The Democrat Thread

[lostfan]

I think immigration was always next.

[Balta1701]

I am hoping that they use the wave of political capital that will follow this health care thing, to pass a decent energy bill. Somehow I doubt that happens. Probably they'll do immigration reform next, as you said, and wait for energy until summer when gas prices are far higher.

Frankly, it's up to Lindsay Graham. Which is just bat sh*t insane.

 

Anyway, what's likely to happen to get an energy bill moving this summer is $3+/gallon gas again.

[NorthSideSox72]

Frankly, it's up to Lindsay Graham. Which is just bat sh*t insane.

 

Anyway, what's likely to happen to get an energy bill moving this summer is $3+/gallon gas again.

We're already over $3 in Chicago - I think I paid $3.25 last night. And its near $3 in the burbs.

 

[Balta1701]

We're already over $3 in Chicago - I think I paid $3.25 last night. And its near $3 in the burbs.

Chicago is a city. That doesn't count, it isn't real America.

[StrangeSox]

It's been $3.09 in Woodridge since last Thursday or Friday. Woo.

[NorthSideSox72]

Chicago is a city. That doesn't count, it isn't real America.

 

 

It's been $3.09 in Woodridge since last Thursday or Friday. Woo.

 

Is Woodridge real America? Or do we have to find some podunk town in Kansas to fit that bill?

 

[Balta1701]

Is Woodridge real America? Or do we have to find some podunk town in Kansas to fit that bill?

Based on the 2000 census:

The racial makeup of the village was 66.29% White, 9.38% African American, 0.16% Native American, 11.27% Asian, 0.02% Pacific Islander, 3.11% from other races, and 3.14% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 25.18% of the population.

Clearly, that's not real america.

[southsider2k5]

We're already over $3 in Chicago - I think I paid $3.25 last night. And its near $3 in the burbs.

 

It is $2.77 by me.

[bmags]

Having just driven from florida, it was shockingly over $3 in much of the south.

[BigSqwert]

So how do I apply to be on one of those death panels?

[bmags]

I think, as part of the census, i am one of the first. I give the names of all republicans to the SS

[BigSqwert]

LINK

 

Dear Liberals (and your mush-minded disciples),

 

I have read and heard enough of you’re apologetics for this s***ty corporate welfare disguised as healthcare reform bill that is now law (Obama will surely sign it and put on a show as if it is something it's not).

First and most importantly: go f*** yourselves. You are a bunch of morons. Cheerleading this heist (for those stupid enough to believe it was reform) or playing apologia for it (for those who were not entirely stupid but so plagued with partisanship and the false notion that the Democrats are a working class political party that you could not help but lie to yourself) was a disgrace. Markos Moulitsas Zúñiga, you're a little prick. Dennis Kucinich: backstabber.

 

Here are a few liberal talking points that need to be dealt with.

 

Liberal Talking Point #1: More than 30 million uninsured will be covered!

 

Covered in what? Medical bills? Copays? Prescriptions? Premiums that are continuing to rise in double-digits?

 

Where Medicaid is being expanded – marginally – will no doubt be helpful for the small percentage of those that narrowly fit into the category of a family of four living on 133% or less of the federal poverty level, but we didn’t need the rest of the stinking bill to achieve this!

 

Let’s take a second to remember why this “reform” was needed in the first place. We spend more than twice as much (per capita) as the rest of the developed world yet we are less healthy and nearly 50 million uninsured. But it was always more than that. What about those who are underinsured? What about those who have to file bankruptcy over their medical bills (over half of all bankruptcies were for this and over half of those HAVE insurance!)? What about those who have insurance and cannot afford to use it?

 

We will still have the high costs, the bankruptcies and tens of millions more “covered” by the rubble of debt.

 

Liberal Talking Point #2: It will reduce the deficit.

 

I got a bridge for sell. You interested? While you are busy looking at the federal government’s budget I am looking at the private sector where my premiums, co-pays, prescription costs, etc., are. Earlier this month Bill Moyer had Dr. Marcia Angell on his show and she talked about the CBO report:

 

MARCIA ANGELL: Yes. They're not looking at the cost to the system as a whole, to the larger system. They're not looking at the private system. They're simply looking at the federal budget as a budgetary item.

