Will our Democratic Party beget the mother of all corporate scams?

[Faryn Balyncd]

(I'm not just talking about the Baucus/GOP-rape -of-America bill, but ANY bill that does not provide an opportunity for EVERY AMERICAN to opt in to a robust public plan - - - an affordable public plan based upon Medicare provider rates.)



Will Nancy Pelosi eventually, as Lawrence O'Donnell tells Keith Olbermann, succeed once again, when push comes to shove, in getting progressives to enable corporatist legislation?

And that is the formula that they're using this time. Nancy Pelosi firmly believes that when the moment comes she can gather her caucus together and tell them that she fought harder for the public option than Barack Obama did, than Harry Reid did, than any senator did, no one fought harder for it than Nancy Pelosi, and she is now telling her troops they're gonna have to go forward without it. That moment is going to come.

OLBERMANN: But there's still a calculation in the other direction here that doesn't add up either. Assuming no Republican votes in the House, the speaker can only afford to lose 38 Democrats. Twenty-three Blue Dogs said they will not vote for the bill as it now stands. But there's 60 to 100 Democratic members - progressives - who might bolt without a public option. Doesn't both sets of math fail her?

O'DONNELL: They do, but she believes is, and what she believes, and what they always believe in the Democratic Party, is that when it comes down to the actual legislating moment, they will get those hundred liberals in the house to go along with this more centrist position. They'll give up on the Blue Dogs and they'll simply talk to that 60-100 voters on the left in the House to be on board with this and be on board with this President and it will work, because it always works.

OLBERMANN: Is it going to work this time?

O'DONNELL: I don't see how it wouldn't work. If Nancy Pelosi gets it to the point that where the only way to get this through is without the public option, and she gathers her caucus together and she tells them that in one of those 'hold-hands prayer meetings,' in effect. And Charlie Rangel, who's been very strong on this, and Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee stands up and says we've got to do it this way, because that's what chairmen always do - chairmen want to get a bill in the end and they will basically hold hands and say 'let's do it this way.'

. . . .

OLBERMANN: Alright, well, we'll see what the Internet can do to change the equation, but I think we're still going to have to meet at the barricades one way or the other.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x367838

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwqsUdmW9hQ

Will we rise to the occasion?

Or will our party beget a more massive package of CORPORATE WELFARE than the GOP was ever capable of passing - - - a mandatory-private-insurance, no-public-option corporatist we dream, dressed up in the rhetoric of "reform"?

Is it conceivable for our Democratic Party to beget he mother of all corporate bait-and-switch scams?





:kick:

[ixion]

1. my money is on corporate welfare

it's what they always do, even when they claim they're not.

[Winterblues]

3. You are exactly right, Your money will go to Corporate welfare.

I am so sick of this top down strategy instead of bottom up. Obama is very much a disappointment to me at this stage of the game. We are still in Iraq, we will not have a Public Option, We are escalating the war in Afghanistan, We are not prosecuting war criminals, we are pretty much keeping everything the Bush* Cabal put into place. I can still hope for some change in direction but it isn't looking very likely at the moment. I thought I was going to be happy after such a Democratic victory in 2008, but it just isn't meant to be I guess. :shrug:

[DaLittle Kitty]

30. K & R Dems And Repubs Are ONE IN THE SAME! The $MONEY PARTY!

Rahm is the Prime Minister and Obama is the ceremonial President!

[flyarm]

42. I have been saying it since Iowa..there is one party with one giant money pot in the middle!

eom

[truedelphi]

60. You spent time there in Iowa, right?

And you had to watch all the goings on first hand. Did you make it to the next state after Iowa, or did you decide that was enough?

Also are you familiar with "Yeswestillcan.org" or should I be wary of them. (PM if you prefer to answer these out of the public view.)

[Faryn Balyncd]

2. The SILENT "Unreckers" are as dependable as the lobbyists.....

[Uzybone]

4. cable shows are on to get folks hyperventilating

clear example here.

What policy is Lawrence O'Donnell endorsing or writing or voting on?

[Laelth]

5. Clinton managed to do it. Why not Obama too?

I continue to hope that the Democratic Party does not sell us out, but that hope is fading.

:dem:

-Laelth

[Faryn Balyncd]

7. Clinton did not mandate Baucus/GOP - private-insurance-only, no-public-option health care

[slipslidingaway]

6. knr nt

[truedelphi]

8. Self deleting the duplicate

[truedelphi]

9. The Pelosi led, Democratic majority congress begat the Infamous

Postal Reform Actof 2007, which has hurt many a small business by its raising of the postal rates while exempting the larger firms (Amazon, Time Life etc.)

