This follows the post by Zipperupus yesterday: http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/zipperupus/2009/11/orthodox-capitalism.php?ref=reccafe  Zip makes a clear and well-suported assertion that capitalism has become a religion.  I found it interesting that The New York Times would post an article suggestive of this on the very day I read Zip's post.  So I am sharing my thoughts about the article, wondering if others might see something similarly.

As protesters slither about Congress following speeches and exhortations from their leaders of faith, first and foremost Republican Congresswomen Michelle Bachmann and Virginia Foxx, it is a blatant fact that faith is at least one of the hooks bringing these people from across the country to Washington, DC.  Well, maybe it is not that important, but this MSM newspaper has seen fit to ensure it is made part of the narrative. 

 Another hook is the suggestion that the efforts are faithful to the principles of the Founding Fathers, saints of another religion known as nationalism.  A religion being adopted by some segments of Christianity as dogma and also encouraged by true-believer Capitalists.  It is not that Capitalists are Nationalistic patriots.  They love money no matter what the color.  But nationalism is a convenient hook to provoke mindless people to do their bidding.

My reference for this post is here at the New York Times.  On the front page of their website is the following article.  http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/05/on-the-hill-protesters-chant-kill-the-bill/?hp  In the post, the author makes an interesting description of the protesters: 

It's a generally older crowd, many in their 50s and 60s, predominantly, white, and many self-identified as Christians. They are fiercely conservative and deeply skeptical of the government, many of them adamantly opposed to abortion rights.

While one may not ever know the intention of the author, I found it curious that their Christianity was worthy of mention.  I thought with my conspiratorial mind that perhaps it was intended to reach the masses and help them identify with the protesters.  Let's ignore that there are certainly a wealth of Christians on each side of the argument.  I'm also going to ignore the racial profiling as that is a post worthy of its own concentrated analysis.  I'm remaining focused on religious aspects of these Tea Party fantasy role-players. 

To make the protesters heroic we are informed they are "fiercely conservative", but to return to that soft, Christian whisper made earlier, we are told they are "deeply skeptical", "deeply" being an adjective I would have expected to precede religious, but maybe they are suggesting this skepticism has a scent of religiousity, placing "Christian" and "deeply" as bookends of "fierce".  But again, who knows that the author's intention is.  Frankly, I am happy to hear they have some skepticism.  To be sure the faithful are bringing their understanding of Christianity to the fore, and perhaps to help the readers know the piety of these protesters, the author finishes the sentence with  "many of them adamantly opposed to abortion rights."  It just warms the religious heart.  

Skepticism leaves the building with the very next paragraph, however, a quote from a protester.  "The government couldn't even get the shots out," referring to the H1N1 flu vaccine. The protestor follows with, "Let's just get the government out of all this."  If one was to be skeptical of this declaration, one would ask, "What did the government do to prevent private industry from providing vaccines?  How was the government impeding private industry from manufacturing sufficient quantities of the vaccine?   Again, I want to stay on topic. I am not sure how a government ban on abortion gets the government "out of all this" either.  I wanted to focus on the quasi-religious nature of the people in Washington, DC, who were moved to attend this protest.  It seems in this regard that faith has prevailed over questioning.  It is faithful to the talking points to say one wants the government out, but it is oblivious to the lack of any private action to take its place serving the needs of the people.  To put it bluntly, the private sector failed utterly to take advantage of a peceived lack of inventory to innoculate the public.

To question the intent of the author, again, I note that one quote is from a man who travelled from Portland, Oregon, to attend the protest.  In Portland, the city so affectionately described as "Little Beirut" by George II [HWBush], there is no majority of Tea Party fans, so, without this knowledge, one might think Portland, as a city, supports this event.  Now does that seem like something a city who elected a gay mator would endorse?  No, but appearances are everything and in this article a miraculous appearance of a Portlander at the protest occurs with a call to get the government out by predominantly older, white, anti-abortion Christians. 

You have to believe this event was significant, as you see two states elect Republican governors.  But you also have to decline to ask the questions whether these governors were Conservatives, because they are not.  You also have to ignore the loss of a GOP seat in Upstate New York where the GOP moderate was driven-out like someone with leperousy, and a Democrat took the seat in a region that had been Republican since more then a decade before the American Civil War.

"Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believed."  So these people believe in the free market, but do not see that it failed to provide vaccines.  These people believe in the private sector while they do not see Medicare as a government-run system they so fiercely defend.  These people believe the private sector will provide their healthcare, but do not see that this provision will be terminated with their employment, if the company folds, or they ever wish to work elsewhere.  These people believe they have coverage for their future health crises but do not see all those who are having a crisis not getting the coverage they also thought they had.     

"Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believed."  Blessed?  In what way Charlie?  These people could use a little more skepticism.  If they did, they would put their faith in a diffferent place, maybe their government.

    

 

Here is just a "little" thing I picked up watching those fascinating and scintillating charts and graphs on CNN last night.  John King and Wolf Blitzer were both making whispered references to how the NY-23 was a place that had been held by Republicans for over 100 years.  I found it interesting that they would round down to the nearest hundred years, rather then admit it has been 150 years, or that we had not even fought the Civil War when the last non-Republican was elected in that district.  It just tells me the fix is coming for 2012, and the media will do everythng they can to return the GOP to power.  The Dems need to develop their marketing a whole lot better because the salespeople for the GOP are alread fabricating a GOP resurgence out of nothing.

NOT!!! 

Just thought I would give this post a title to get your attention and provoke a little anger and hopefully effect you enough to call that Congress critter, or the White House, AGAIN, to advocate for a public option.  I have been thinking long and hard about this Trigger Option and it just seems like such BS.  It's a totally contrived designation of "Bad Enough" that suggests it is not bad enough already.  We'll take effective action when it really gets bad, and this is not bad enough.  Essentially, 44,000 people dying needlessly in this a nation purported to be the "greatest nation on Earth" is not bad enough. 

For whom?!?!?! 

In my humble opinion, this is already bad enough.  I'm not at all keen on the idea of designating a trigger to give the health insurance thieves another chance.  They have had their chances, and they have failed miserably in providing services.  Did they have no warning people would rebel and reject the notion that they were the only source of help, their private corporation, and that we could not help ourselves and each other after being so completely abused at their hands?  Frankly, I think they never considered it as a possibility, but there were warnings.  They've witnessed Medicare and Medicaid develop in response to a deplorble lack of health services.  They've seen Clinton take a run at changing the system.  Why?  Because it desperately needed change.  Why?  Because it would not, and could not, change itself.  Now we want to give them yet another chance?  Didn't the threat of Clinton's efforts influence them sufficiently to moderate their greed?

How many dead are too many?

I'm just wondering what the trigger will be?  I'm in favor of a body count, if we need to designate a trigger.  If we lack any capacity to judge the behavior of the health insurance industry and its determination to stop healthcare reform, and we feel we must give them one more chance, let's count the bodies.  Evidently, there are those who think the lives already lost should not be sufficient to take away the reins from these malevolent corporate beast.

I am not in agreement with any monetary consideration related to premiums or any other financial measure because we have seen how the data can be so easily skewed and manipulated.  We should also note that a Progressive will not inhabit the White House indefinitely and we need something soon to ensure it survives the next Progressive fall from grace, the next inevitable moment of human weakness.  What if we have a trigger mechanism, and the President in power declines to pull that trigger?  Much the same, the previous President ignored the regulations in place to allow his friends and acquaintances to pilfer the treasures of massive financial institutions.  How can we put so much faith in an unknown future when the past reveals so perfectly clear that these industries have no intention of playing fair?

This changes NOW!

We have it in our reach to make a fundamental change in the way we obtain health care.  We have the precursors of Medicare and Medicaid that show us how to achieve a decent program providing services to the American people - ALL THE PEOPLE!!!  We have the experience of making concessions so fresh in our memories with the oh-so-quaint "donut hole".  Why was this not named "The Bermuda Triangle", where qualified people somehow disappear, and then mysteriously reappear, all the less suited to take care of themselves, much the poorer, with even less the capacity to turn things around then ever before in their lives.  These predators feasted on our seniors, and now we are discussing a trigger somewhere in the future?!?!

44,000 dead.  There is NOTHING wonderful about triggers. 

It seems to me that the GOP is dead, but doesn't know it yet. They are fighting as if they have a strong force behind them, but because of their reliance on God to support them, they are blinded to the reality that it actually takes people to be successful.   This is the only explanation I have as to why the GOP has decided Upstate New York is a good place to drive home the Far Out Right agenda.  It is a fool's errand to believe their outsider candidate, Doug Hoffman, can succeed.  His failure will be the final straw that broke the elephant's back in this made-for-TV political drama, set in a place no oen gave much import.  [It's kind of like Gettysburg in that regard.]

The GOP has their candidate chosen by the people of Upstate NY, in a district that has not elected a democrat since dang near the Civil War!   But the Uber-Party GOP has decided that the New York selection, Dede Scozzafava, is not conservative enough to join their ranks in Congress, as they understand the meaning of that term.  So the Uber-Party has this guy Hoffman, who does not even live in that district and knows nothing of their needs, suited up to challenge her as an independent.  Many of the shakers and movers in what's left of the GOP are lining up to endorse him, because he loves God more then Scozzafava, which means he is detached from reality.  That detachment from reality has become the hallmark of the GOP of late.  [Think Saddam linked to 9/11, Saddam with WMD, what climate change?, and etc.]

