Why the majority aren't showing up at Townhalls
http://www.americablog.com/2009/08/white-house-special-deal-with-drug.html
I keep hearing how the majority who support Health Care reform should show up to Town Halls and I as k to support what?
Single Payer was peremptorily taken off the table before the debate began even though it has majority support among the public.
Waxmans committee sold the farm to get the support of the d's rethuglican lite coalition of blue dogs who have profited mightily from their obstructionism. The D's did not strong arm them into submission.
Yesterday in the news it was reported that Obama was meeting with Baucaus and the 6 dwarfs to discuss a plan that has no public option and does not address any of the issues that the majority care about.
Today it is reported that the White House cut a deal with big pharma to guarantee their profits and this will require a further weakening of the bill. ( http://www.americablog.com/2009/08/white-house-special-deal-with-drug.html )
The Progressives in Congress are getting laughed at by Pelosi when they state they will not support the shell of a bill being presented,
So what are we suppose to show up to support? A title with no substance?
The d's have spent this entire debate dissing the left and playing to the right and now they are reaping what they have sown.They are out there alone with an angry right mob that will never be pleased and the left has washed their hands of the quislings in congress. If the D's Congressional leadership will only laugh at the progressives when they expect what was promised during the campaign why shouldthey be surprised when they have no one behind them.
I keep hearing how the majority who support Health Care reform should show up to Town Halls and I as k to support what?
Single Payer was peremptorily taken off the table before the debate began even though it has majority support among the public.
Waxmans committee sold the farm to get the support of the d's rethuglican lite coalition of blue dogs who have profited mightily from their obstructionism. The D's did not strong arm them into submission.
Yesterday in the news it was reported that Obama was meeting with Baucaus and the 6 dwarfs to discuss a plan that has no public option and does not address any of the issues that the majority care about.
Today it is reported that the White House cut a deal with big pharma to guarantee their profits and this will require a further weakening of the bill. ( http://www.americablog.com/2009/08/white-house-special-deal-with-drug.html )
The Progressives in Congress are getting laughed at by Pelosi when they state they will not support the shell of a bill being presented,
So what are we suppose to show up to support? A title with no substance?
The d's have spent this entire debate dissing the left and playing to the right and now they are reaping what they have sown.They are out there alone with an angry right mob that will never be pleased and the left has washed their hands of the quislings in congress. If the D's Congressional leadership will only laugh at the progressives when they expect what was promised during the campaign why shouldthey be surprised when they have no one behind them.
Advertisement
This sounds like Palintology.
August 6, 2009 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
"This sounds like Palintology."
Huh?
August 6, 2009 2:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
How much you wanna bet that there are a whole lot of astroturfing trolls recommending this defeatist post?
Thanks, this is just what we needed to boost support for health care reform (see dictionary for definition of "sarcasm).
August 7, 2009 3:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Very good question. Did rational catch a wave or are we being punked? (Rational is not at fault if astroturfers are punking us, of course, and I think he is stating a legitimate concern: Lawrence O'Donnell also thinks the Dems have gotten themselves into a whole and he at least had a bill out by August for Hillary in the 90's and it got wrecked anyway.) If you look at rational's blog, with all respect for him, he's got two followers and no data listed. He had a one post before with 22 purported recommendations (which is a whole lot). After that, the maximum was 2 and frequently fewer.
This time he's got 46 and counting. Many posters are dismissive or not agreeing and wouldn't recommend it. There may be a lot of frustration out there, granted. But 46 is a big number.
August 7, 2009 4:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wow! Is this some kind of record or what? We're up to 49 rec's! The atrosmurfs are really performing!
August 7, 2009 9:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, you know alot about the innertubes.
August 7, 2009 9:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
and that means... what, exactly/
August 7, 2009 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just a couple of points.
Single payer was never, ever promised by Obama. He wasn't going there and he was clear about it.
The Pharma deal was announced by Obama way back on June 22nd.
Please show me the source for you assertion that Obama met with Baucus group to discuss taking the public option off the table. The reports I have read state they discussed dropping the republicans and going it alone.
