What Now Cartoons

Sebelius explains to Matthews that private insurers already deny care "every day" (County Fair, Media Mattes for America)

Medicare Payment Advisory Commission recommends denial of care as a model (by DCblogger at Corrente)
Report: Medicare Expansion Would Not Solve Problems "To illustrate what it might take to save Medicare, the commission describes how primary-care doctors, specialists and hospitals could be reorganized into 'accountable care organizations' whose members would receive bonuses if the organizations met quality and cost targets. To ratchet up the incentives, health-care providers who fail to meet cost and quality targets could be penalized, the report says." If we do not speak out the health insurance parasites denial of care model will be legitimized under the pretext of cost control.

Analysis: Doctors' boos show Obama's tough road (AP)
Barack Obama isn't used to hearing boos. For all the young president's popularity, the response he got Monday from doctors at an American Medical Association meeting was a sign his road is only going to get rockier as he tries to sell his plan to overhaul the nation's health care system. The boos erupted when Obama told the doctors in Chicago he wouldn't try to help them win their top legislative priority -- limits on jury damages in medical malpractice cases... Instead, Obama left the door open to some kind of compromise on malpractice...

Not long ago, doctors' decisions were rarely questioned. Now they are being blamed for a big part of the wasteful spending in the nation's $2.5 trillion health care system. Studies have shown that as much as 30 cents of the U.S. health care dollar may be going for tests and procedures that are of little or no value to patients...

[Obama] promised that Washington would not dictate clinical decisions. And he asked the doctors to imagine a world in which nearly every patient has insurance coverage and they can devote their full attention to the practice of medicine. "You did not enter this profession to be bean-counters and paper-pushers," Obama said. "You entered this profession to be healers -- and that's what our health care system should let you be." That line got him an ovation.
So let's get out our calculators, shall we? If 30% of health care costs are attributable to unnecessary tests (see above), and another 30% of health care costs are attributable to profits, fat salaries for insurance company CEO, and paying clerks to deny coverage and claims (see here), that means ALMOST 60% OF HEALTH CARE EXPENDITURES ARE UNNECESSARY. Quite an eye opener, isn't it?

So now are they going to tell us that if some of those testing companies close their doors, it will mean lost jobs? And that we're just as obligated to keep them in business doing unnecessary tests as we are to maintaining insurance company profits and overhead? That it's our duty?

You wouldn't know it from news reports, but most doctors support national health care (by Jamison Foser at County Fair, Media Mattes for America)
In the comments section of my column about media coverage of the AMA, a reader writes: "Do you think you are fooling people? In this entire article, you never once address what the FAR MAJORITY of Doctors believe. They believe that a nationalized program will be the downfall of coverage and care as we know it... Do your job as a jornalist..." Well.  I'm no journalist; I'm a media critic.  But the reader is correct that responsible reporters should report the facts.  And the facts are that, despite what media reporting about the AMA's recent comments would lead you to believe, most doctors support national health care.

On  Dobbs,  Pilgrim falsely suggests AMA represents "the nation's doctors" (County Fair, Media Mattes for America)

The AMA Does Not Represent Us (Dr. Margaret Flowers and Dr. Carol Paris, members of Physicians for a National Health Program)
[T]he AMA represents less than one-third of America's physicians, and half of those are retired. [Emphasis added.] In fact, the American Medical Student Association endorses universal health care reform. The AMA's longstanding opposition to every effort to change health care financing, including Medicare in the 1960s, has resulted in decades of needless and countless morbidity and mortality. Sixty people die every day in this country simply for lack of access to health care. And instead of being an advocate for the only solution that accomplishes the goals of universal coverage and fiscal viability, the single-payer option, the AMA continues to be primarily a trade association looking out for the financial interests of its members... The AMA does not represent us.

Dean On Conrad's Co-op Plan: Insurance Industry Licking Its Lips (by Sam Stein at the Huffington Post)
Sen. Kent Conrad's proposal for a cooperative approach to health insurance coverage has created a unique challenge for progressive health care advocates who don't object to the idea but find it inadequate... "This is a big mistake," former Gov. Howard Dean told the Huffington Post. "These co-ops will be very weak. Many won't have the half-million members that most experts think is necessary to influence the market... Insurance companies will be licking their lips."... Added SEIU President Andy Stern through his active twitter account: "Health Care Co-op is distraction from need for real competition and cost control. Good idea and attempts to avoid important debate on costs."

A health care flashback (by Jamison Foser at County Fair, Media Mattes for America)
Look what I came across while researching my column about media coverage of the American Medical Association (note the date): "...August 25, 1994... America's corporations - the biggest buyers of health benefits - have been forcing reforms on their own for years. [Emphasis added.] Regardless what happens in Washington they'll keep cutting costs, reducing chances that drug companies, hospitals and other medical providers would seek to sharply raise prices." Just something to keep in mind the next time you see a news report offer industry-friendly spin that things won't be that bad if comprehensive health care reform doesn't happen.

