He may be slightly to the left of Ribbentropp (spelling?) and Paisley, but his political instincts are sometime worth listening to to see what the righties are afraid is their weakness.
If the Blue Dogs abandon health care reform, I'm sure Buchannan sees the opening here to split Obama's center-left coalition. That's his real goal. Split the Democratic coalition.
It pains me to see the left on this blog and others basically walking into the trap.
Obama and Dean have the right ideas on this. Trust them. Don't hand a victory to the Buchannan's of the world by being so frickin' pure that you don't see the dagger in your enemy's hand until it's sticking out of your ribs.
]]>Muahahahahahahaha. !
]]>"Malefactors of great wealth", Teddy Roosevelt:
"Too much cannot be said against the men of wealth who sacrifice everything to getting wealth. There is not in the world a more ignoble character than the mere money-getting American, insensible to every duty, regardless of every principle, bent only on amassing a fortune, and putting his fortune only to the basest uses —whether these uses be to speculate in stocks and wreck railroads himself, or to allow his son to lead a life of foolish and expensive idleness and gross debauchery, or to purchase some scoundrel of high social position, foreign or native, for his daughter. Such a man is only the more dangerous if he occasionally does some deed like founding a college or endowing a church, which makes those good people who are also foolish forget his real iniquity. These men are equally careless of the working men, whom they oppress, and of the State, whose existence they imperil. There are not very many of them, but there is a very great number of men who approach more or less closely to the type, and, just in so far as they do so approach, they are curses to the country. (Forum, February 1895.) Mem. Ed. XV, 10; Nat. Ed. XIII, 9."
From when the GOP, and its leaders, had a soul....
http://www.theodoreroosevelt.org/TR%20Web%20Book/TR_CD_to_HTML364.html
]]>As posted elsewhere:
I think continued appearances by the old befuddled bulls and various winger wankers has one possible benefit.
It is slowly (I hope) making credible the impression in the minds of moderates and independents that the Republican party leadership is almost totally bereft of any significant ideas, and do not really represent the majority interests of the citizens on major issues like health care, or even defense and foreign policy. More than that, or perhaps because of that, the GOP leadership, such as it is, is focusing solely on petty, partisan political tactics.
It's really, really hard to take these characters seriously any longer. It's like watching Michigan play football the last couple of years. Just pathetic (and I say that as a Penn State fan!)
In the end, I believe a majority of the country will reject this leadership, their arguments, and the foaming fanatics that they permit to be seen as the defining mentality of the so-called conservative movement these days.
My favorite theory this week is that we're watching the death-throes of the GOP, out of which a new conservative party will be born -- Whig-->Republican anyone?-- but it's not clear yet if that'll happen.
]]>Sausage. Being. Made.
]]>You had me down through this:
"Yeah, it's all them stupid and greedy people. How does that help? The point of a political analysis is to identify what needs to be changed to get ahead. If you asked a general "Why are we losing the war" and the answer were "because of the enemy," what would you do?
The industry is defending its profits. It is doing it by mobilizing an angry reactionary subsection of the U.S., and it is helped by a pro-capital media.
Not only we know that, but we knew that even before the battle was engaged. What did you expect, that all those who earn rent from the venality of the health care system would roll over at the sight of His Progressiveness? Did you expect those politically invested in rolling back the New Deal to suddenly decide that Sweden is the way of the future?
What's the point of post after post about how dreadful and shameless these townhall thugs are? What does it accomplish? Except making an excuse for failure. Is that the goal?"
Then your policy suggestions go right off the cliff of bitterness.
I'm not saying you're totally wrong about Obama's response so far, and the entrenched oligarchy and all that. But I simply don't share your gloomy and demoralized view that all is going down to utter ruin, and that the only solution is some sort of (pretty vague) mass mobilization.
Gee. Sounds like the Vietnam protests all over again to me.
What your argument fails to take into account is that it's ALWAYS harder to defend a mishmosh of half-baked proposals typed into 3-4 as-yet unresolved congressional drafts of parts of the whole. It's always easier to yell and scream and poop your pants and scare grandma, while proposing nothing real in return, if as you say, your goal is to derail, delay or otherwise prevent a reform that will cut profits to the profligate insurance industry.
