fantasy Land of Somalia.
Bilgeman
Since I am not a lawyer I cannot directly speak to some of your comments, I can speak about my objection to the anti-abortion language inserted into the bill through ammendment the way I understand it.
The bill was already true to the Hyde ammendment by adhering to it in the language of the Public Option, as no Federal funding could be used for abortion except in the case of rape, incest or the health of the mother.
The Stupak ammendment went further by not allowing any woman receiving subsidies from the government to buy private insurance which covers abortion. As a women’s right to choose is still the law of the land many of us believe this to be a set back.
Then they added insult to injury by saying women could buy an additional policy on their own, a rider, to cover abortion. It’s as if they’re saying, much as you did this morning, that abortion is a form of birth control and we can just buy a policy to pay for it.
News Ref:
A “personal best” in your jihad for internet debate enfeeblement!
Fling poo when you don’t know what else to do!
Congratulations, you feeb.
As to your suggestion, Secession is the Future.
We’ll betaking our country WITH us.
That’s right Bernie, they would just as soon no one knew about the insurance money they have received, and that goes for Blue Dogs and pro-life Dems. They’re entitled to their opinion obviously but to try to continually circumvent the laws allowing choice is simply a ploy to repeal the law at every turn.
I like brevity, but love moderation.
lmsinca:
“Then they added insult to injury by saying women could buy an additional policy on their own, a rider, to cover abortion. It’s as if they’re saying, much as you did this morning, that abortion is a form of birth control and we can just buy a policy to pay for it”
That tracks with what I understand it to be.
“The Stupak ammendment went further by not allowing any woman receiving subsidies from the government to buy private insurance which covers abortion. As a women’s right to choose is still the law of the land many of us believe this to be a set back.”
Well, hey…when you embark on such a massive exercise in unconstitutional Federal power with nobody apparently stopping for one minute to ask a very basic question:
“Does this action fall within the scope of the Powers enumerated to the Federal government by the Constitution?”
you’ve got to expect some more inconsistencies.
You see? The government is ALREADY deciding what procedures you may and may not have, and the thing isn’t even out of the Congress yet.
The paternalism that lies at the heart of Liberal moonbat-ism is showing through.
It’s only “your” money when you spend it how “we” direct you to.
The worm turns, lmsinca, it turns.
When I first dropped anchor on this board, one of the conservative commenters repeatedly asked the sweat-lodge how they would feel with Dick Cheney having access to their medical records.
TMK, none ever answered his query.
Now imagine how much you’ll like your government health care under a Palin Administration, and with a McConnell/Boehner Congress?
Jesushchrist! How dreary and desolate are Republicans’ choices for credible leaders up the road? This dreary and desolate… http://crooksandliars.com/nicole-belle/fns-wallace-tells-new-va-gov-mcdonnel
The anti-American Bilgewater again admits his true intentions: “Secession is the Future.”
Actually, no. My country is indivisible.
It’s a shame that so many right wingers (and many Republicans) don’t understand that.
You are welcome to leave our American Nation.
But you don’t get to divide it up like some terrorist thug.
To those people that engage with the anti-American thug Bilgewater, keep in mind that he wants to destroy America by dividing it up into pieces using violence.
That’s who Bilgewater truly is. Everything else is just a charade.
Andy:
“I like brevity, but love moderation”
More pity you. Since it seems my reply to you has broken the moderation ‘bot…here’s the short and sweet of it:
Medicare/Medicaid are voluntary programs…you have to enroll in them. Socialist Utopiacare is a MANDATE.
The VA is a health service provider to veterans as a benefit of their service. You, as Joe Schmuckatelli, lifelong civilian, cannot plop yourself down at a VA hospital and expect any treatment at all, (not that you’d necessarily WANT to…)
News Ref:
“Actually, no. My country is indivisible”
Careful there…you ALMOST sounded like a jingoistic, xenophobic Republican!