August 6, 2009 4:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Todays headlines are after meeting with Baucaus and the 6 dwarfs Obama is open to Co-op's ( SEn Rockefeller's question What is a health co-op?) to replace the public option.
So I guess the public option and co-ops were part of yesterdays discussion.
August 7, 2009 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rational - In another post, by Kali Star, I commented on this same issue, stating why I think the current reform legislation is on track to become one of the remarkable achievements of recent American political history, and why its most important components remain intact despite assaults on other components that are desirable, but less critical. The link is at
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/star_mason/2009/08/white-house-caves-to-drug-comp.php?ref=reccafe
I hope readers will look at that thread, because it addresses many of the perspectives presented here. I hope that agree or diagree, they will seriously consider my appeal that all of us eager to see a major advance in American healthcare should not only support the Administration's efforts, but do it vigorously. I've already done part of this by participating in town halls where I was booed, held my ground, and probably won a sympathetic ear from some members of the audience. I'll try to do more of this, and I hope others will as well.
August 6, 2009 5:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's fair to wonder why citizen advocates of health reform aren't as numerous or full throated at these town halls as the irrational misinformed flash mobs that show up and scream idiocy.
I don't like disruption of a debate especially if it's not in good faith, as is the case with the nationally organized thug brigades that show up at town halls.
Imagine, for a minute, if those people really had something smart to say.
As I recall, this happened at one time. Single payer advocates showed up and pressed reps and senators for the real reason why single payer was off the table.
What happened?
They were thrown out on their butts.
But the thugs who show up just to yell mindless socialist diatribes?
These are the ones we have to think about addressing more strategically?
August 6, 2009 5:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Weren't we only this week being told to shut up and not say bad things about Blue Dogs? So why would I show up?
August 6, 2009 6:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
How do you translate Obama expressing regret that groups on the left are running ads against Blue Dogs with "being told to shut up?"
Really, the blog commenters on the left who have made a hobby of jumping on every rhetorical turn of Obama's are every bit as hysterical as their Glenn Beck-listening, teabagging counterparts on the right.
You're really only aiding anti-progressive forces with your willingness to shit all over Obama because he doesn't meet your own oh-so-lofty personal standards.
And maybe you should explain to the 50 million Americans without health insurance that you are willing for them to go for another fifteen without affordable coverage because you believe a single-payer plan is the only solution you can support.
August 6, 2009 11:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
First
The White House making time for Baucaus and the 6 dwarfs.
the dwarfs bill has no public option.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/06/obama-to-meet-with-financ_n_252623.html
Via the Wash. Post
Next Obama never promised single payer but the fact he took it off the table while still willing to discuss a complete sell out of the Public Option and/or real reform. It seems when hesay's that he is open to discussion of all options he means only those that guareentee Insurance profits.
The details of the pharme deal were revealed today,
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090817/greider
Money quote
" What prompted Billy Tauzin to spill the beans on his deal-making with White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel was the House measure that specifies government's right to bargain for lower prices. No, no, no! Tauzin said. We've got a deal with the president, who says that won't be allowed."
So lets review
Single Payer = Unworthy of discussion
Public Option =Maybe Open to negoitations
Big Pharma = Profits guareenteed by White House
Health Ins. Co. = New subsidies
Blue Dogs= Bribed
Baucaus and his dwarfs=Private meeting at the White House
Progressives= a joke
So what are we suppose to be out supporting again?
Rather no bill then the obomanination coming out now.I hope the Progressives have the courage to torpedo this sell out.
August 6, 2009 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
You have some good points in here. I wish I could refute all of them, but I can't. All I can say is this is politics. And that this kind of politics does not seem to promote the general welfare.
August 6, 2009 6:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
sorry, wasn't finished.
And that as I understand it, our government is supposed to promote the general welfare of its citizens.
Not just the general and sustained welfare of its corporations.
And it's this balance that is all out of whack.
August 6, 2009 6:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bottom line for me. No public option, then the bill isn't worth passing.