On CNBC, David Goodfriend notes that conservatives have been calling health care reform "socialism" since the 1930s (County Fair, Media Mattes for America)

Obama to single-payer advocates: "go fuck yourselves" (by vastleft at Corrente)
Naturally, he wasn't talking directly to us "liberal bleeding hearts." Instead, he delivered the message to the AMA: "'What are not legitimate concerns are those being put forward claiming a public option is somehow a Trojan horse for a single-payer system,' he said. I'll be honest. There are countries where a single-payer system may be working. But I believe -- and I've even taken some flak from members of my own party for this belief -- that it is important for us to build on our traditions here in the United States.'"
Yes, well, slavery was once a tradition here in the United States, President Obama.

Click here for more politics and media news headlines.

Carolyn Kay                      
MakeThemAccountable.com

Elections - Iranian Style (Mario Piperni)

Barack Obama's Psychology and Foreign Policy - Israel And Iran (Hillary Is 44)
We sympathize with the voters of Michigan and Florida Iran who have witnessed what is clearly a crooked caucus election delegate court with the preferred candidate of powerful interests and American Iranian Big Media getting delegates in an election he never ran in gifted an nomination election.

Protests Flare in Tehran as Opposition Disputes Vote (New York Times)
The streets of Iran's capital erupted in the most intense protests in a decade on Saturday, with riot police officers using batons and tear gas against opposition demonstrators who claimed that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had stolen the presidential election. Witnesses reported that at least one person had been shot dead in clashes with the police in Vanak Square in Tehran. Smoke from burning vehicles and tires hung over the city late Saturday.
It's too bad about the violence, but it's good to know that there are places in the world where people don't just give up and let the powers that be steal elections--or nominations.

Iran's 2009 Election Results Suggest Massive Fraud...Just Like Ohio's in 2004 (The Brad Blog)
It sounds a lot like Ohio 2004. A less than popular old-line incumbent facing massive public demonstrations against him and in favor of his main progressive challenger promising reform; polls that suggest a swell of support for the challenger; unprecedented turnout on Election Day; long lines at polling places; paper ballot shortages and names missing from voter rolls; widespread rumors, concerns and evidence of voter intimidation and vote-rigging, all accompanied nonetheless by a general feeling among the populace that the incumbent has been turned out, only to learn from officials, late on Election Night, that the incumbent has been declared the winner of a second term.

Iran supreme leader orders probe of vote fraud (AP)
Iran's supreme leader ordered Monday an investigation into allegations of election fraud, marking a stunning turnaround by the country's most powerful figure and offering hope to opposition forces who have waged street clashes to protest the re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Stealing an Election, Iranian Edition (Political Wire)
Juan Cole: "I am aware of the difficulties of catching history on the run. Some explanation may emerge for Ahmadinejad's upset that does not involve fraud... But just as a first reaction, this post-election situation looks to me like a crime scene. And here is how I would reconstruct the crime."

Iran reformists held after street clashes (BBC)
Up to 100 members of major Iranian reformist groups have been arrested, accused of orchestrating violence after the disputed presidential election.

Report: Defeated Ahmadinejad rival arrested in Iran (Haaretz)
Iranian presidential candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi was reportedly arrested Saturday following the reformist's defeat at the polls by hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Supporters of Mousavi, the main challenger to Ahmadinejad, have responded to the election with the most serious unrest in Tehran in a decade and claim that the result was the work of a dictatorship.

Ahmadinejad Re-election a Blow to U.S.-Arab Allies (Wall Street Journal)
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's announced election victory Saturday could deal a blow to Washington's Arab allies, who have been alarmed by Iran's regional ambitions and hoped his ouster might moderate them.

Iran election result makes Obama's outreach efforts harder (McClatchy)
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's highly disputed reelection victory will complicate President Barack Obama's push for better relations with the Islamic republic.

White House

Obama in Green Bay: Broke no new ground; said Medicare/Medicaid on course to breaking Federal budget (by jawbone at Corrente)
Alas, the speech is the usual Obama points about health insurance reform: His list of reasons for change lead inexorably to single payer, but he just can't do it. Won't do it. Would be "disruptive."... Obama begins by discussing socialized medicine and, after a few sentences, says that single payer is not socialized medicine. Then he repeats his lament that since we have a different system in place, it's impossible to go with single payer. Altho' he has said in his answer that Medicare is an example of single payer!

COWARDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Democrats hint compromise to win Senate health care deal (McClatchy)
Senate Democrats are offering to scrap a controversial government-sponsored health insurance provision in an effort to win more than a dozen moderate and conservative Republican votes to extend health care coverage to nearly 46 million uninsured Americans.

Should Health Care Reform Be Bipartisan? (by Ezra Klein, Washington Post)
Are 10 Republican votes worth lowering the subsidies from 400 percent of poverty to 300 percent of poverty and leaving out, say, eight million Americans? Are five Republican votes worth leaving out eight million Americans? Two Republican votes? It would be nice if someone published a table or something.