In point of fact, it already IS divided, culturally and religiously, it has, I think, never been more so.
The essential schism occurred long ago, and was stitched up and papered over, but those seams are coming apart again.
What follows from here is just the paperwork catching up.
“To those people that engage with the anti-American thug Bilgewater, keep in mind that he wants to destroy America by dividing it up into pieces using violence”
And now you sound like an abusive spouse. There will be no violence at all if you simply leave the lands you have occupied these last 145 years.
Just let us go our way.
Froomkin is wise… http://www.huffingtonpost.com/the-news/reporting/dan-froomkin
News Ref:
He’s not really worth your time. He’s more bark than bite. I’ve dealt with worse.
News Ref:
A very nice little article for you to ponder. Find someone smarter than yourself to read it to you:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/04/those_who_secede.html
The propagandists such as Bildge would want nothing more than have a divided nation. It would give credence to their push to prove Obama can’t unite a majority of Americans.
While the extremists such as yourself isolate themselves and wallow in the muck, the rest of us will move forward to compete globally. We aren’t interested in living in the wild west, pretending science and innovation aren’t what will make us a stronger country such as simpletons as yourself.
Regardless, if you’re still bitter about the civil war defeat then you’re beyond help.
Man this site needs an editor. Just chopped off half a sentence and hit enter.
Guess I’m the simpleton.
The right wing neo-Confederate extremist Bilgewater explains: “leave the lands you have occupied these last 145 years.”
What right winger Bilgewater is angry about is that liberals went to war to stop him from selling people as slaves. (And won, by the way.)
Bilgewater isn’t just an anti-American extremist, he’s an advocate for the return of slavery.
That’s who ya’all are trying to have a rational conversation with.
Nonetheless, to those of you who have tried to provide a thoughtful counterpoint to Bilgewater’s nonsense, I salute you, what you are doing is commendable.
“You see? The government is ALREADY deciding what procedures you may and may not have, and the thing isn’t even out of the Congress yet.
The paternalism that lies at the heart of Liberal moonbat-ism is showing through.
It’s only “your” money when you spend it how “we” direct you to.”
Sorry Bilgeman, those were not paternalistic liberals who added that language to the bill, those were Republicans by a huge margin and some socially conservative Democrats. My hope is they will have their ammendment stripped from the bill. If not, universal coverage is the most important issue and I am personally willing to have this fight later.
It may sound cowardly to some women, but there are too many people suffering from lack of or unaffordable insurance to hold up passage of the bill.
And if you think medical decisions are being made now by “we the people” you are kidding yourself. The insurance industry makes those decisions now and they do a really bad job of it. I am much less fearful of the government than some industry employee working for bonus money by finding a way to rescind my policy.
That explains his disdain for President Obama.
Why do the racists not just come out and say it rather than cry socialism and all the other stupid **** they cry about?
mike from arlington:
“Guess I’m the simpleton.”
You’ll get no argument from me there.
I would be more concerned if I were you, about claiming to be a Catholic, but being too chickensh!t to embrace the Nicene Creed so that these your moonbat “friends” don;t make fun of you.
Would you like to try it again?
Third time’s a charm, I hear tell.
Excellent piece by Alterman on Continetti’s new book on Palin and on modern conservative “journalism” generally… http://www.thenation.com/doc/20091123/alterman
Nice little contrarian view that might do some of you moonbats a world of good:
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/11/08/maybe-this-time/
Get out of the sweat lodge and take a walk in some Hot Air.
Challenge your assumptions.
Bildgeman, the un-Christian like southerner still bitter about the loss of the civil war, asking people if they are Christians.
Amusing.
Bildge, I’ll embrace it publicly when you admit you’re just a bitter racist upset that President Obama is your President and stop hiding behind clever euphemisms.
lmsinca:
“Sorry Bilgeman, those were not paternalistic liberals who added that language to the bill, those were Republicans by a huge margin and some socially conservative Democrats.”
And you REALLY think that it makes a difference?