What would your organizing theme be for these glorious and noble events you envision? How would they be anything but the flip side of Bubba yelling at a congressperson on TV?
I'm sick to death of the feeble whining about all the stupid bad people on the other side. Fact is, they're not all stupid (not more than most people, anyway). And most of them aren't bad. They're misinformed and scared, lots of them. They've been lied to so long that they never ever stop to think that it's being done again.
If someone's afraid that you're going to take away what little they have, they'll fight like hell. And raising the heat only scares them more, and makes them fight even harder.
What more do you whackos want? Eggs in your beer?
Give 'em and inch...
]]>http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/8/9/764064/-Alright-Republicans,-We-Give-Up
Dear Republicans,
Over the past week, we have seen your passionate protests and heard your concerns about Democratic proposals for health care reform. We have considered your insightful and well reasoned arguments, and on behalf of progressives everywhere, I am here to say: OK! We give up! We are willing to compromise on the proposals that concern you. You've won! Yay!
In accordance with your cogent and potent criticisms, these are the terms of our concession:
1. We will not euthanize your grandmother. This is the big one, and I really hope you guys appreciate how much of a concession this is on behalf of the progressive movement. Since the days of the Bull Moose Party, progressives have wanted nothing more than to slaughter old people by the millions. That much is obvious. After all, if we wanted senior citizens to have long and healthy lives, why would we have created Social Security and Medicare? Think about it. Death to grannies has long been the core of progressive policy, so it's not without some consternation that we give it up. So there: no euthanizing old people. You've got it.
2. Rahm Emanuel's brother will not kill Sarah Palin's baby. While this will require us to gut HR 3200 "America's Health Choices and Murder Sarah Palin's Baby Act of 2009," we're currently working with Henry Waxman to remove the extensive Sarah Palin's baby-killing provisions from the final bill. While this will probably cost us Andrew Sullivan's support, we recognize that this is a necessary sacrifice for securing broad bipartisan support of health care reform.
3. The government will not nationalize hospitals and other health service providers. This is another big one. Though the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has correctly pointed out that current Democratic proposals involve adopting the British health care system, we now recognize that this is not politically viable. The final bill, accordingly, will not involve the nationalization of hospitals and other health service providers. This will be a major setback to Obama's well known communist agenda, but again, we progressives agree with the Blue Dogs that we need to reach a broad national consensus by responding to Republican concerns.
4. We will make the health care reform bill available for all Americans to read as soon as possible. I know that conservatives and pundits have been eagerly anticipating an opportunity to read the final health care reform bill, and after extensive discussion, we have decided to comply with your request. While we would like to have unseen drafts languishing in committee forever, we have asked Senate Democrats like Max Baucus and Kent Conrad to deliver a bill as soon as possible in order to allow the public to read it. As you know, progressives wanted nothing more than to keep these drafts hidden for as long as possible, but in the interests of transparency and bipartisan consensus, we recognize that it's vital to move the legislative process forward. In fact, it is our hope that Baucus and Conrad will return from the August recess early in order to ensure that the public has as much time as possible to inspect their work.
5. We will not subsidize abortions with your hard-earned tax dollars. Despite the fact that both FactCheck.org and Politifact insist that we already made this concession months ago, we're going to make extra-special-super sure that we did. Just give me a second...
...
...
...
... yep, we did.
6. We will not allow the government to have direct access to your bank account. I know several conservatives I've spoken to are deeply concerned about this measure, and while we progressives are always looking for new ways for the government to unlawfully violate your privacy and steal your money, we have decided to remove this provision from the final bill. While we may include a way for individuals to voluntarily set up an electronic funds transfer with their insurance provider, we will no longer push for government access to all individual bank accounts. You've won this one.
7. We will not provide illegal immigrants with unlimited free health care. Though progressives want nothing more than to provide unlimited social services to illegal immigrants while denying them to everyone else, we now recognize that this plan was, perhaps, a bit inequitable. However, while they will not be receiving unlimited free health care, each illegal immigrant will still receive a pretty pony. I'm sorry, but we have to draw the line somewhere.