 

BILL MOYERS: Right. They look at the government--

 

MARCIA ANGELL: The government part of that. So if they can save money in Medicare, then they come out ahead, no matter what happens out in the private sector. And so that's what he's talking about. It will take money out of Medicare and put it into the private sector. Medicare is the source for a lot of the funds that are going to go to subsidize the private health insurance industry. So that's the first thing. The second thing is the CBO has to build in assumptions. And those assumptions are arguable, to put it mildly.

 

In other words, shifting public debt to private debt without taking into consideration the full extent of the private debt or the lack of mechanisms in place to keep it from getting out of control – which is already the case – is a snow job and you’ve got white s*** all over your face.

 

Liberal Talking Point #3: Yeah, it’s not perfect but it’s a step forward and the Dem’s will come back later to fix it!

 

It’s not perfect and it is not a step forward. If anything, it’s a step backwards. The problem has always been private insurance and forcing us to buy the problem is NOT the solution.

 

Okay, so they can’t deny coverage or charge more for people with pre-existing conditions or who become ill – in theory. But they can raise the premiums. I bet my house that they will too.

 

And what makes you think the Democrats will come back to “fix” this? Seriously. From the get go the Democrats gladly brown-nosed the insurance and pharmaceutical companies while shunning single-payer activists. When Obama came into office who did he begin having secret talks with: health industry executives or single-payer activists? Who did Max Baucus have at his hearings: health industry folks or single-payer advocates? They wrote up a bill that is a tremendous gift to those who fund their campaigns (NOT single-payer advocates) and you think they will come back to undo it?

 

---------------

-----/\-O-/---

----/--/-\/----

------/--------

-----/--\------

----/----\-----

--LOL---LOL

---------------

 

↑ That is me on my lollerskates racing past your naïve bastards…

 

P.S.: A Facebook friend reminded me of this point: if we already know it needs tobe "fixed" before it passes then what does that say about the prospects of it being "fixed"?

 

Liberal Talking Point #4: We have to support Obama because if he loses this then we are in trouble in 2012.

 

We are already in trouble with the Democrats. What more do the Dems need to do before you accept that they are not who you think they are? They are a pro-capitalist, pro-war, pro-imperialist political party. They support the ruling class over the working class. You apologists also made excuses for Obama by saying, “It’s only been a year” yet you forget that in that year he has consistently betrayed the working class. From EFCA to Van Jones to the Cuban embargo to Gitmo to Afghanistan to Iraq to Healthcare to Copenhagen to Honduras and so on and so forth.

 

Furthermore, this thought process seems to exclude the possibility of a popular movement. As if our only option is to vote for one ruling class-approved candidate or the other.

 

Anyway, this is a major disappointment. We got a few years till this s*** goes into effect and hopefully single-payer activists grow in numbers and keep pushing for real reform that will help the working class, not further burden it.

[bmags]

i'd rather stick to people that know what they are talking about rather than the "OMG INSURANCE INDUSTRIES MIGHT PROFIT!! THEN WE ARE ALL DIE!" bulls*** firedoglake mouth breathers.

[BigSqwert]

http://www.aticketforrush.com/

[HuskyCaucasian]

http://www.aticketforrush.com/

That's awesome

[bmags]

ahh, i wish had a hot tub time machine to go to Chile in the 1970s. It was such a conservative utopia. Complete free market, military leaders, torture. Ahhh.

[GoSox05]

ahh, i wish had a hot tub time machine to go to Chile in the 1970s. It was such a conservative utopia. Complete free market, military leaders, torture. Ahhh.

 

 

Tell Milton Friedman I said hi!!

[BigSqwert]

I love me some Digby...

Democracy

 

by digby

 

The teabaggers are all upset that the Democrats passed a bill without any Republican votes. Evidently, this makes it illegitimate and unconstitutional. I'm not surprised they think this. They get their constitutional instruction from Glenn Beck.

 

But what can you say about the front runner for the 2012 presidential nomination?

A Campaign Begin

s

Today [Mitt Romney]

 

America ha

s

ju

s

t witne

s

s

ed an uncon

s

cionable abu

s

e of power. Pre

s

ident Obama ha

s

betrayed hi

s

oath to the nation

—

rather than bringing u

s

together, u

s

hering in a new

k

ind of politic

s

, and ri

s

ing above raw parti

s

an

s

hip, he ha

s

s

uccumbed to the lowe

s

t denominator of incumbent power: ju

s

tifying the mean

s

by extolling the end

s

. He promi

s

ed better; we de

s

erved better.