Co-op Health Plan Emerging as a Senate Option (by Robert Pear at The Caucus, New York Times)
Senator Max Baucus, the Montana Democrat who is chairman of the Finance Committee ... said Thursday that the public plan could take the form of an insurance cooperative, owned and operated for the benefit of its members. "I am inclined, and I think the committee is inclined, toward a co-op," Mr. Baucus said. "It's not going to be public, we won't call it public, but it will be tough enough to keep insurance companies' feet to the fire," Mr. Baucus said of the co-op.
Isn't that what Blue Cross and Blue Shield were supposed to be? Look how well that worked out.

"Strong public option" = "peace in our time" (by vastleft at Corrente)
Once you accept the "public option" frame, it's "goodnight, nurse!" for real health-insurance reform. It's only happening about everywhere in the liberal blogosphere. OTOH, maybe a compromise with the Blue Dogs, Republicans, and death-by-spreadsheet crowd will work out just fine. It would be irresponsible not to equivocate.

Going Postal: Reid's New Defense of Public Health Care (The Note, ABC News, thanks to Alegre)
"I'm confident both private companies and the option of public plan can live in harmony," Reid said on the Senate floor [Thursday]. "When you send a birthday present to a relative to -- say I want to send something to one of my children in Nevada, the products that I choose can be sent by FedEx, UPS, DHL, or the United States Postal Service... The Postal Service may not be perfect, but the public option is there, and the private companies, FedEx, UPS, know they cannot rip you off or [be] slacking on their service," Reid said.

Health Care Overhaul Opponents Use Selective Stats (All Things Considered, NPR)
It's become one of the most commonly cited statistics by opponents of the health overhaul being put together by Democrats in Congress: Creating a new government-run public health insurance plan would result in 119 million people losing their private insurance... The point of the study was to show that the number of people who would eventually join a government-sponsored public insurance plan would vary -- dramatically -- depending on how that plan is designed... For example, Sheils says, Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer of New York "has a plan which would require the public program to pay private payer rates -- the same rates that other private insurers have to pay -- and under that scenario we get only between 10 and 12 million people dropping private coverage."

Good Gravy. Grassley calls Schumer's plan "obnoxious" (by Alegre)
At least Nancy Pelosi is standing up for the public option.  She's taken a head-count and told HuffPo that she won't have the votes to pass a reform bill unless it includes a public option.  She also said that Conrad's compromise (a system of co-ops) won't be enough.  It's got to include a public option or no deal. Meanwhile Grassley continues to be the mouthpiece for the party of NO when it comes to health care reform:  "No public option, no employee mandate to either provide insurance or pay a penalty, and nothing that leads to rationing of health care."  If you stick to Grassley's criteria here we won't have ANY changes to our current (and messed up) system.  

Well I've got news for Grassley... we've already got rationing.  With nearly 50 million Americans living without access to health care services, I defy him to show us how anything they could do in Congress could make things worse than they already are.

The Rise of Right-Wing Violence (by Pareene at Gawker)

When the Department of Homeland Security issued a report warning of potential violence by "right-wing extremists," the right-wingers of the internet were enraged. Then some right-wing extremists started killing people. Three--three!--political shootings by right-wing extremists does actually make a trend, mostly because it's not accidental that the crazies are turning violent now. Right-wing domestic terror, weirdly, spikes when the right-wing media step up the intensity and violence of their rhetoric--which they happen to do when Democrats are in charge...

What happens is Scott Roeder, the Kansas resident who murdered Dr. George Tiller at church because he was an anti-abortion fanatic with ties to, hey, a right-wing extremist group. There was Jim Adkisson, who shot up a Unitarian church, killing two, because he hated liberals and gays. And now there is the White Supremacist who just shot up the goddamn Holocaust Museum. He is, of course, named "James Von Brunn," and he is 89 years old! And, obviously, he writes crazy things, on the internet. He is also a World War II vet? For the Allies! [Emphasis added.]

James W. Von Brunn's anti-Semitic screed (by Mark Benjamin, Salon)
The alleged Holocaust Museum shooter published a book called "Kill the Best Gentiles." Read selections here.

How Many Crazed Gunmen Is it Going to Take? (Truthdig)
President Obama said in response "we must remain vigilant against anti-Semitism." Sure, but how about getting a little vigilant against guns? The alleged shooter served six years in prison after showing up at a Federal Reserve meeting with a sawed-off shotgun among other weapons, but he obviously had no trouble rearming.
To stop the discussion from going in that direction, then, what kind of creativity can we expect from the right wing? See the following stories to get an idea.

On Fox, Jim Lacamp says Obama admin's "class warfare" helps set "the stage for social unrest" (County Fair, Media Matters for America)

Fox News hosts "terror expert Bob Newman" to discuss Holocaust Museum shooting (County Fair, Media Matters for America)
[Wednesday], Neil Cavuto hosted Bob Newman -- a Colorado radio host who Cavuto presented as a "terror expert" -- to discuss the shooting at the Holocaust Museum. During the segment, Newman raised questions about whether President Obama's recent visit to a concentration camp or his statement about Israeli settlements were factors in the shooting... Cavuto didn't say anything else about Newman's background, so here are a couple highlights from his radio show, The Gunny Bob Show. Newman called for all Muslim immigrants to the U.S. "to be required by law to wear a GPS tracking bracelet at all times"... Newman said of "terrorist-hugging" Obama: "What are you gonna do, Obama, come to Denver and try ... to whip my white ass?"