Please note, when I suggest "loves God more" and "detached from reality", what I mean is that the God-test, like the neo-con litmus test, demands one declare things as factual that have no evidence in reality. [Think Creationism vs. Evolution].  For me, the love of God and detachment from reality are not always a concurrent condition.  I can say that in Upstate, evolution and Christianity are not mutually exclusive.  However, in the GOP of the 21st century, it seems to be so.  This is a recent phenomenon.

What it seems to me the GOP is ignoring, and Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins are keenly aware, is that the Northeast is not like the South or MidWest.  People are more independent, coming from arguably the birthplace of the American Revolution.  This is where they really had the Tea Party.  Upstate New York is the home of Fort Ticonderoga and Saratoga.  People do not abrogate their independence to their pastors here like they do elsewhere, and tolerate that pastor making political speeches from the podium.  They go to church to talk about God and to the pub to talk about politics!  [Think Hillary doing shots in Pennsylvania]   They are also highly educated, or at least respect people who are, which is abhorrent to the masses in the GOP.

The above comments are all generalizations, I know, so let's do a little fact check here.  In the Northeast in 2008, every seat in Congress turned blue.  It was a landslide muffled by the sound of the Great One giving a speech in Chicago.  Snowe and Collins are going to be battling for their political lives when they are up for reelection and the NY-23rd will be key in their making up their minds as to how to vote on the HCR reform bill.  If the Fighting 23rd goes blue, we have our 60!  If it goes Red, nothing is certain, but if the Independent wins, the HCR fight may be lost this time around ... again.   

The smart money will bet that the 23rd turns blue.  If anyone has any idea what the Northeast values, it is their independence and these folks coming from as far away as Alaska to tell them who they favor will not sway many to their cause.  It is not the cause of Upstate NY.  They do not wish to have Creationism be the only explanation for this world, although they are not opposed to the Bible.  The Bible is good reading on Sunday, but come Monday they have to get back to work and they know they need science and reality for that.  So, as the GOP is lost in the fantasy world of the Neo-Cons and their effusive declarations of faith, Upstate NY will reassert their independence and the GOP will succumb to it's decision a few years ago to dance with the devil, Prince of Lies.  It is written.

 

Hey Barack!  I have an idea for you.  You are spending a lot of time and energy fighting something you should be celebrating as your own - healthcare reform.  Democrats, why are they all so initimidated by a party that has dwindled to a 20% representation by voters?  Their party is dead and no one has told them yet.  When we think of Social Security and Medicare, those are Democratic institutions and no matter how much misinformation the GOP throws out there, they have never had any success getting the people to agree with them these are failed institutions, even despite their greatest efforts to sabotage those institutions.  Healthcare reform can be the same thing, a badge of honor for Democrats.  Own it!

If there are no Republicans willing to take part in the passage of life-changing legislation {and that is not hyperbole} let them keep out!  They have already torn out the heart of the reform.  Or I should say, they took out the heart of what was left of reform, and now we're being told it will not be "robust".  All I can say is that Oprah said, you are "The One!"  Be the One!  Own it.  If the GOP fails to see the importance of this monumental legislation, well, you can lad a horse to water, but you can' tmake him drink it, and this is about as clear an analogy as there is.  We're talking about something as critical to life as water.  We are talking about medical care!  If they wish to run from this, let them go.  I hope you will stand up for the American people and be 'The One".  Own it!

A curious thought came to me as I was considering this post.  You are the <b>worst</b> President since George W. Bush!  You are also the <b>best!!!</b>  Own it!  Because for the American people we feel as though this country was som completely trashed by the last one, you are getting to start all over again. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJ1Q_cZTYGI

 

OWN IT!!! 

NFL = No F&cking Limbaugh!

That acronym has been keeping my lips curled up around the edges since yesterday!  I am ecstatic that the NFL has made what I would call a real, American business decision, one that respects the rights of all Americans to have their own opinion.  One where business appreciates the fact that its success is based on the participation of people of all politcal stripes.  It was an Olympic decision, in that it ignores the politcal climate in the name of sport.  Let's put politics aside and just play ball!  Since the arrival of Rove, politics has been injected into every facet of our lives and any decision a person makes has become political.  These decisions, virtually any decision, are seen as evidence of a person being in one party or another, and this revelation is generally made resembling an insult.  Today, the NFL has made a very clear decision to not perpetuate the notion that everything one does will fly the colors of their party and be a political statement, meaning an affront to anyone who disagrees.