 

He call

s

hi

s

accompli

s

hment

“

hi

s

toric

”

—

in thi

s

he i

s

correct, although not for the rea

s

on he intend

s

. Rather, it i

s

an hi

s

toric u

s

urpation of the legi

s

lative proce

s

s

—

he unlea

s

hed the nuclear option, enli

s

ted not a

s

ingle Republican vote in either chamber, bribed reluctant member

s

of hi

s

own party, paid-off hi

s

union bac

k

er

s

,

s

capegoated in

s

urer

s

, and ju

s

tified hi

s

act with patently fraudulent accounting. What Barac

k

Obama ha

s

u

s

hered into the American political land

s

cape i

s

not good for our country; in the word

s

of an ancient maxim,

“

what

s

tart

s

twi

s

ted, end

s

twi

s

ted.

”

I can't help but recall hearing a whole lot of patronizing advice from these same people a few years back when anyone breathed that President Bush might not have legitimately taken office since he lost the popular vote, his brother manipulated the system in Florida and he was was installed by a partisan supreme court decision. Back then it was all "get over it," and "I've got political capital and I'm gonna spend it!" Now, these same people are all screaming that it's a usurpation if the Democrats win the majority and then pass legislation that they don't like.

 

It's fairly clear that Republicans don't understand how democracy works. You campaign, people vote, you win elections, you get a majority, you pass legislation. They seem to think Democracy means that that elections are irrelevant, majorities are meaningless and that all legislation is contingent upon the permission of the Republican Party.

 

I'm sorry these people are so unhappy. I know how they feel. I used to hate it when the Republicans passed some disgusting initiative that went against everything I believe in. But I don't recall having a mental breakdown at the notion that they could do it even though I didn't want them to. The idea that they were obligated to do my bidding didn't actually cross my mind.

 

As they used to say repeatedly, "elections have consequences." If the people don't like this bill, they have every right to turn the Democrats out of office and repeal it. But screaming hysterically that it's cheating to pass legislation with a majority just proves that these folks' great reverence for the constitution is based more on their love of wearing funny hats than anything that's written in it.

 

This is how the system works. If you don't like it, start pressing for a constitutional amendment that requires that all legislation be approved by every teabagger in the land before it can be enacted. Or start campaigning to put your teabaggers in office so they can have a majority and enact the legislation you like. In either event, stop the whining about "abuse of power." They passed a bill you don't like, for crying out loud, it's not like they seized office with a partisan decision by the Supreme Court and then invaded a country that hadn't attacked us or anything...

[BigSqwert]

I wonder when Chris Matthews will apologize to Representative Grayson for this interview on Hardball from this past January...

MATTHEWS: Let's bring in Democratic Congressman Alan Grayson of Florida. Look, I'm not sure... I think I know what that means, "Make the good fight, make your big pitch." They've lost sight of the sales pitch in trying to get the thing made. But you still are faced with the realities. You don't have the 60 votes to break the filibuster in the Senate.

 

Grayson: I don't think we need 'em.

 

MATTHEWS: You don't need 60 votes?

 

Grayson: We've had a Congress now for 222 years. How long has there been a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate? How long? You tell me. You're a student of history.

 

MATTHEWS: Well, it's been a long time, and let me tell you, that's why nothing ever gets through Congress. [Laughs.]

 

GRAYSON: And the country somehow managed to function...

 

MATTHEWS: Name me a major bill that Congress ever got through that was partisan.

 

GRAYSON: We got tax cuts for the rich from the Republicans with 51 votes...

 

MATTHEWS: Easy! Anybody can cut taxes! That's not hard.

 

GRAYSON: No, tax cuts for the rich. Fifty-one votes.

 

MATTHEWS: It's easy! That's easy!

 

GRAYSON: Well, it turns out that in the 222 year history of the Congress, we've had a filibuster-proof majority for all of 14 years. And somehow, we managed to pass legislation on all those other occasions.

 

MATTHEWS: But you haven't created a major new program like health care for everybody. Can you pass a major new program, like Medicare, in the current environment, where there's such division.

 

GRAYSON: We not only can, we have to.

 

MATTHEWS: But that's just talking! How do you do it?

 

GRAYSON: It's not talking! There are people dying in America every day because they have no health care.