Newsmax.com publishes column, "Obama Breeds Climate of Hate Against Jews," linking Obama to Holocaust Museum shooting (County Fair, Media Matters for America)

Right-Wingers Blame Left-Wingers and Muslims for Holocaust Museum Shooting (by The Cajun Boy at Gawker)
First off, Beck went on his show [Wednesday night] and performed perhaps the most stunning feat of pulling one out of the old anus in the history of stunning pulling one out of the ole anus feats. Beck, with a straight face mind you, looked into the camera and said that America as it stands today is a "boiling pot" fueled by extremists groups like Al Qaeda and 9/11 truthers who are sowing the seeds of extremism and hatred in this country. Then, still with a straight face, Beck also warned his viewers that more violence is likely to come in the future, that "more nutjobs are going to coming out of the woodwork now," that all of this is part of the "perfect storm" he's been trying to warn everyone about, a "perfect storm" which will result in a "witchhunt" that will focus on two groups of people. Can you guess who they might be?

Jews and--Conservatives!

IT HAPPENED LAST TIME: (by Bob Somerby at the Daily Howler)
By "last time," we mean the last time we had a Democrat president. As you may recall, that president was Bill Clinton--and crazy stories spread far and wide about his intolerable ways. The liberal world ran off and hid in the woods--and, to all intents and purposes, the "mainstream press corps" didn't exist. And sure enough! By September 1994, a man name Frank Corder decided to act. This incident largely went down the memory hole, like most misconduct directed at Clinton... Were unbalanced people driven to act by all the crazy talk about Clinton? Are unbalanced people being so moved by Obama's rise today? By crazy and semi-crazy talk about him?...

Is it time for the mainstream press to come to terms with America's underworld discourse? For decades, the mainstream press has tended to avoid the cauldron of craziness bubbling beneath the surface of our public discussions. In the 1990s, the insider press was closely involved with the spread of crazy talk about Clinton, then Gore. Today, the insider press is much less interested in spewing wild tales about Obama. But the mainstream press corps loves to avoid all such difficult, unpleasant regions. Isn't it time to report it out straight? There are crazy areas of our discourse, in which people are encouraged to believe crazy things. Yes, we know: Powerful people are sometimes involved in these wild promulgations. But isn't it time to report it out straight: That there's lunacy inside our discourse?

The worm turns and turns... (by Joseph Cannon at Cannonfire)
From Joan Walsh in today's Salon... "...[I]t's hard not to think about the extreme right-wing rhetoric, especially about Barack Obama, and whether it could conceivably lead to more right-wing violence." What about the tons of hate-talk offered by the pro-Obama forces during the campaign? What about the transformation of Kos, D.U., AmericaBlog and TPM into festering cesspools of cyber-rage? What about the death-threats? Apparently, that genre of extremist rhetoric does not trouble Joan Walsh.

"All that is required is leadership." (by Tengrain at Mock, Paper, Scissors)
Gee, Rachel, maybe you shouldn't have been such a Hillary basher last year. She's pushing for State Department employees to receive the same benefits for same sex partners as for married spouses. Click through to watch the video.

Dismay over Obama's Turnabout on 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' (Time)
The endorsement of "Don't ask, don't tell" by the Administration marks the latest rightward tack by Obama. The President denounced many of George W. Bush's national-security policies during the campaign, but in office has adopted more conservative positions, including endorsing military commissions to try purported terrorists, and declining to release a second batch of photographs depicting alleged U.S. maltreatment of Iraqi detainees. His stance on "Don't ask, don't tell" may be more surprising, because Obama aides have made clear the President wants the ban lifted eventually.

Obama Not Being Trotsky in Disguise: Good or Bad? (by Pareene at Gawker)
Obama's philosophy of government is all about, in Rahm Emanuel's phrase, "the art of the possible."... Kevin Baker's essay in the upcoming Harper's, "Barack Hoover Obama" [subscription required] ... addresses the inkling of dissatisfaction we have each time we hear that [Rahm] Emanuel phrase repeated: don't you have, right now, a rather historic opportunity to redefine what the "possible" means? "... "We are back in Evan Bayh territory here, espousing a 'pragmatism' that is not really pragmatism at all, just surrender to the usual corporate interests. The common thread running through all of Obama's major proposals right now is that they are labyrinthine solutions designed mainly to avoid conflict... They bear the seeds of their own defeat."

Annals of Worshipful Mindlessness (by Arthur Silber at the Power of Narrative)
In a story about the Obamas' "date night" that included attendance at a Broadway play, we learn the following: "Then it was up to Broadway, where they had tickets at the Belasco Theatre for 'Joe Turner's Come and Gone,' a play by August Wilson about a man coming to terms with the history of slavery. 'I'm nervous, excited, honored,' said Andre Holland, who plays character Jeremy Furlow, before the show. 'It's like in Shakespearean times, when the king would come to the show.'"...