I’d point out to you that it was your beloved Liberal Democrats who threw you right under the bus when it came down to “all for one and one for all”.
This morning you still had the honesty of your anger, although tonight you seem to have rationalized away the betrayal
“My hope is they will have their ammendment stripped from the bill. If not, universal coverage is the most important issue and I am personally willing to have this fight later.”
You are a good and loyal little moonbat…the hive-mind is pleased with your obedience.
“. I am much less fearful of the government than some industry employee working for bonus money by finding a way to rescind my policy.”
Then you’re a fool. It’s FAR easier to sue a private sector HMO/PPO than it is to sue the government.
The private company will usually settle out of court when you subpoena their internal company documents.
The government can string you along for centuries…what are you gonna do? Call the cops?
That was an interesting piece Bernie, thanks. I’m looking forward to Palin’s re-emergence next week as an author and look forward to her interviews with the media and talk show personalities. Well, talk show personalities anyway.
BTW, I also got a kick out of the Wisconsin piece you posted.
Bilgeman
I really think you’ve insulted me enough for one night. I can be outraged and concilliatory at the same time. I don’t see the world in black and white as you do, I search for the greater good.
The pro-slavery, anti-American right wing extremist Bilgewater cites Michelle “Concentration Camp Advocate” Malkin to back up his fantasy falsehoods?
Gee, who didn’t see that coming?
Oh yeah gotta love those C street dudes. They’re so good at moralizing for all the rest of us.
“As you read Bart Stupak boasting of taking reproductive choice away from women, remember that he’s not just an otherwise good Democrat (he’s not, in fact, a Blue Dog) who consistently lets the agenda of the Catholic Church override the well-being of his constituents, he’s also one of C-Street’s top Democratic members. This man, crowing over his legislative success is speaking as a representative of a group that preaches moral purity for others, but excuses itself from such moral guidelines with a back-slapping prayer lunch with the buddies. And then turns around and uses that moralizing to accrue political power.”
http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/11/08/bart-stupaks-c-street-sepsis/
lmsinca
I guess that sheds a little light on this:
“The majority party had seen plenty of defections earlier. A stunning sixty-four Democrats joined with the GOP to pass Stupak’s amendment, 240-194.
Stupak, during the vote on the final bill, didn’t stick around long. He cast his vote quickly and shook the hand of Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), then headed over to the GOP side, where he was warmly welcomed.
Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.), a strident partisan, was the first to greet him, shaking his hand and slapping him on the back. Stupak then found Cantor and Young, shook their hands, and retired from the floor to the Republican cloakroom.”
You got it Andy. That kind of conservative male crosses party lines quite easily. They use God and their religion to keep us in our place, but even though we may have lost this battle the war continues.
I am not as strident as some of my female friends but it doesn’t mean I will ignore it. Right now the HCR bill is the most important legislation and I will continue to support it. The choice issue will be revisited.
From Teddy Partridge at FDL. This is hopefully my last comment and illustrates how fervently I want HCR, if you catch my drift.
“To commemorate Saturday’s infamous rollback of women’s reproductive health introduced by Congressman Bart Stupak (D-Gilead) and included in the health care reform bill by a floor vote permitted under the Rule developed by Democratic leadership, Duncan Black (Atrios) proposed a new definition for the term Stupak:
Stupak (n) – The sepsis commonly experienced after unsafe back alley abortions
Today, Urban Dictionary has posted this definition:
2. Stupak: A medical condition (subset of sepsis) resulting from unsafe – unnecessarily so – back alley abortions as a result of the “Stupak Amendment” to the 2009 Health Care Reform Bill.
Doctor: Unfortunately, while this would have been covered under private insurance carriers, public plans were barred from including women’s health measures. I’m sorry, you’ll have to see “Dr. Julio” in the alley behind 7-11.
(Three weeks later.)
Doctor: I believe you’ve developed Stupak, a form of sepsis, a severe illness in which the bloodstream is overwhelmed by bacteria.”