 

MATTHEWS: OK, OK. OK, you know, this show is about reality.

 

GRAYSON: Well, the reality is...

 

MATTHEWS: Tell me how you pass this bill with 41. You just got a guy elected in Massachusetts who said...

 

GRAYSON: Reconciliation needs 51.

 

MATTHEWS: ...he signs his name "41." That means enough to stop this bill.

 

GRAYSON: Reconciliation needs 51 Senators.

 

MATTHEWS: What are you talking about? What procedure do you know that Harry Reid doesn't know?

 

GRAYSON: What makes you think Harry Reid's not going to do it? I was calling for it six months ago.

 

MATTHEWS: That Dick Durbin doesn't know? That all those top guys, that Ted Kennedy didn't know?

 

GRAYSON: They said they're not going to use reconciliation?

 

MATTHEWS: The secret route to the Indies that only you know about?

 

GRAYSON: What are you talking about?

 

MATTHEWS: These Senators can't do it!

 

GRAYSON: They've been talking about this...

 

MATTHEWS: They've said they can't do it.

 

GRAYSON: Why do you think they can't use reconciliation?

 

MATTHEWS: Because you talk to any one of these Senators... have you talked to any of them lately? And what do they tell you? What do the Democratic Senators

 

GRAYSON: You think I'm their confessor?

 

MATTHEWS: OK, you ever call up a Democratic Senator and say why don't you do this by reconciliation?

 

GRAYSON: What makes you think they're not going to do it? What do you know that I don't know?

 

MATTHEWS: Because... they've refused to do it because they cannot get past the filibuster rule. The United States Senate is different than the House.

 

GRAYSON: I...

 

MATTHEWS: You're allowed to talk as long as you want in the Senate.

 

GRAYSON: Not with reconciliation.

 

MATTHEWS: Unless you get cloture.

 

GRAYSON: With reconciliation it's 51 votes, not 60 votes.

 

MATTHEWS: What do you mean, reconciliation? You can't create a program through reconciliation!

 

GRAYSON: You can create an amendment...

 

MATTHEWS: Nobody's ever done one!

 

GRAYSON: The bill's already passed with 60 votes, you...

 

MATTHEWS: Name a program that's...

 

GRAYSON: All you need to do is...

 

MATTHEWS: Congressman, just name me the program that's ever been created through reconciliation. Name one! One!

 

GRAYSON: As I said, tax cuts for the rich...

 

MATTHEWS: That's not a program! Under reconciliation, you're allowed to do two things, change fiscal numbers. You're allowed to raise taxes, or cut program spending. You cannot create something.

 

GRAYSON: You're saying that. You don't know that. Nobody else thinks that.

 

MATTHEWS: I just spent three years on the Senate Budget Committee when I was a kid, let me tell you, you can't do it, and you can ask... By the way, have you asked any Senator this question? This program... this plan you have?

 

GRAYSON: I'm in the other place...

 

MATTHEWS: Why don't you run for the Senate and try to...

 

GRAYSON: I'm in the House, not the Senate.

 

MATTHEWS: I know, that's why you're not in the Senate. In the Senate you have to do this thing...

 

GRAYSON: Oh, that's why I'm not in the Senate! OK, now I understand! Well, we got that cleared up!

 

MATTHEWS: In the Senate, you have to get 60 votes. Why do you think the Democrats fought like hell to get 60 votes? Why do you think the President and everybody else is dying over the fact that they lost Massachusetts? Because it didn't matter? You think they're all crazy over there, but you're smart?

 

GRAYSON: No, I didn't say that. What I'm saying is that everyone's been talking about reconciliation, and nobody has the guts to do it.

 

MATTHEWS: Name the United States Senator that's willing to do this. You keep talking about it...

 

GRAYSON: I think that's what you'll probably see at this point.

 

MATTHEWS: [Laughs.] Wanna bet? [Laughs.] Do you want to bet that they're gonna do this? In other words, they killed themselves to get 60 votes, but now they're gonna say all we need is 50, and Biden to break the tie.

 

GRAYSON: They shouldn't have killed themselves to get 60 votes. This is something they could've done six months ago.

 

MATTHEWS: This is netroots talk!

 

GRAYSON: No, look...

 

MATTHEWS: This is outsider talk, and you're an elected official...

 

GRAYSON: That's not true. That's not true.