This is part and parcel of the undue reverence and obeisance offered to the U.S. president ("the biggest standing ovation of the night"), as the ultimate representative of authority, a notably mistaken and dangerous state of affairs. Given the actual behavior of almost all U.S. presidents for the last hundred years (and longer), including the numerous wars and interventions they have instigated and the millions of innocent people they have caused to be murdered, to say nothing of their actions on the domestic front, those presidents may be entirely deserving of many responses; reverence and obeisance are decidedly not among them.
Arthur gives the quote by Evan Thomas of Newsweek that I mentioned on Monday, comparing Obama to God.

Limbaugh: Obama has "god complex," "imposing his values" on U.S. economy and "destroying it" (County Fair, Media Matters for America)

The habit of skepticism (by John Caruso at The Distant Ocean, thanks to Arthur Silber at the Power of Narrative)
[T]here's scarcely a sentiment in Obama's Cairo speech that wasn't already spoken by George W. Bush.  And yet when Obama offers the same platitudes--sometimes in the exact same words--credulous liberals are seized by fits of swooning and enraptured praise just shy of glossolalia.  Obama's speech wasn't some epoch-defining moment of transformation from a "transcendent leader"; it was a moment of polished stagecraft from a consummate salesman for American empire and corporate capitalism.  It was the same old wine in a lovely new bottle, from someone who's already shown us repeatedly that his words aren't matched by his actions.  And had it been their arch-nemesis George Bush giving this speech instead of the Anointed One, they'd have had no trouble seeing that.

One can only hope that some day these people will embrace the habit of skepticism for all politicians, not just the ones on the other side, and finally and fully accept that fine words alone mean nothing at all--no matter who speaks them.

Bronstein on Obama and the press: "This guy is good. Really good. And, frankly, so far, we're not" (SFGate.com, via Poynter Online)
"You can't blame powerful people for wanting to play the press to peddle self-perpetuating mythology," writes Phil Bronstein. "But you can blame the press, already suffocating under a massive pile of blame, guilt, heavy debt and sinking fortunes, for being played. Some of the time, it seems we're even enthusiastically jumping into the pond without even being pushed. Is there an actual limit to the number of instances you can be the cover of Newsweek?"

'Max, You Work For Us' (by Susie at Suburban Guerilla)
Demonstrators outside Max Baucus's Missoula MT office.
Click through to watch the video.

Paying for Universal Health Coverage (Editorial, New York Times)
For Congress and the administration to keep the promise of comprehensive health care reform, they will have to find the political will to pay for universal coverage and other investments that are needed right away but will not produce quick savings.
WRONG, New York Times, Congress and the administration don't HAVE to pay for universal coverage. After all, they didn't HAVE to pay for giving away trillions to the bankers and the insurance companies, did they? Isn't it strange that when it comes to helping the already rich keep their Picassos and their yachts, the money can be found, but when it comes to allowing ordinary families to keep their meager savings as opposed to losing it all to major illness, there's no money?

Limiting the Tax Exclusion for Employer-Sponsored Insurance Can Help Pay for Health Reform (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities)
Universal Coverage May Be Out of Reach Otherwise
Same comment here. The only thing stopping us from getting universal coverage is the fact that to do it, we have to take the profit out of what we now call health care. The health insurance executives demand their entitlement, too. They must be able to keep THEIR Picassos and yachts.

So let's start another us vs. them meme, shall we?
Will health insurance 'haves' pay for 'have-nots'? (MSNBC)
As part of a health insurance reform package now before Congress, some of the 164 million Americans who are covered by employer-provided health plans could be asked to give up at least part of the longstanding tax exemption granted to such compensation. It's an idea likely to be met with howls of opposition if it makes it into the final version of health insurance legislation that President Barack Obama is pushing. The idea of limiting the tax break for employer-provided insurance gained momentum last week, when Obama told senators that he'd consider it as one ingredient of the  health insurance reform bill he wants Congress to pass by early August, when the Senate starts a one-month recess...

Obama's new openness to the idea stands in contrast to what he said six months ago as a presidential candidate, when he harshly criticized his Republican rival, Sen. John McCain, for proposing that employer-provided benefits should be taxed.

Harry and Louise Need Health Reform (by E.J. Dionne)
Fifty million new customers. Those may be the most important words to remember as the health care reform effort hits its stride this week. Many have expressed amazement that the interest groups historically opposed to fixing the health system seem ready to work with the reformers. Their public-spiritedness reflects enlightened self-interest: The health system is so unstable that even the drug industry and the insurance companies are worried that it will crash on top of them. Health care reform could bail out these interests by adding the currently uninsured -- fast approaching 50 million people -- to their customer base, and by preventing more individuals and employers from dropping insurance altogether...