When I was young my father advised me that businesses seldom takes political stands.  The owners might, of their own, but their business would usually be free of any partisan inclinations.  This was because a business could only thrive if it was able to reach customers of both parties, and people of no party, or people from a fringe party.  At the end of the day, the business didn't want to change your mind, they wanted your money.  They valued every customer equally.

Non-partisan existence seems to have evaporated because today every decision gets painted by political alarmists.   Today, many businesses are very clear about whom they support.  But we, the people, have lost our voice by continuing to support these entities.  Despite having an opinion opposed to those espoused by a business, we have continued to support those businesses and now, it seems, there are few businesses that stick to commerce.  A prime example of this is CitiBank, whose recent reported losses are also contributing to a smile on my face. 

Citi had the audacity to channel funds from the Bailout to an organization that opposed organized labor.  They took federal money, money originating in people of all political stripes, and made a partisan stand.  What is most agregious about this is that CitiBank has barely any employees that are part of any union!  Being an institution originating in the NorthEast, they most assuredly have union members' money and owe their past success to those comfortable wages negotiated by unions.  But, if one believes they are too big to fail, then it is problematic for a union to call for their members to remove their monies from this politcal assassin.  Or is it?!?  Maybe it is time we put our money into places that, if they are unable to share our values, can at least respect us enough not to take us for granted.

The NFL has taken a bold step in declaring they will not welcome Limbaugh into their ranks if he insists on broadcasting devisive rhetoric.  The NFL has Republicans in its ranks, mostly at the top with the owners, but it also has its Democrats, mostly on the field, and it probably has a good mixture of asses and elephants among the coaches.  Looking through the stands, it is probably a broad mixture of people in the crowds as well, having teams throughout the nation, in Red States and Blue States.   What the NFL acknowledges and respects, is that its revenues come from everyone, and they are all Americans.  It is a thoughtful reminder of what made this nation great.  The NFL is declaring, in a very real way, that "United We Stand", as we all do when they play the national anthem before the games, and "we" means everyone.      

This is just a quick proposition.  It needs some fleshing out and discussion, and that's what makes TPM worth visiting, the discussion. We hear about the payment schedule of Medicare and how unfair it is, but we seldom talk about the payment schedule of the insurance companies, who set their own prices, reimbursing providers as they see fit and leaving the providers to write off the "loss" or bill the patient, who I will refrain from calling the customer.  Maybe we should call the patient the mark in this con game of insurance.  At any rate, what if the government simply paid the average of the fees paid by the insurance companies, thereby allowing the insurance companies to set the costs based on their own criteria  This would make the government a moderate in the game of insurance when it comes to paying the providers.  Some insurers would pay more, and some less.  If every provider paid the same, then so would the government insurance.  Now how that average was calculated might need some consideration.  Average all prices, or average of all services paid to allow a majority insure'rs quantities to adjust the average with an insurer who seldom provided that same service.

It seems this strategy could help separate the providers from the insurance, because right now, big medical providers and insurance appear to be bedfellows and strange ones at that.  But if the prices for services were related to the prices paid by insurance companies, then any objections  providers would have would need to be made versus the insurance companies rather then the government program  This proposition takes responsibility for prices out of the hands of the government, but still gives the government a fair price.  It would seem to me that the providers would rather argue with the government in this matter then private insurers.  I mean, how successful have they been in naming their own price for their own services?  Insurers have set the prices.  Insurers set the price and the premium deciding who pays them how much and how much they pay others.  It's really a great gig.  I want to buy a car like that.  I just go in and tell them, as I take the keys and drive away, that the "usual and customary" price for the car is $10,000, although the sticker says $17,000 and leave them no recourse from me other then to call my office and leave a message, or write a strongly worded letter.  But I digress.

Efficiencies with a government run program would still enable them to keep premiums down.  The government would not need marketing or exhorbitant CEO salaries, or shareholder profits, or a host of other necessities incumbent on private insurance.  So the program could be economical and related to free market prices, and I laugh as I think of that invisible hand helping consumers by keeping prices down.  Is it one of the "good hands" in the insurance world, I wonder?  At any rate, I think this idea can appear reasonable to the people and something the insurance companies might support or at least have no rational defense, although I do not think that would stop them from objecting.  But the providers might have to reconsider their alliance with the insurers, and it's the oldest strategy known to man, divide and conquer.  We could get a public option, government run program, and leave the providers and insurers to fight among themselves.

