I personally never thought that Single Payer ideas in the HCR Debate were going anywhere and so put that ideal off the table at the outset... reason being that in a traditionally capitalist social structure, putting Insurance Companies out of business simply would never "fly" re: witness the vitriolic hysterics over the mere mention of an Option for Public Insurance...
     
A Public Option has many good things going for it - placing the government in a position to compete with local and regional monopolistic practices by the Insurance giants... but alas they (the GOP and Industry) are Dead Set against a competitor in their domain. Some criticism of conservative Dems is appropriate here as well... The Operative Word here however, is monopoly capitalism, that means Capitalism that is NOT competing in a Real Free Market System.
      
So the idea of Co-ops has been floated as a middle-ground position to bring competition to the market while preserving "private" enterpise as the operational model for our society, sadly that privacy is like a "prime directive" for a culture like the US which still holds onto many mythologies of it's expansionist/frontier youth...
     
Having said this - the GOP has resoundingly rejected ALL Three Options - No Single Payer, No Public Option, and now No Coops either!
    
Where this puts the the debate though, is actually on favorable ground for Reformers - the GOP has effectively made it their Official Position that they are happy with the Monopolistic practices of the Health Insurance Industry - and by definition Against Competition in the "Free Market". In this area of the Economy there is NO Free Market - and the GOP likes it that way!
     
Since it is The GOP that has placed this frame around their Oppostion to Reform - it is now Open Season to place the onus back on THEM - Are you for the Monopolies or for the People? Are you for Competitive Markets or Against Real Free Markets?
   
It's Past Time for The People to Define Them as the Corporatist Lackeys that they've made clear that they are - and time for Leadership to Define the Debate in These Terms!
    
Good from the NYTimes today:
   
Eagan - Prairie Health Companion - Check it Out.
     
Thank You
JHC

    

<i>There's something's happening here...
What it is ain't exactly clear, there's a man with a gun over there...
telling me I got to beware.
    
It's time we Stop children, what's that sound, everybody look what's
going down....</i>
     
<b>Buffalo Springfield</b>
    
This incident at the Obama townhall in NH has me absolutely fuming right now! Let's imagine for a moment what the reaction would be if something like this happened at an event for our former President? With our former "leader" protesters might be limited to an area far away from either the event or the media (in a "free speech" zone) and/or anyone so much as wearing an unwelcome T-shirt hustled OUT of the event altogether... remember?
     
So here we are Today - with the right wing noise machine running every smear they can think of from commie! ,nazi!, socialist!, tyrant! I'm sorry to have to say this, but the Democratic Party should have been much more prepared for just what has come to pass - Pure Thuggery as we saw durning last year's GOP campaign events and over a long span of time before that. I guess the GOP simply assumes that the rules of civil discourse don't apply to them either when IN Power or OUT of Power - thus when Democrats properly identify a problem with discourse being squelched at townhalls - all of a sudden the GOP starts whining about their "Free Speech"  give me a freakin break!!
    
As for the Healthcare debate itself.... all this is really about is breaking the monopolies of the insurance and medical establishments over healthcare for those alerady insured and those who still need coverage that they can't get or can't afford... Whether that goal is accomplished through a government system or through establishing Consumer Co-ops (not for profit!), it is a desperately needed step toward bending the curve of ever rising  insurance and medical costs back to earth... It is vital to the competitiveness of our country in the world economy and part of an overall integrated approach toward moving our overall economy forward!
    
A simple retort to the GOP's "supply siders" who always rant about taxes as destroying the small business owner (etc.),  well then what about the skyrocketing costs of Insurance? Isn't that cost even greater than marginal changes in tax rates?
   
I could go on (and on) but I just had to rant here.
  
Thank you for your time.
JHC

The Norwegian newspaper VG has reported a truly amazing story about a newly-wed trying to get to Norway to be with her husband, and the stranger who helped pay an unexpected luggage surcharge. The blog "Leisha's Random Thoughts" has translated the story.

It was 1988, and Mary Andersen was at the Miami airport checking in for a long flight to Norway to be with her husband when the airline representative informed her that she wouldn't be able to check her luggage without paying a 100 surcharge:

When it was finally Mary's turn, she got the message that would crush her bubbling feeling of happiness.

-You'll have to pay a 103 dollar surcharge if you want to bring both those suitcases to Norway, the man behind the counter said.

Mary had no money. Her new husband had travelled ahead of her to Norway, and she had no one else to call.

-I was completely desperate and tried to think which of my things I could manage without. But I had already made such a careful selection of my most prized possessions, says Mary.

As tears streamed down her face, she heard a "gentle and friendly voice" behind her saying, "That's okay, I'll pay for her."
Mary turned around to see a tall man whom she had never seen before.

-He had a gentle and kind voice that was still firm and decisive. The first thing I thought was, Who is this man?

Although this happened 20 years ago, Mary still remembers the authority that radiated from the man.

-He was nicely dressed, fashionably dressed with brown leather shoes, a cotton shirt open at the throat and khaki pants, says Mary.

She was thrilled to be able to bring both her suitcases to Norway and assured the stranger that he would get his money back. The man wrote his name and address on a piece of paper that he gave to Mary. She thanked him repeatedly. When she finally walked off towards the security checkpoint, he waved goodbye to her.