So by all means, let's welcome the drug and insurance companies to the health care bargaining table. But let's also remember that they are sitting at that table as a matter of urgent necessity. Negotiators should bear in mind that health care reform is as vital for them as it is for the now underinsured Harry and Louise.
Forever the naïve one, aren't you, E.J.? Remember Krugman: 1. Don't trust the insurance companies. 2. Don't trust the insurance companies.

How DC Centrism Makes For Bad Politics and Bad Policy (by Mike Lux at Open Left, thanks to Susie at Suburban Guerilla)
There's  been a lot of talk in Washington, DC lately of a "new, centrist compromise" gaining momentum in terms of how to fund health care reform, and that is taxing health care benefits. The problems? It's not new, it's only centrist in the bizarre inside-the-Beltway world of what qualifies for centrist, it's one sure way to make health care reform incredibly unpopular, and it's a bad policy idea. Remember how popular Ira Magaziner's "health alliances" were in the Clinton health reform battle? This would be worse.

How Pharma and Insurance Intend to Kill the Public Option, And What Obama and the Rest of Us Must Do (by Robert Reich)
Big Pharma and Big Insurance are gaining ground in their campaign to kill the public option in the emerging health care bill. You know why, of course. They don't want a public option that would compete with private insurers and use its bargaining power to negotiate better rates with drug companies. They argue that would be unfair. Unfair? Unfair to give more people better health care at lower cost? To Pharma and Insurance, "unfair" is anything that undermines their profits...

The concrete is being mixed and about to be poured. And after it's poured and hardens, universal health care will be with us for years to come in whatever form it now takes. Let your representative and senators know you want a public option without conditions or triggers -- one that gives the public insurer bargaining leverage over drug companies, and pushes insurers to do what they've promised to do. Don't wait until the concrete hardens and we've lost this battle.

Robert Reich Sounds the Alarm (by Susie at Suburban Guerrilla)
You can contact your congress members and senators here or here. Let's fill those voice mail boxes, clog those fax machines, lead sit-ins in their offices. Surely you can afford to take a day off to save your country's future!

Single payer silence will be broken in the House, 6/10 at 10:30 AM (by gob at Corrente)
My local single payer activist sends the following: "The Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions Subcommittee of the House Education and Labor Committee will hold a hearing titled 'Examining the Single Payer Health Care Option' on Wednesday, June 10th at 10:30am in 2175 Rayburn House Office Building. You may be able to watch via webcast. She adds: "Contact C-SPAN and let them know we would like them to carry it. C-SPAN's Main Number is: (202) 737-3220."

Howard Dean's Scream: 'We Need Real Health Insurance Reform' (Politics Daily)
Back in 2004, as a Democratic presidential hopeful, the former Vermont governor was outraged about the Iraq war. Now it's the U.S. health care system - in particular, at a union hall here Friday, the tale of a breast cancer survivor who said she was denied chemotherapy for months because she didn't have insurance. Without offering any details, she said she finally did manage to qualify for care - by divorcing her husband. "I had to get rid of him so that I could live," the woman told Dean. "I'm proud to say we're still together." She added tearfully that she can't get life insurance, "so if I die my family will pretty much be trying to figure out how to bury me."

"First of all, let me say just one thing," Dean said. And then, in the space of a tiny pause, he rocketed into high dudgeon. "There is not one other industrialized democracy on the face of this earth that somebody with that story would happen! Not one other country! Not one! How can America be like this? This is America for God's sakes," he shouted, to cheers and applause. "It just makes me furious."... "This is a disgrace and that is why we need real health insurance reform." This is Dean's latest crusade, prodding Congress - and prodding Americans to prod Congress - to pass the type of health care reform President Obama proposed last year on the campaign trail. That is, health care that gives people a choice between private insurance and a competing government-run plan.

Howard Dean on Real Healthcare Reform (by Susie at Suburban Guerrilla)
If Obama really cared about actual healthcare reform, wouldn't he have picked Howard Dean to head it?

Special Report asks of Obama: "Islam or Isn't He?" (County Fair, Media Matters for America)

The Weekly Standard and its Arabic freak-out (by Eric Boehlert at County Fair, Media Matters for America)
If we've confirmed anything this week about the GOP Noise Machine it's that its members' heads pretty much explode at the mere mention of Islam or Muslims in the context of the Obama president... The sheer xenophobia though, and the blatant disdain for all things Islamic and Arabic, doesn't get much more transparent that [a] kooky blog post at the Weekly Standard in response to Obama's two-syllable response to the king of Saudi Arabia: "Shukrun," which is Arabic for thank you... [A]t the Arab-hating Weekly Standard that set off all kinds of alarms bells.

Liz Cheney: Obama Wants To Hold Hands With Terrorists (by Greg Sargent at The Plum Line)
That's not really an exaggeration! On an appearance on MSNBC, Liz Cheney appeared to say that Obama's speech in Cairo today showed that he wants to deal with terrorists by "hand-holding."
Click through to watch the video.