  

We are all asking ourselves, why is the United States not getting its money's worth out of Aghanistan?  I think we can, but we need a draft to really profit from these ventures and a military that is self-sustaining.  What we have instead is this corporate boondoggle that has a one-way benefit for corporations and does nothing for this country, here at home.  Now, before I get accused of being pro-war, please know I am not convinced we need a massive, permanent presence in Afghanistan.  I think we should have our Special Forces doing the work with a few support posts.  We should eliminate Al-quaeda and get Bin Laden.  When he is brought to justice,  we will have completed our mission.  It's clear.  It's concise, and it's really about the only point justifying why we should care about what happens to an unsophisticated, tribal region barely comprising anything representative of a nation in the 21st century.  We should probably care about the drug traffic too, but that's the poison killing Eastern Europe, who has never been warmly received in the US anyway.  Before I get too side-tracked, let's talk about getting our money's worth out of this war.

We have all heard the arguments about World War II and how it was the War that brought this nation out of the Great Depression.  World War II put people to work!  Of course, it was also convenient we were pretty much the only nation with a working industry to rebuild Europe at the time, their having pretty much levelled each other's cities and factories in that conflict.  But whichever reason one chooses, and it was probably both, the means of recovering from the Depession was employment.  So why are we not getting that benefit from our latest war?  I mean, if Reagan could replicate a war-time economy without an actual war, why can't we get it done with two?!?  Ask Thomas Friedman!   

What has happened is that we have shipped traditional military jobs overseas.  Rather then have American military personnel supporting the troops, we have foreign workers providing services.  The bulk of money passing through most companies goes to payroll.  So if we put billions of dollars into a company and they spend the money paying foreign workers to do the work, we get no return on investment for the US. None of the payroll money goes into this economy. In fact, even the companies that were American, as the perfectly reasonable and natural result of being a profit-driven, multi-national corporation, have gone overseas.  So we are losing the entry of those profits into the US economy as well.  Take Halliburton, the company formerly run by our former Vice President whose name causes me to see red and so will go unmentioned.  Halliburton has profited enormously from the wars.  It's raking in so much money in the Middle East, it has opened a "Second" headquarters in the United Arab Emirates, a boutique nation that resembles the Cayman Islans in a lot of ways, but without being an actual island surrounded by the ocean.  This tax shelter is now the home of not just the "Second" headquarters, but also the home of it's CEO.

The greatness of the US was at an apex after World War II because everyone was working, or had worked for a couple years at least during World War II.  Now we have two world wars and no work.  I express the wars as world wars because most of the players in the first two were fighting with us early in these conflicts, except now, due to a complete and total diplomatic collapse, we fight in Iraq alone now, having lost the Coalition of the Willing, and very few nations remain fighting with us in Afghanistan.  To the military industrial complex, the war profiteers, this is most excellent.  They would prefer NOT to share the spoils of war, but to the American people it puts an even greater burden on us, and that burden is soon to be increased exponentially, if we do escalate the war in Afghanistan.

The question I am asking is, since most would agree we are going to turn up the heat in Afghanistan regardless of the public oppositions to it, why don't we spread the wealth around and put the American people to work like we did in the middle of the last century.  Get people into a military that cooks its own food, cleans its own latrines, builds its own bases top to bottom, inside and out, and completely supports itself?  There was a time when getting a military contract meant you won the award because you had the best product.  Getting your hands on any military equipment was getting something of quality.  Today, the award goes to the lowest bidder and getting something from the military is to know that whoever decided buying this piece was worth the money was probably influenced in many spurious ways to come to that decision because the product is blatantly a piece of crap.

It just feels like someone else is fighting these wars, not the American people.  It seems like someone with dogged determination and the time to do so could reveal just how many jobs are given to foreign nationals to fight our wars.  How many contractors are actually American entities and how many are clearly not, and how many are standing on both sides of the For-U-or-Against-Us Line.  Isn't that how Bush described people, as for us or against us?  So is it a stretch to use that measure when looking at these contractors, whether they are helping or hurting the cause by taking more money then they are worth and providing products far from anything resembling quality?  Wasn't the benefit of war related to the money spent fighting that war because those monies circulated into the American economy?

This post rambles a bit and could certainly use a few footnotes and references and so forth, but it's intent is more of a starting point then an all-encompassing piece, to answer the question, "If wars are good for an economy, why are we suffering so greatly when we are involved in two?"  I think the answer is that our only involvement in the wars is only in paying for them and not in actually getting the jobs and profits cycled back to the country of origin, the USA.  It is within that cycle that a nation achieves economic benefits from war, not in sending those jobs overseas.  What we have in this war is a reflection of our present state of affairs with the rest of our commerce.  We have shipped the jobs overseas and the only ones profitting from these enterprises are the wealthy, who now pay less taxes then ever and have probably moved their homes overseas as well.  Of course, this argument presuposes there is a just reason for fighting these wars in the first place, but I am surpassing any moral imperative to make an economic argument, and doesn't economics thrive in a reaml devoid of morality anyway?