August 6, 2009 6:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Which is the very reaon to show up at a town hall meeting: to let it be known that you demand a public option and why.
August 6, 2009 8:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I try to read what others say before commenting, so I'm always disappointed when I try to present evidence that is simply ignored by individuals who have already decided what they think and are uninterested in any information they might not have considered.
I expect that there may be some commenters here who fit into that category, but I hope there are others who don't, and also readers who don't. I've explained here briefly, but with links to another thread, why the reform plan Obama is now supporting is likely to be a transformative moment in American social progress, and deserves not only support, but a very vigorous commitment to promote it. I hope those who consider themselves open-minded will read my comments. If they have specific questions, I'll try to address them. If they provide reasons to disagree, I'll respect them and take them seriously.
If others choose simply to repeat their denunciations, I won't take them seriously, but more importantly, I hope others won't be dissuaded by them from doing what we must to promote the healthcare reform that is waiting for us to achieve unless we choose to sulk instead of act.
I'll only add that I have already participated in one rowdy town hall meeting where I think my comments may have helped our cause. I plan to do more. I will also be attending meetings with strategy planning groups and legislators where I will have a chance to speak. If anyone here can help me with material that these audiences would respond to favorably, I will be grateful.
August 6, 2009 7:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I read it It just seemed like an apology/excuse for the d's to do nothing but tweaking along the margins.
If there is no limit on thepremiums that can be charges what difference doesit make if the Ins. co's arerequired to offer a plan if no one can afford it? It has been tried in some states and failed.
I see thisbill more like the Telecom bill in the early 90's to promote competition and lower cable charges through competition. Hows that been working out for you?
So no I see nothing other then a publicity event coming out of the bill presently being proposed.
August 6, 2009 7:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rational - HR 3200 is available online. It's more than one thousand pages long, but if you skim through it, focusing on crucial details as I have, I expect you'll find that if anything enacted is even close, it will indeed transform American society for the better. Would you be willing to spend 5-6 hours doing that, and then get back to me with questions about specific elements in the legislation?
Again, I hope others will read what I wrote here, and in more detail in the other thread by Kali Star that I linked to above. There, I described many of the specifics, although there wasn't room for all of them; for example, I neglected the subsidization part that is so contentious because it involves billions spent to help low income families pay insurance premiums.
It's curious that so much attention is focused on the public option, despite the fact that it is not the most critical element of insurance reform. I strongly support it, but interestingly, it isn't necessary in at least one European healthcare system that provides excellent and universal care at affordable rates. In the Netherlands, some long term care and care for the disabled is insured by the government, but all standard medical care is furnished exclusively through private insurers. The essential element of that system is not a public option, but strict regulations of what insurers are allowed to do, so that they compete on the basis of value rather than by denial of services to patients. The link is
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_the_Netherlands
The Netherlands healthcare system is not directly transferrable to the U.S., but I cite it to indicate that solving healthcare problems is a matter of evidence rather than ideology, and thus all practical solutions should be considered, rather than only those most compatible with one's predetermined political biases.
Again, because I'll be engaged in dialog with individuals involved in policy, I would welcome practical suggestions, based on empirical data and other evidence, that would help me in my discussions.
August 6, 2009 8:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
I answered you in the other thread. Let's discuss.
August 6, 2009 10:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Kumbaya... I'm speechless, though probably not for long.
August 6, 2009 8:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Opinions are interesting but not necessarily valuable.
As a side light their was an article today talking about the privatization of health care in the Netherlands is proving to be at best problematic in these tough times. So scratch another failure of privatization.
Health care should not be profit driven.
Public dollars should not be used to guarantee health insurance profits at the cost of the publics health.
Single payer is the only fiscally and effective way to deliver universal coverage. Whenever the choice is between profits or approving necessary care for the public the system has failed.
trying to see jewels in the muck that is the present bill may be an entertaining way to kill time but then proposing that the scraps being offered are some panacea or better then a public option or single payer is misleading.