 

MATTHEWS: ...and you know you can't do it. You're pandering to the netroots right now. I know what you're doing!

 

GRAYSON: You are wrong! This is something we talk about with the leadership in our caucus meetings every week!

 

MATTHEWS: OK, tell me how you'd convince the United States Senate Democrats, 59 of them, to do what you want them to do. How do you change their minds? Because they've made up their minds.

 

GRAYSON: They want to pass the bill.

 

MATTHEWS: Yes?

 

GRAYSON: The only way to pass the bill now is to use reconciliation.

 

MATTHEWS: Yes? And they're gonna do this?

 

GRAYSON: I think they will.

 

MATTHEWS: When will they do this, because I want to write write this down. When are they gonna do something that has never been done before? Create a program through this reconciliation process?

 

GRAYSON: You know, they've used reconciliation time and time again. You're saying create a program, as if that's something dramatically different from everything else the Senate does. It's not.

 

MATTHEWS: OK, let me tell you, the purpose of reconciliation is to take measures -- cutting taxes, er, raising taxes or cutting spending -- to reconcile actual government spending and tax policy with previous legislation that you've passed. You haven't passed a bill to create a health care plan.

 

GRAYSON: When did you become the Senate parliamentarian? Did I miss that?

 

MATTHEWS: Well, I worked over there for many, many years, and I worked for the Speaker for six years, I worked 15 years up there...

 

GRAYSON: Well, I'm speaking to the Speaker and the leadership this year...

 

MATTHEWS: ...and I know what I'm talking about! You ask anybody... you ask anybody in the Senate right now... Go call the Senate legislative counsel's office and ask them if you can do this. Go ask the parliamentarians if you can do this. You haven't bothered to do that.

 

GRAYSON: No, the leadership...

 

MATTHEWS: [Laughs.]

 

GRAYSON: ...my leadership has done that. And my answer is yes.

 

MATTHEWS: OK, this is a moot point. OK, so in other words, there's going to be a health care bill and it's gonna be passed by reconciliation. You predict that?

 

GRAYSON: I think that there'll be an amendment passed by reconciliation. We already have a bill passed, we just have to merge the two bills.

 

MATTHEWS: And when will this happen so that we'll get this thing done and stop arguing about it?

 

GRAYSON: Thirty days or less.

 

MATTHEWS: Thirty days or less, we will have a health care bill passed through the process of reconciliation?

 

GRAYSON: I believe so.

 

MATTHEWS: You believe so.

 

GRAYSON: And I certainly hope so...

 

MATTHEWS: You predict it?

 

GRAYSON: ...because America needs it?

 

MATTHEWS: You predict it? [Laughs.]

 

GRAYSON: It's the most likely option at this point.

 

MATTHEWS: [Laughing.] This is the problem, Congressman...

 

GRAYSON: What?

 

MATTHEWS: This is the problem. Every night, we deal with two worlds: the real world of Congress, that has to do things and get things passed; and this outside world, represented by the netroots and the other people out there, like yourself, who play this game...

 

GRAYSON: What are you talking about?

 

MATTHEWS: ...and it doesn't get done! [Laughs.]

 

GRAYSON: I sit in meetings with the Democratic Caucus week after week. You talk about netroots, netroots, netroots! I'm telling you, this is what we're talking about. This is what the leadership is telling us.

 

MATTHEWS: OK, we'll make a side bet. It's not gonna happen. Anyway, Congressman Alan Grayson, a true believer, who believes he can get things done by willing it!

[bmags]

Ha! yes, Grayson should go back with that transcript.

[NorthSideSox72]

I wonder when Chris Matthews will apologize to Representative Grayson for this interview on Hardball from this past January...

I'll admit I know nothing about this Rep Grayson person... but after reading that, I think I like him. Matthews is such a wind bag.

 

[bmags]

I don't think you'll like him NS,

 

you do know him.

 

He's of "Dick Cheney is a vampire" and "Republicans health care plan: Get sick, die quickly" fame

[Balta1701]

I'll admit I know nothing about this Rep Grayson person... but after reading that, I think I like him. Matthews is such a wind bag.

You'd hate him. He's an outspoken leftist, the kind that would typically get portrayed as crazy. He's the one who was quoted on the House floor saying that the Republican Health Care plan is "Don't get sick".

[bmags]

we're on the same posting schedule at the moment, balta.

[BigSqwert]

LOL