OT – The world (except US & pakistan) thinks that the “free market” and capitalism suck.
“More than 29,000 people in 27 countries were questioned. In only two countries, the United States and Pakistan, did more than one in five people feel that capitalism works well as it stands.
Almost a quarter – 23% of those who responded – feel it is fatally flawed. That is the view of 43% in France, 38% in Mexico and 35% in Brazil.
And there is very strong support around the world for governments to distribute wealth more evenly. That is backed by majorities in 22 of the 27 countries.
If there is one issue where a global consensus seems to emerge from the survey it is this: there are majorities almost everywhere wanting government to be more active in regulating business.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/in_depth/8347409.stm
OT … or may be not
“Despite being relatively few in number, the Afghan Taliban are thriving in Afghanistan and Pakistan, as they take advantage of Islamabad’s apparent ambivalence towards them, the BBC’s Hugh Sykes reports from Kabul.
…
There was clear evidence of barefaced election fraud, implicitly insulting people who went out to vote believing that their ballots would count. But there has been peace on the streets.
One man said to me this week: “This is all so crazy I’ve just stopped thinking – and most of my friends are now simply depressed.”
And Afghanistan struggles on.
Despite eight years of international assistance, many places in Kabul are a mess.
….
Almost everyone I have spoken to here on three visits in less than a year has said their demands are very simple: employment, an end to the corruption that’s endemic in the Afghan system, and – security.
Security should be simple, one man pointed out: “The Taliban are a small force compared to the British and American armies…you could beat them if you really want.”
There is a suspicion here that the entire Western presence is Afghanistan is deeply cynical, misguided, and fundamentally confused.
The Afghan Taliban leadership and sources of supply are not even in Afghanistan, they are in Pakistan – in Quetta, a city just across the mountains from Kandahar where so many British and American troops have died.
The charge of cynicism arises because the Americans and the British support the Pakistan government – and the Pakistan government at the same time provides sanctuary in Quetta for the Afghan Taliban who are killing US and British troops.
It is like fighting off the enemy at the front door of your home, but leaving the back door unlocked.
…
Haroun Mir, director of Afghanistan’s Centre for Research and Policy Studies, told me he cannot understand why this surreal situation is tolerated.
“Pakistan gets away with impunity. And instead of being punished, they are rewarded with US aid.”
“Why is American public opinion silent about this?”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/south_asia/8348796.stm
Surreal indeed.
More from that BBC piece above
“One answer is that Pakistan has to hedge its bets. As more and more British and American troops die, pressure from the public in Britain and America to withdraw their forces could become irresistible.
The future of the Afghan government of President Hamid Karzai, already stained by election fraud, would then be uncertain. And the chance of the Taliban returning to power here would sharply increase.
They are already waiting in the wings.
On Friday, Nato-led International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) troops from Poland went to a village in Ghazni province south of Kabul. They distributed blankets, and some radios, and they left.
Twenty minutes later, a dozen Taliban arrived on motorcycles and seized the blankets; they set fire to some of them, and took the rest away for themselves.
The Afghan Taliban are well-organised, well-resourced, patient – and they have good sources of intelligence. They should not be under-estimated.
Pakistan needs smooth relations with whoever is in power in Kabul.
Islamabad was one of the very few capitals where the previous Afghan Taliban regime had an embassy. Only two other countries recognised the Taliban government – Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
And after 11 September 2001, the only nation that continued to recognise the Taliban government in Kabul was…Pakistan.”
That last sentence says it all.
The ever-observant Paul Krugman from today’s column…
“…the G.O.P. has been taken over by the people it used to exploit.” http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/09/opinion/09krugman.html?_r=1
“We are now about to find out what the Senate, as an institution, is made of. (Again.)”
We were all taught that the Senate is the superior institution, with the House a poor relation. But the Senate seems to me to have been transformed into a national embarrassment, a dysfunctional joke.