The D's were elected by people who expected real reform. They have done nothing but game the system so as to appease the opposition. In doing so they have ignored, offended and alienated those who voted for them. Now if they are feeling lonely let them go to the Blue Dogs or the Baucaus 6 for their support. For after 6 months of being ignored while the Blue Dogs and the senatorial dwarf pack have been catered to, appeased and granted power does not inspire me to work for a pig in the poke.
and what do we know about this pig we are suppose to defend
Single Payer out
Big pharma obscene profits in.
Public Option on life support
Health Ins. subsidies growing by leaps and bounds.
Can't see anything to support
August 6, 2009 9:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can't see anything "rational" in this comment or blog.
August 6, 2009 11:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ditto, Jason. This is mindless cutting off of one's nose to spite one's face. Self-indulgent nihilism.
August 7, 2009 1:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
sorry "rational" but, you're in the minority.
August 6, 2009 9:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think rational is in the minority, plan69, and I certainly hope so. Not necessarily a small minority in wondering about the value of proposed legislation in its current state - that's legitimate - but a minority is being so closed minded as to be unwilling to spend several hours scrutinizing the evidence.
At times, I find myself battling on two fronts. On one hand, I'm fighting for a reform package whose opponents on the right see it has so dramatically changing the status quo as to pose an existential threat to the principles they worship. On the other, I'm battling those who say the legislation won't change anything.
Fortunately, the latter are making that claim out of ignorance - inadvertent ignorance in some cases, but stubborn ignorance in others.
I expect that we can win both battles, but it wouldn't hurt if we only had the more important one to fight.
I will be glad, based on the evidence I'm aware of, to address specific concerns, but not dogmatic accusations undocumented by data. I'm confident that will allow readers to draw conclusions that are appropriate.
Finally, despite understandable concerns, I interpret the healthcare reform effort to be going well. I'm reasonably confident that what will emerge is a package that greatly expands high quality health care access to most Americans, at an affordable cost - excluding none who wish coverage, and providing insurance that covers all essential services, with no discriminatory charges, no annual or lifetime caps, no denials of legitimate provider claims, and with at least reasonably adequate subsidization for low income families. It will, I expect, translate into a major victory for the proponents of reform, and worth the struggle.
August 6, 2009 10:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Amazing any one who disagrees is "ignorant".
Sorry neither ignorant nor gullible.
Cite a "game" changer in the present bill?
Forcing Ins. Co.'s to insure all? is there any restriction on premiums? Not that I have read about. This was tried in several states and failed because the premiums were set so high as to be prohibitive.
What else? Big Pharma "promising" to give up a mere fraction of their obscene profits? Wheres the enforcement if they renege on their promise?
Extension of COBRA? With out a job who can afford the premiums?
Please name a specific fact. I guess its easier, when you're on the wrong end of a discussion, to claim special knowledge.
Whether I am in the minority or not is open to question and not really relevant. Remember a majority voted for addled ronnie raygun.
The battle I fear has been lost. The Ins. Co.'s and existing big money donors seem to have won.
Alas I fear the D's will be disappointed with a dispirited volunteers and weak turn out next election.
If the people we voted for won't stand up for us why should we stand up for them?
August 6, 2009 10:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
You haven't even read the bill and yet disclaim ignorance? How about HR 676? Did you read that one?
August 6, 2009 11:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fred,
You confuse evidence with opinion and you might worry more about your own arrogance than the ignorance of others.
This isn't a research seminar or grand rounds, this is politics. The proof will be in what goes on behind closed doors in the wee hours before this bill comes to a vote. I don't expect there will be many clinical scholars in the room when that happens.
August 6, 2009 11:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's not arrogance, bluebell, it's frustration. We need you out on the frontlines, badgering reform opponents, refuting their false claims, and encouraging others to vigorously support Obama's efforts.
I'm already doing that. I've already been booed and jeered by hundreds at a town hall for standing up for reform. I held my ground, and I believe open-minded members of the audience recognized that those who tried to suppress me knew that the facts weren't on their side.
In the coming weeks, I'll be doing more of the same, but everyone must pitch in. Sniping at those who are already working hard will just make the job harder.