Who was the man?

Barack Obama.

Twenty years later, she is thrilled that the friendly stranger at the airport may be the next President and has voted for him already and donated 100 dollars to his campaign:

-He was my knight in shining armor, says Mary, smiling.

She paid the 103 dollars back to Obama the day after she arrived in Norway. At that time he had just finished his job as a poorly paid community worker* in Chicago, and had started his law studies at prestigious Harvard university.

Mary even convinced her parents to vote for him:

In the spring of 2006 Mary's parents had heard that Obama was considering a run for president, but that he had still not decided. They chose to write a letter in which they told him that he would receive their votes. At the same time, they thanked Obama for helping their daughter 18 years earlier.

And Obama replied:

In a letter to Mary's parents dated May 4th, 2006 and stamped 'United States Senate, Washington DC', Barack Obama writes:

'I want to thank you for the lovely things you wrote about me and for reminding me of what happened at Miami airport. I'm happy I could help back then, and I'm delighted to hear that your daughter is happy in Norway. Please send her my best wishes. Sincerely, Barack Obama, United States Senator'.

The parents sent the letter on to Mary.

Mary says that when her friends and associates talk about the election, especially when race relations is the heated subject, she relates the story of the kind man who helped out a stranger-in-need over twenty years ago, years before he had even thought about running for high office.

Truly a wonderful story, and something that needs to be passed along in the maelstorm of fear-and-smear politics we are being subjected to right now.

It has just struck me overnight that something entirely different is going on with The Palin revolt within the McCain campaign; news reports that she's going rogue and no longer really with her own Party anymore, and going further to the right with each speech. If we add in all the recent rhetoric about the "Real America" and fostering a sense of (faux) populist anger at the "liberal" other America - she's setting up a movement of the extreme right that will refuse to accept any New Administration - essentially she's not looking for a Political future in 2012, she's looking to be the spokeswoman of a rejectionist front - beyond the GOP.
     
I would venture to guess that she may plan to return to Alaska and begin pushing for Independence for her State - In fact I predict that she will push a right wing "confederacy" and invite other states to do the same... If only to facilitate a crisis for a Democratic Administration.
    
Back to the AIP? I say Yes she will....

     

I think this ought to be a slogan for the Democrats to Use - by way of saying "I think the American People have largely concluded that the Bush Presidency Has Been a Failure both as a President and as CiC" and follow up with "Perhaps the American People Have Realized to Their Regret That Our Current President Was Not Competent for the Job We Elected Him To Do and is Still Not Competent Today"
   
Get the Competency Question Out Flat in the Open and Make the GOP own the Bush Presidency as their product! I know that bluntly putting it out there will spark all kinds of outrage from the right - but that is exactly the point.... We've had Seven Years of Incompetence - from 9/11 to Katrina and  all through Two Wars and the GOP wants us to Trust their Policies Still Today??
   
Where this ties into the current situation is that calling into question the competence issue it also has the potential to drag in the Question of McCain's basic fitness for the Office in that his choosing Palin as his running mate is manifestly a matter of putting political considerations over her Actual Fitness for the Office. I doubt if  several interviews out into the near future the majority of Americans will consider her "ready on day one" for the Highest Office - But it's up to US to plant the Question in their Heads.
  
No I don't think that Obama need fear a backlash over the Question either - He's been out there and answered all comers including now FOX and passed wihtout a hitch.
   
That's my take on it.
  

Given that the media needed a controversy narrative for this past weeks DNC; they poured everything they had into making a "drama" where none really existed. The point though, was to posit "questions" so that they could at least pretend to report on something....
   
By Tues Evening Sen. Clinton effectively trumped their ongoing narrative with a full-on endorsement of Sen. Obama and (I think) a heartfelt plea to consider the Real Issues of the Campaign more than her gender. The only question left was the CiC "endorsement test - which left some hanging on into Wed, and then Bill Clinton effectively Ended Any and All Questions on that score with an effective speech and validation of the Ticket Up and Down.
   
(I do wish the Clinton's had been good enough sports to stay for Obama's Acceptance Speech - as including them together in the visuals would have set the their speeches in stone as enthused supporters - their absence says a Lot about them as politicians and as people - why I didn't go for Hillary in the First Place)
    
Now with the GOP coming Up in two days the controversy narrative will need something to fill up a lot of otherwise Dead Air. I think the Palin nomination will provide precisely that extra question-drama for the media to pontificate about and leaves the GOP in a bind they'll have a very  hard time dealing with...
   
Given the Question: Is McCain a continuation of the Bush Legacy? They can't answer with a Yes or No as either reply is fraught with risks; so they'll dither, slither and hem and haw. So it is now with Palin - the controversy created by her on the ticket beggars the question Will she attract women to the ticket? Was she really the best available choice for McCain to make? Both of these questions present the classic double-bind as they bring up both reproductive rights issues and conjure up in the public imagination such classic GOP "picks" as Thomas for the High Court, Gonzales for DOJ, Meyers at White House Counsel etc.
   
Honestly, I can see all the possible Independents and Moderate Republicans scratching their collective heads at all of this as the GOP tries to sell Snake Oil in the Twin Cities next week.
   
I don't think it will work.