Morning, Plumbers!
I think I’m going to be following the Dow Jones pretty closely today to see how the market reacts to the passage of Socialist Utopiacare.
Are you into health care stocks in your 401k?
You might want to watch the DJ too.
“Has the United States been captured by a foreign army? The reason why I ask that question is because I keep hearing a lot of Right Wingers saying; “we want to take back our country”. Of course I know that we have not been invaded, but I just wanted to make the point that those Teabaggers, and their so called leaders, in the Republican ranks, are using that meme, to smear Progressives as not being real Americans.
The Republicans are the very same as the Taliban in that regard.They both operate from the same principle that only their Ideology is to be allowed, and all others are Infidels/Non-Americans.”
http://www.winningbackamerica.com/
How short your memories are. Taking back America was the Dem theme from 2000-2008. You all held annusal Take Back America conferences. I’ve provided links to this stuff before when you whined like Liam is whining.
How many times can you liberals repeat the same foolishness?
Browse through these Howard Dean quoatations — take back “our country” from the “evil” Republicans, whom he “hates.”
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Howard_Dean
How is this for demonizing the opposition as unAmerican usurpers:
quarterback | September 15th, 2009 at 09:32 am
On “taking back” the country:
http://www.democrats.org/a/party/a_50_state_strategy/
“We are going to lift up our Party and take back this country for the people who built it.”
quarterback | September 15th, 2009 at 09:34 am
Forgot to attribute the quotation — Howard Dean 2008.
So, once again, the moral of the story for the liberals is, good if liberals say it, evil if conservatives say it.
http://www.ourfuture.org/takebackamerica/2008
Big news out of Iraq, election law looks good to go for January next year.
http://books.google.com/books?id=Tp8KOUY46SsC&dq=take+back+america+howard+dean+amazon&printsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=Bhv4SoaJK8bi8Aaxw5nzCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CBIQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=&f=false
Howard Dean again on taking back America from the evil Republicans who stole it and destroyed democracy.
And Carville and Begala on taking back “our country”:
http://www.amazon.com/Take-Back-Party-Country-Future/dp/074327752X
All, morning roundup posted:
http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/president-obama/the-morning-plum-7/
Apologies for the delay.
Here’s one of those California Republicans, the new darling of the conservative movement. Our state is effectively at a stand still with very little room for compromise because of the 2/3 majority rule and consequently we end up cutting services in order to balance the budget. I wouldn’t wish CA on anyone right now.
“Chuck DeVore, a Republican member of the California State Assembly, is positioning himself as the ideologically pure alternative to Republican Carly Fiorina in the party’s effort to take Sen. Barbara Boxer’s Senate seat in 2010. This past week, he got the seal of approval from the party base: an endorsement by the Senate Conservative Fund and the explicit backing of conservative darling Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.). Among the right-wing netroots, his race against Fiorina has been elevated to top-tier importance: alongside Marco Rubio’s primary bid against Florida Governor Charlie Crist.”
Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/06/chuck-devore-the-new-cons_n_348898.html&cp
“Actually, no. My country is indivisible.”
Actually, the most likely precipitant of eventual division of the country right now is an irridentist movement in the southwest and California. Your liberal policies are laying the groundwork for it right now.
“I think I’m going to be following the Dow Jones pretty closely today to see how the market reacts to the passage of Socialist Utopiacare.”
..and feverishly masturbating to Mein kampf, we get it.
“How many times can you liberals repeat the same foolishness?”
Until the republican party is a party full of civil war re-enacters and garden variety bigots. Mission Accomplished.
What’s wrong Jaxoff, no actual defense of Liam’s foolish comments? Kind of indefensible, huh?
“What’s wrong Jaxoff, no actual defense of Liam’s foolish comments? Kind of indefensible, huh?”
Jaxoff? What I do on top of your mother while her mouth is open is between me and her. Liam doesn’t need defending drunken special needs children are more coherent than your clumsy rebuttal.