August 6, 2009 11:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've tried to post more details here regarding the many provisions in HR 3200 and Senate bills, but the comment has been held up. I'm not sure why, but it had several links to extensive factual documentation, and perhaps that requires a holdup. If and when it appears, I expect it will help readers not already committed to final conclusions to see the evidentiary basis underlying the reform provisions that portend dramatic changes in American healthcare, as well as unfinished business none of the bills has yet adequately addressed. That task, however, will require the currently proposed legislation to become law, and so I believe our efforts now should be to ensure that happens.
Outside of the blogosphere, I'll be spending additional time in the next few weeks trying to promote that outcome by influencing legislators whose votes will make a difference.
August 6, 2009 11:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Considering there are 3 versions in the house and if baucaus ever does anything their will be 3 versions in the Senate then they go to reconcillation, not to mention Obama's adoptation of "signing statements" from the past junta, it seems arrogant to assume one knows what will be in the final bill.
4 months ago a Public option was a given now it is on life support.
And yet we still have no real details of how it is to be implemenented, how the insurance companies are to reined in, how big pharma will enforce the pittance they have put on the table or anything else.
Yet we are told to trust "our betters' that in the end they will care more for our health then their campaign contributions. Well that obviously failed with the Blue dogs, The Congressional leadership doesn't seem to be in much of a rush. In fact Reid today discarded the idea of "time tables" or deadlines.
What we do know is thatthe Blue dogs and the Senate rethuglicans are getting a great deal more consideration then the Progressive wing of the Democratic party, Howard Dean or any single payer advocate,
Sorry I think this sausage is rotten even before they get it made.
August 7, 2009 12:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Rational - please approve the comment I posted about an hour ago, but is still being held up. It links to an extensive set of data that should help readers understand the content of provisions in the proposed legislation, their importance in reforming healthcare, and the steps that will remain after the legislation is passed. I think it may reinforce the urgency we face in moving forward with these bills.
August 7, 2009 12:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know if this is your problem, but often, if there are more than two links in a comment, the comment will fail to post and you'll get the message "Comment is being held awaiting approval" -- or some such language. The original blogger is not at fault and is uninvolved.
If you run into this problem, try breaking the comment up -- that is, replying to yourself with a comment including a couple more links and again if you need even more links.
August 7, 2009 9:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Fred,
What Ellen said.
It's clear to me by what you say about the message you got and what you had in the comment that you have triggered the spam filter on this system for comments with more than two links. That comment will never be published, as no one here checks those "held as possible spam" comments out (I have found that that to be the same case with other sites who have the same system, so that's not unusual) and the original blogger has nothing to do with it.
If you still have the same window open on your browser, you might be able to retrieve it in preview, and repost it broken up into several comments--go "back" on the browser, find the page and chose trying resend when you get the page that says the information is no longer available. That works in IE, if you have the same window still open.
August 7, 2009 11:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have not seen or in any way obstructed any comments.
As for
"Can't see anything "rational" in this comment or blog.
Posted by jason everett miller
If that is the case don't read it. simple.
August 7, 2009 12:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
BTW isn't the real reason because they are outnumbered by these heavily funded mob operations, such that if the good guys send 200 the bad guys sent 1000? So one can shorthand that as done above and say "our people didn't show up"?
Especially when you add to this fear of violence and discomfort at going to teabag screaming session?
August 7, 2009 6:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sounds like defeatism and excuse making to me.
We need to fight. Provisions that are watered down can be strengthen if our guys are bolstered by our support.
This is a matter of fighting tooth and nail for every inch of turf, not throwing up our hands and quitting if we don't get an easy victory.
Liberals need to fight harder, and not quit, all the way to very end.
August 7, 2009 9:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
If the Dems. fail do deliver real heathcare reform - yet again - it will be clear that Congress operates the same whether it's democrats or Republicans in power.
Republicans talk big to their base about reducing deficits, overturn Roe vs. Wade and such. But when actually in power, they somehow always manage to fail to deliver for the right on any of those issues.