Pagliarulo: Obama should do what Reagan would have, tell moderate Muslims "screw you," love us or "live in your cave" (County Fair, Media Matters for America)

Limbaugh on Obama speech: "This is a call for the end of sovereignty" (County Fair, Media Matters for America)

Hannity airs Obama "apology tour" montage (County Fair, Media Matters for America)

ABC News thinks Sean Hannity's anti-Obama screeds = news (by Eric Boehlert at County Fair, Media Matters for America)
We noted earlier that the news crew at ABC dashed to post a bulletin about how right-wing talker Sean Hannity hated Obama's Muslim speech [Thursday]. Because at ABC, Hannity's important and insightful. A couple hours later here's how the Note summed up the reaction to Obama's speech: "...'This is an extension of what has become an apology tour, that America is an arrogant country," Hannity said... The instant reaction from Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, per ABC's Jake Tapper: It was a 'wonderful speech,' she said."

At ABC News, Sean Hannity's reaction to a foreign policy speech is on par with the reaction of the United States' Secretary of State. Behold your liberal media at work.

How Fox News Defies Ratings Gravity (by Jeff Bercovici at AOL Daily Finance)
In the just-ended May ratings period, Fox once again manhandled the competition, posting big gains in both primetime and full-day while MSNBC stumbled and CNN plunged headlong... It's tempting to ascribe Fox's surge to the change in administration. There's something to this. Political media outlets, whether print, web or broadcast, tend to flourish in opposition. Certainly that was the case with MSNBC, which rode the crests of Obamamania to new highs last fall, only to settle to earth once campaigning gave way to governing. Even the network's powerhouse, Countdown with Keith Olbermann, was down in May (a 20 percent drop among viewers 25-54), the first time that's happened in almost three years.

But Fox has never fit comfortably into this mold. When George Bush took office, analysts and competitors predicted Fox would fizzle without Bill Clinton to beat up on. Instead, it merely opened up an ever-growing lead on CNN. Just a few months ago, the chin-strokers were thinking that maybe it was actually Bush and his War on Terror that had been propping up Fox and that the dawn of the Obama era would prove Fox's undoing. That's clearly not happening.
What Fox News gives its audience is a worldview that it reinforces every single day, many times a day. How else could almost 30% of the population still have believed, when he left office, that George Bush did anything worthwhile as president?

What so-called progressives like those on MSNBC have tried to do is mimic the us-vs.-them mentality that Fox News uses so successfully. But I don't believe that reinforcing tribal hatred and propensity for exclusion is the way to build a more progressive, more tolerant, dare I say more moral society. But Obama's kind of moralizing isn't the way to do it, either.

Too bad we have so few voices explaining, convincing, teaching. Too bad so many people have bought in to the smartass model of social interaction that they don't think teaching and being taught, convincing and being convinced, is worthwhile. Too bad for our social structures. Too bad for all of us.

Click here for more politics and media news headlines.

Carolyn Kay                      
MakeThemAccountable.com

Pennsylvania Paper Flunks U.S. History, Publishes Obama Death Threat (by John Cook at Gawker)
Someone placed a personal ad in the Warren (Penn.) Times-Observer calling for Barack Obama's assassination. But to understand the ad you have to know history and stuff, so no one at the paper really got it... The ad reads simply, "May Obama Follow in the Footsteps of Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, and Kennedy." Cute, right? But wait a minute--what do those great men all have in common?... The Times-Observer realized that they had published and distributed a call for the assassination of a sitting U.S. president early [Thursday] morning, and now the feds are investigating, because Obama is a power-mad socialist who hates free speech.

Will Obama Call the Murder of George Tiller What it is-Terrorism? (by bostonboomer at The Confluence)
President Obama released a statement...: "I am shocked and outraged by the murder of Dr. George Tiller as he attended church services this morning. However profound our differences as Americans over difficult issues such as abortion, they cannot be resolved by heinous acts of violence."... It was pretty mealy-mouthed. Abortion is a "difficult issue?" Why not take an opportunity to defend the courageous doctors who keep helping women at the risk of their own lives? Why not defend the rights of women to make decisions about their own bodies? Oh yeah, because he doesn't believe those things. Never mind....

Time To Revisit Criticism Of DHS Report On "Right Wing Extremists"? (by Greg Sargent at The Plum Line)
You may recall the enormous controversy that erupted in April over a Department of Homeland Security report that assessed the threat of "right wing extremists." The story provoked days of nonstop cable chatter, and DHS chief Janet Napolitano ultimately apologized. Fast forward to the huge and horrible news yesterday that late-term abortion doctor George Tiller was shot dead by a man who reportedly posted on the blog of the anti-abortion group Operation Rescue. Maybe we should take another look at all that criticism?

A history of violence on the antiabortion fringe (Los Angeles Times)
Bombings. Butyric acid attacks. Sniper shootings. Letters filled with fake anthrax. These are some of the tactics used over the years by antiabortion extremists.

Suspect supported killing abortion providers, friends say (McClatchy)
The suspect in custody for the slaying of Wichita abortion doctor George Tiller was a member of an anti-government group in the 1990s and a staunch opponent of abortion.