8. Private health insurance will not be eliminated. Though, as Drudge recently pointed out with a damning YouTube video, the long-stated Republican goal of moving away from employer-based coverage somehow means "eliminating private insurance" when Obama talks about the same thing, we've decided to preserve private insurance plans for those who want them. However, we have yet to convince ultra-socialist Charles Krauthammer to drop his communist crusade against employer-based (i.e., according to Drudge, "all private") coverage.
9. You will not be issued a "National Health Insurance ID." While we thought this was a fun idea, the final version of the health care reform bill will not require you to have any kind of ID when you're pulled over for drunk driving or found loitering outside of a military base. In fact, you are hereby encouraged not to carry any proof of insurance whatsoever. Trust me, it's a terrible idea!
10. There will be no super-secret-awesome health care program for ACORN employees. Though we love our election-stealing squirrels, we have decided that they'll have to settle for the same options as everyone else.
With these concessions having been made, I trust that we can now move forward on health care reform with a broad, bipartisan consensus. Blue Dogs and Republicans, you can now rest easy knowing that the concerns of the town hall protesters have been met. While the progressive dream of a nation in which old people are slaughtered to pay for the abortions of ACORN-employed illegal immigrants will again have to be deferred, we are willing to settle for a bill without these measures in the name of bipartisanship.
Congratulations, Republicans. You've won this round.
]]>Spread it around....
]]>Second, I may have insurance (and I have a pretty good plan through my employer), but none of us has assurance that, should something happen, that the insurance companies won't try to duck payment. I've worked in investigation of insurance fraud, and have come to loathe insurance adjusters. They're whole job is to stiff people who've paid premiums in the naive trust that when the time for paying a benefit comes that it'll happen. Too often, the private insurance system operates more like a shell game.
I hope you never have this experience, and any trust you have in the current system is never tested.
]]>He looked around, talked to specialists, and investigated some experimental programs at a big state university medical center.
In the end, he decided that there wasn't enough of a chance of any reasonable outcome to offset the horrible nature of chemo and radiation. (My wife has had cancer three times, two times with these treatments, so I know a lot about what it does to a person. She survived all three times, thank God, but it was awful for her, and for those of us who had to watch.)
Back to Dad...
He went home, called Hospice and went on morphine to manage the pain, and died within a short time in his own bed, with my mother, brother and I there. Was it terrible to lose him? Sure. But the point is that he got to decide how he went out, and chose the most dignified path possible.
He was born in 1907, and lived most of his life without all of the amazing medical technology we take for granted now. Maybe that made a difference, as he and his generation were more familiar than are we with death and a certain kind of acceptance that comes with not having a lot of options, sometimes. I don't believe suffering is automatically enobling, but it is also part of life and death, and we ought to try to keep it real as much as possible.
They'd also gone through the Great Depression and WWII, and knew a lot about sacrifice and the things that make a life worth living. I think we've lost something important in that regard, with too many comforts and the expectation that our medical system is able to do just about anything. Maybe there are too many doctor shows on TV, with actors trying to look too heroic.
As to my wife's experience, we'll go the whole nine yards if there's a hope of success. What's one more time? But we've talked about this issue a lot, as you might imagine, and have decided that neither of us is going to assume that we're going to live forever, and that heroic measures to save us from the inevitable just aren't all that smart. Quality of life, and the dignity that comes from facing one's fate with a clear eye and some courage at the end, is worth more than all the high-tech futility around.
]]>Since his mother was a US citizen, even this distinction is moot.
Some have claimed that Barack Obama's Hawaiian birthplace doesn't qualify him as a natural-born citizen because Hawaii was not yet a state when he was born. This claim is wrong: Hawaii was admitted as the 50th state almost two years before Barack Obama's birth there (21 August 1959 for statehood vs. 4 August 1961 for Obama's birthdate).
Sorry. Not helpful. There are too many children who think snark = witty in the world as it is.
]]>