The problem seems to, as always, come down to the rules of the Senate which enable 41 people to thwart any legislative initiative, and that enable a Senate committee of only six people to, effectively, do much the same.
August 7, 2009 10:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
" user-pic
If the Dems. fail do deliver real heathcare reform - yet again - it will be clear that Congress operates the same whether it's democrats or Republicans in power. "
No, that is defeatism and plays right into the GOP's hands.
Both may be bad, but the GOP is far far worse.
The sensible course is to fight to elect better bluer Dems, and not these fake GOP wannabes.
August 7, 2009 5:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am really disgusted by these Teabagger place-holders, and all of the misinformation the is being hurled out in the air.
To make it plain: Yes, let's have constructive debates. But if people are attending town hall meetings with the exclusive intention of shouting down anyone who moderates the pros and cons of the proposed reform plan then it's just not productive.
I've seen it stated in many of the comments here and in other posts related to the health care reform discussions that regardless if the statesmen/women are Repugnants or Democrats - somehow they are trying to keep the status quo that benefits the companies enacted. We need an After school special PSA that plainly explains all of the components of the 1,000 page plan, because I think these oppositional forces are making much ado about nothing of things they clearly don't understand.
Me, I personally would like to see a public option policy eventually enacted. Sure it would mean paying higher taxes. Citizens of countries that have a public option plan pay into the system through taxation, but they are GUARANTEED to receive services. You can't expect to get something for nothing.
But we need to know that the Government is monitoring and maintaining the system. The teabaggers are simply tools used by the political opposition system and they spout out what the Becks and many of their elk feed them. There is no substance to what they are spitting out, and they are little more than the 2 year-olds having a tantrum.
August 7, 2009 10:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
My own feeling is that we won the damn election, already. I shouldn't have to put up with another 6 months of lies, robocalls, deceptive ads, disingenuous op-eds, hot-winded town hall debates and solicitations for campaign donations, just for the majority to enact a watered down version of the agenda on which it campaigned and won!!!!!
August 7, 2009 11:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
The previous Republican Congress acted like a well oiled machine. They kept all their various people aligned into one massive block. You have to recognize party leadership for accomplishing that.
So, now we have our Democratic Majority. In reality, it has become a parliament of divergent groups under the Democratic Banner. At blame are primarily Pelosi and Reid.
The DSSC and other funding groups should be right under Reid and Pelosi telling the Blue Dogs that if they aren't on script they can kiss their campaign contributions good-bye.
That hasn't happened and so it appears that there never was any serious attempt to present a unified Democratic front.
In the name of bi-partisanship, the Dems have lost control of their own agenda.
The single payer march on Dc is another example of the lack of senior level democratic backing and planning. If any of the senior leadership were really serious about single payer it would have already passed both houses and been on the President's desk.
So, rational is correct.
We are being played.
Congress isn't paying any attention to the attendance at the town hall meetings.
August 7, 2009 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
What are we fighting for?
To put more of the working poor into a poorly funded and badly run Medicaid program? New York Times 8/6/2009
To get a public option which won't go into effect for years and won't be allowed to negotiate drug prices -- and maybe a lot of other prices, as well?
Who's going to show up for that?
August 7, 2009 12:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
They don't want to know.
August 7, 2009 1:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep, all or nothing. That';s why we get nothing.
I assume all the people who think we can wait until it is *perfect* have health insurance already and no preexising conditions. The sick people can't wait for perfection.
Any "progressive" who tells these people to wait -- a decade perhaps ??? -- is an ideologue, not a progressive.
August 7, 2009 5:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's not that frogs aren't lovable; indeed, they're very lovable.
It's that they're dumb.
August 7, 2009 7:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
We won the election and that was a very big thing, remember?
The lies, robocalls, deception, disingenuity, hot wind and all the rest of it seem to be examples of free expression and I am frustrated by it as well.
Winning the election must have been the mere beginning of change. Oh, did Obama already say that?
August 7, 2009 12:56 PM | Reply | Permalink