Homegrown Terrorists (by Susie at Suburban Guerilla)
I can only presume that the person or persons responsible for this will soon be in Gitmo? And that the government will crack down on the hate merchants if they can?

Internet posts draw police interest after doctor's murder (McClatchy)
The angry reaction from both sides of the abortion debate that exploded onto the Internet in the aftermath of the murder Sunday of one of the few doctors in the United States willing to perform late-term abortions has drawn the attention of police who are trying to understand if George Tiller's killer acted alone.
They should take a look at the Fox News Channel.

Click here for more politics and media news headlines.

Carolyn Kay                      
MakeThemAccountable.com

New York Post Goes Schizo on Sotomayor (by Hamilton Nolan at Gawker)
The New York Post cannot contain its excitement about our new Hispanic Supreme Court nominee! The millions of Hispanic people in NYC are encouraged to pick up a copy right away, and celebrate!... Then there's the part where the Post takes care of its natural inclination, which is to hate Sonia Sotomayor and all she stands for. Rich Lowry has Xeroxed the Republican talking points and pasted them directly in every issue of the Post, with Elmer's; then there's the paper's own editorial. They're not as sure as their own cover that this whole "Latina lady" thing is going to work out.

I am a killjoy (by Avedon Carol at The Sideshow)
I suppose I'm expected to ready myself for a fight to defend Sonia Sotomayor as a Supreme Court nominee against an onslaught of GOP hissy-fit in which she is falsely cast as some kind of a screaming (literally) liberal rather than a mostly-conservative (though not completely insane) jurist... [F]riends, the GOP hissy-fit is just convenient cover for the sell-out Dem leadership sliding yet another corporate conservative in with the Supremes without most people waking up to the fact that that's what they're doing... The Dems don't fight back against the fake right-wing outrage because it serves their purposes...

Oh, we've destroyed the conservative movement. The country is with us. No one likes the Republicans anymore. And yet even my favorite outraged lefty blogospheric voices are right where [Obama] wants them - defending a conservative president's choices as he destroys liberal America once and for all.

Obama's Anti-Roberts (by E.J. Dionne Jr.)
Republicans would be foolish to fight the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court because she is the most conservative choice that President Obama could have made.
All those years observing politics up close and personal, and you still don't get it, do you, E.J.? It's not about how conservative she is. Republicans will fight her BECAUSE SHE'S A DEMOCRAT. Wake up, please, E.J., we could use your voice in the battle to save this country from the right-wing fanatics.

'Not a dyed in the wool liberal' (Politico)
Some liberal legal groups are raising questions about Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor, citing her relatively moderate judicial record and her skimpy paper trail on crucial issues like abortion, gay marriage and the death penalty. "She is a mixed bag. I would not call her a left liberal," Marjorie Cohn, president of the progressive National Lawyers Guild, said in an interview on Air America.

Your Breakfast Read (by mablue2 at The Confluence)
I don't know what type of SC Justice Judge Sotomayor would be. However, I find it aggravating that Republican Presidents are allow to choose absolute Right Wing freaks like Rehnquist, Fat Tony Scalia, Sam Alito, John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, they can confer with the likes of Chuck Dobson, but a Dem President with a super majority cannot choose a "dyed in the wool liberal"? Liberal activist are told to "get on board or get out of the way."?
Not the exact equivalent of George Bush's "Who cares what you think?", but close.

On Sotomayor, Some Abortion Rights Backers Are Uneasy (by Charlie Savage, New York Times)
In nearly 11 years as a federal appeals court judge, President Obama's choice for the Supreme Court, Sonia Sotomayor, has never directly ruled on whether the Constitution protects a woman's right to an abortion. But when she has written opinions that touched tangentially on abortion disputes, she has reached outcomes in some cases that were favorable to abortion opponents. Now, some abortion rights advocates are quietly expressing unease that Judge Sotomayor may not be a reliable vote to uphold Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 abortion rights decision.

PhillyDeals: Sotomayor's record is pro-insurer, not insured (by Joseph N. DiStefano, Philadelphia Inquirer, thanks to Susie at Suburban Guerilla
As a federal judge, Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor's decisions in insurance disputes "have overwhelmingly been in favor of insurers" and against policyholders, says Philadelphia insurance lawyer Randy Maniloff, partner atWhite & Williams L.L.P. "Judge Sotomayor has been very, very insurer-friendly during her time on the bench," Maniloff told me after reviewing a long list of her cases and appeal rulings. "Has she ever ruled in favor of a policyholder?" Maniloff asked. On Sotomayor's docket, between insurers and their customers, "it's insurers by a landslide," he said.

Yet,
Discrimination Case Could Pose Problems for Sotomayor (AP)
In 2008, Sotomayor was one of three judges on a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit who upheld a trial court's ruling rejecting the reverse discrimination claims by 19 white firefighters, one of whom was also Hispanic. The plaintiffs claimed that the city of New Haven violated their rights by throwing out the results of an officers' promotion exam in which minority candidates received disproportionately low scores.