 

{Note: This was a comment on a post by OverreachThis, but I thought it was worth sharing since on the West Coast I come so late to these parties.  http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/mare_nostrum/2009/10/barack-obama-has-won-the-nobel.php#comment-3628807}

 

Maybe we should just leave the Republicans out of this. I mean, it is not due to any action of the GOP that Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize today, but solely due to his efforts to turn away from the path the GOP had taken. They are not on this path. They do not wish to be on this path, and yet we bring up their name. This is not about them. This is about our country, our President, the country and President they would deny. To hear their name is to pollute the air of peace that has developed. It disturbs the peace if you will. Let there be peace. The GOP has no intention, stated or implied, to bring about peace. Fine, they may remain in whatever misery they wish. Bringing them to this celebration only makes them more upset. So let's not. They have no intention of making this a Grand Old Party anyway.

Since I have not posted anything in so long, I had taken a brief vacation, I'm not yet back up to speed on smacking down the Right, but this one thing did occur to me which I think might be a jumping off point for others.

 

Obama's wost day?  When do you think that was? 

 

The Right suggests it was the day the Olympics declined to designate the USA as host of the 2016 games. 

 

One suggestion I have, which would never phase the Right, maybe it was last week when we lost eight soldiers in one heroic defense of an isolated post in Afghanistan.  Getting that news might have been his worst day yet. 

 

Any other suggestions?   With this country as screwed up as it is and the Right having abandoned any pretense of being part of a solution, maybe it just gets worse for Obama every day when he realizes we cannot stand disunited as we are and the closed fist he referred to in Egypt was actually our own American Taliban.  Anyway, what say ye?

Anyone wondering why the GOP ran so crazy over this country for so long and took their crimes so far?  Here's a suggestion, because we are fools.  Maybe not the readers of this post so much, but the American people, the "real" Americans.  The ones watching Tom Delay, a disgraced former US Congressman, prance around the stage and shake his butt in their face as they applaud this feat and scream for more.  Gluttons for punishment!!!  
It seems the only way to take his arrogance further would be if he were waving his middle finger at the audience while he is performing.  Hey, America!  F&ck YOU!!! 
The MSM has abandoned any pretext for discernment as to whom it will provide a national stage.  We have become obsessed with people whose lives are train wrecks in action.  We adore the criminals.  We celebrate the deceitful.  Or, at least, it would seem that this is the level to which the MSM will now stoop to avoid having to create anything of substance, and the American people eat it up!
Maybe this an opportunity to reveal to the US, to remind them, just who this guy is, Tom Delay.  Maybe we ought to revive the evidence against him while outlining the crimes of which he has been charged.  Maybe this is the moment to recall how corrupt the Bush regime was.   And perhaps we can illustrate the disservice the MSM has done to this country when they choose to provide a person such as To Delay a national platform to create an image of carefree exuberance, when what he really represents is care less authoritarian government that disrespects the values of democracy. 
Here is the opportunity to let the people speak against being fed crap from criminals and demanding the MSM give us something more meaningful, a real talent, not a celebrity.  We are watching people we know dance poorly rather then being introduced to people who dance well.  I would rather see new people given the opportunity to dance on the public stage then see someone who has already been there and can't dance.  When are we going to say, "This is crap and demand something better?"

Sometimes we do not give the GOP enough credit for what they have contributed to the debate regarding healthcare reform.  This post is a starting point to list some of the outstanding things they have provided to what is likely going to be the most dramatic legislation to personally effect the American people this century.  Yes, I know, there's a war going on and a few thousand Americans have been killed, and then there are those million Iraqi dead to consider, but that is why I qualified my declaration.  I am talking about personally effecting the American people, in an intimate way, regarding their own healthcare.  I'm not talking about soldiers halfway around the world, or Iraqis who have a vague resemblance to the terrorists of 9/11.

Here are three examples of GOP-initiated aspects of the pending healthcare reform.  I'm going to take the easy and obvious ones:

First,thanks to the GOP, we can be sure that Americans will not be able to take care of each other, by using their government, which is responsible to its 300 million citizens, to faciliate providing healthcare services.  We are abdicating that power to corporations responsible to a relatively few shareholders for making profits by rationing the least amount of heatlhcare possible to us, that can be provided with a straight face while taking your money.  In short, the GOP abhors the thought of Single Payer and it's vehement opposition has led many Dems to agree, although many Blue Dogs were already there. 

Second, we can be grateful that end-of-life issues will not be addressed by patients while they are coherent and can speak for themselves, but rather we will avoid this issue in favor of letting someone other then the patient, most likely the government, decide how much longer a person should have their life sustained artificially.  Think Teri Schiavo, but without the benefit of having an after-life in the mainstream media, or any heart-pounding rhetoric in Washington, DC. 

Finally, [Well, not finally.  There are other instances, but I will leave them to the readers to add as comments] we can thank them for making very damn sure we do not allow any illegal immigrants to obtain relief as a result of these efforts to improve the delivery of healthcare.  Sure, we already have employment laws without real enforcement letting these people work in the most menial jobs that are physically demanding and poorly paid, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't hold helathcare reform to a higher standard.  let's leave thos eold laws as they are and fight to have the new ones made impenetrable.  We're spending our money here, people!   We should spend it one something that's worth it.  We do not need a healthy worker to have a healthy economy, we just need another worker.  [These last three sentences were totally snark, in case anyone wants to suggest this writer does NOT feel immigrants are worth helping, this descendant of 20th century immigrants.]

The ball is in your court.  What do you see the GOP has contributed to the healthcare debate?  I know there's a Republican Congressman right now being quoted as saying we need to start from scratch with reforming helathcae, but this latest effort at reform was started months ago, and the GOP has made many contributions to the process already.   I have named three.  What can you contribute?  it's not time to start the debate.  It's time to finish it! 

 

Well, we have tried to create healthcare bumperstickers, to find that slogan, and some great ones were made.  But now it's time to write a few for the other side.  Something that speaks the unspoken results of their advocacy.  It might have some of that tough guy language too, just to add force to the message to compensate for the lack of size in the population that the fringe represents.

[Note: This idea originated with Destor's post, based on info published at The Daily Howler regarding how the US stacks up against other nations considering our healthcare costs.

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/desidero/2009/09/health-care-cost-channeling-bo.php?ref=reccafe ]

 

Here's a few of mine to start:

30% of my premiums go to bureaucrats and CEOs.  Is that a crime?!?!?

I've got a gun!  How's that free speech working for you?

If we pay to treat illegals, who's going to pay the CEOs?

Medicare is mine, and y'all can't have any!

It's called the donut hole because it's fun to pay to lose coverage in your old age!

I've been paying premiums for years without ever getting sick. Of course I have coverage!

 

Well, just came up with one for HCR.  Could not help it. :

My insurer told me I was paying for coverage and not for treatment!

Your turn!!!  :-{)>

 

 

It's not venereal disease of which I speak, although one might wonder about that with the unfaithful tendencies of the GOP of late.  It's about Visceral Disease, an emotionally charged state of being that defies logic, that blinds the infected with an inability to understand rational explanations.  This illness clearly has all the hallmarks of Rovian tactics.  It is spread by talking points that have no basis in a temporal reality, but they are real.  They effect a deep, unconscious part of the brain, a place that has been watered and treated with herbicides, pesticides and petrochemical fertilizers to create a rich, dark soil, amped up to grow an invasive species that by design will choke out any other plants by depriving them of light and lead to some blissful homocroptual existence on the planet.  It seems we are developing an immunity to it, but we need to be prepared for any mutations that might emerge and foment another plague.

Have you ever stood in awe at how the absurdities of their declarations are ignored and the agenda advances despite the lack of truth in the basis of their presentation.  Death panels?  Ignore everything about it, just feel the words, death panel.  It's scarey.  What about Weapons of Mass Destruction?  I don't know about you, but just hearing this makes me want to crawl under my desk.  Take away my guns?  I'm feeling vulnerable and defenseless.  Defense of Marriage/Christmas - were they under an attack?  I mean, seriously, was violence threatened, because that is typically what one thinks of when they consider defense, that one may need to resort to violence.  We have an entire federal department for just that purpose, defending by violent means.

Czars!  This is the latest, but it's really rather dated.  The GOP began with this meme.  I am so intimidtaed by the royalty of that expression.  I can't go near a czar.  I have no voice whatsoever in the face of a czar.  Father Gapon thought he could bring the complaints of the peasants to the czar and was met with cossacks on horseback brandishing swords and rifles.  It was Bloody Sunday in Russia, 1905. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloody_Sunday_(1905)  Oh, I'm going to stay away from that autocrat, and resent him the entire time! 

Considering this meme when the GOP used it, it was to intimidate and bestow an air of superiority on the director.  It was intended to exude power and broadcast in a positive light, something serious was being done.  It was a very useful tool in a government not inclined to respect voices of the majority of people but preferring to listen to the voices of special interests.  But now the Adminstration is not GOP, and all the darkest suggestions are being created to frighten people.  Bush equalled a benevolent monarch, a father figure and Obama is a despot.   But which President joked about dictatorship?  Oh, it was a joke, and laughter feels good.

For a long time, the GOP has provoked visceral reactions by people in many ways, not just fear.  They provoke anger, which is strongly related to fear, but they also provoke jealousies, a base sentiment thrust at the unions for their decent wages and healthcare.  It's been masterfully orchestrated.  People prefer to take away the benefits of union workers rather then obtain those benefits for themselves by forming a union.  Seriously.  Does anyone verbalize the result of their destructive inclination?  In real words they are promoting this expression, "I don't want better wages or health care, and I don't want them to have those benefits either!"

The good news it that there is hope in the next generation.  There were large numbers of students who stepped up and worked hard to get Obama elected, and these were college age kids.  But take a look at the students yet to emerge from high school, http://www.tampabay.com/features/article1034344.ece.  [Borrowed from js fox, who borrwed it from DialyKOS, http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/jsfox/2009/09/and-a-child-shall-lead-us.php?ref=reccafe ] . These young adults are not infected with the virus of visceral reactions.  They get it.  They are aware.  They see the light.  It gives me hope that I might have social security when my time comes and I might not be left to whither away on the street after healthcare costs have taken away my savings and my home.  The GOP is once again providing the people with good feelings - laughter, and that makes me feel good. 

 

 

[Note:  Almost a month ago I posted this, but now that we are about to reconvene, and we're all fired up and ready to go!, it seems this is a better time to offer it to you.  I've always been ahead of the curve.]

Democrats are so terrified of their own power it's really disappointing to see them flailing about crying the sky is falling when they actually have the power to stop it.  The GOP has this nearly impotent minority and are wagging the Rottweiler into convulsions.  "What do we do?  What do we do?!?!?"  Man up!  Girl up!  Put on your big boy pants and git 'er done!!!  That is what you do!

This is a golden opportunity for the Democrats.  They have the capacity to pass healthcare reform legislation, but appear to lack the organization and determination.  They could bring universal healthcare to this country and deserve decades of gratitude for doing so, or they can collapse, which would be extremely unfortunate.  I do not wish to see the Dems slinking back into the shadows as the nation, with its short memory, returns the GOP to prominence as though the GOP would do a better job.  The GOP history does not support that notion.

It is surprising, though, when one steps back to consider it, that the history of the Democratic Party DOES support the notion that they can do a terrific job with this.  Yes, none of the current Representatives were there when Medicare, or Social Security, were passed.  But they were the ones who SAVED Social Security not that long ago.  They need to understand this is crisis time, right now!  They either bring this to fruition, or their rising stars will begin their descent much too soon. There is some truth to the suggestion that if this fails, the rest of Obama's term will be irrelevant and reelection improbable.  There is also much truth to the proposition that the party will mirror the fate of the Obama Administration.  So, here it is!  Sink or swim!  Rise or fall!  Win or lose!  We are playing for all the marbles.

If the Dems do not understand that failure will be theirs if there is no reform, they need to ask themselves one very important question, "Now that the health insurance industry has spent  tens of millions of dollars fighting healthcare reform, who is going to restore their treasuries after the dust settles?"  Did they guess the consumer, their constituents, all of them?  Whether they were agitators or not, everyone with insurance will be made to pay those bills?  Do they understand how monumental a loss this will be when people will again have the insurance companies reach deeper into their wages and salaries to pay for the opposition to healthcare reform?  Make no mistake, the fault is going to be tied around the necks of the Democrats like a millstone. 

Forget about it!  Forget failure!  It is not an option!  When you return to Congress after the recess, git 'er done!!!   Get something meaningful passed that will be reflected in the pocketbooks of tens of millions of Americans, the under-insured!  Do something that will enhance the lives of tens of millions of Americans, those with no healthcare.  Stake your claims as the Party that brought this nation Medicare and Social Security and the party that recently saved Social Security.   These are examples of what we can do together and universal healthcare can have the same success and bring the Democratic Party back to the respected Party they were when these programs were first implemented.  That success gave the Democratic Party control of Congress for decades.  If you want it to be that way again, then healthcare reform must be passed and it must be meaningful. 

The only way a positive long term result can be achieved is if the insurance companies are facing competition from the State going forward, a public option.  As many have suggested, the insurance companies will gradually dissolve after that, and they should.  People will come to see healthcare as a right for ALL, not just senior citizens.  They will see it as a part of America just as Social Security is a part of America.  At the end of the day, it is social security that has remained unwavering during this economic collapse.  This cannot be said of those with 401ks and IRAs.  The Democrats are losing the PR war at the moment, but it's when Congress reconvenes that the issue must be resolved.  Be the one who changes people's lives for a better, healthier future, and the reward is yours for years to come.  Forget about the agitators and noise makers.  Make it happen!