I am not holding my breath regarding this party of corporate Sell-outs. I admit Obama is golden-tongued, but even the best golden tongue is despicable - if used in the service of snake oil-ism.

[ShortnFiery]

13. At least the democrats figuratively hug us BEFORE they sell us out to the Corporations.

I guess we'll just have to be consoled by the fact that America's slouching toward fascism is NOW being delivered to us with the soft hand of a democratic glove?

[truedelphi]

15. Che Guevara explained this quite well

If he was still alive, he would be telling us that Obama is a "negotiated solution."

In the era of the Banana Republics (some of which still exist - note the Honduras coup earlier this summer) any time that an appointed dictator is so odious to the people that revolt is possible, the powers behind that Throne decide to off that dictator, sometimes peacefully, sometimes violently. And that dictator is always replaced with someone more amenable to the people. An Eva Peron type of person, if you will.

So in October of 2008, a deal is cut with Obama. Palin will be McCain's running mate, and Obama will get his eight years in the WH, if he just signs on the dotted line.

Although this will delay the coveted war with Iran, (McCain would have had bombs dropping by mid February, as far as I can tell) the bargain with Obama will prevent an out and out revolt.

Obama is just too nice and too set in the image of the Gestalt of the times. People in the USA will no longer accept the Dick Cheney type of leader; better to have the softness of the Obama Administration to wash poison down our gullets than the iron fisted types we have come to be wary of over the long Bush years.

[FiveGoodMen]

22. Sadly, that's just exactly how it appears.

Change that was never ever intended to come to fruition!

[flyarm]

44. only fools bought into that bullshit!

i have yet to see anyone ever feed their kids on hope or change or promises of health care..only someone gullible would buy into that bullshit talk.

[truedelphi]

59. But it appears that 20% of all the Dems will believe

That whatever Obama to declare as his "mission accomplished" on the home front is most worthy of their support. Just as my trusted (Formerly trusted) Republican friends bought into Bush's lies and baloney about Iraq.

The truly sad thing about all of this is that a full 40% of us are independent thinkers, and would be amenable to a third party. (If you look at the other nations, all of which have health care - they also all have third and even fourth parties as a challenge to the primary parties.) But here in America, a third party's success would rely on someone as charismatic as Obama running as a third party candidate. And having the money to back him or her. (The 40% figure is from a Pew study done spring 2008, in which 32% of all Americans considered themselves Dems, 28% cosnidered themselves Repugs, and the rest were indies.)

[tomp]

51. and du plays right along with its obamphilia. nt

[flyarm]

43. it's what Leo Strauss called for!! too bad no one paid attention!! eom

[truedelphi]

62. I haven't thought about Leo Strauss for some time.

I put this on my hard drive (Maybe from the telospress site?) last year:

But the Straussian twist is this, and certainly much more than just a Chicago connection. Some conservative fence-sitters make the argument that Obama does not mean what he says, indeed that he is in fact better than what he says, because he means something else. What he says is only what the public needs to hear for him in order to win the election, such as the promise to rewrite NAFTA unilaterally; his staff already announced that he will do nothing of the sort. Just kidding!

[peace frog]

10. So it would appear

but I would love to be proved wrong. PLEASE Mr. President and members of Congress, prove me wrong.

[ShortnFiery]

11. On Progressive Radio: BIMBO - Big Insurance Major Bail Out

B. I. M. B. O. Bill ... it's all a scam. :puke:

[truedelphi]

12. It's a scam, fer sure.

Great acronym though.

[SergeStorms]

29. Just think how all that money.........

given to the insurance companies will stimulate the economy! :sarcasm: Yep, I bet that will be the new proffered meme: it's a stimulus thing, don't ya' know. ;)

[dotymed]

52. I wrote about this

on the General Discussion Board and was attacked by every
responder....poor me...but that is exactly what it sounds like
to me; another bailout for the wealthy corporations. This time
Insurance companies instead of financial institutions.

[RoccoR5955]

14. Turn the Blue Dogs into BLACK AND BLUE DOGS!!!

Vote the corporate scum out in 2010.

They work for WE THE PEOPLE, not them, the corporations.

NO MORE CORPORATE WELFARE!
People before profits!

[Aragorn]

28. vote em out

is the only answer. Do enough of them know that, or does the ability to ignore the LAST election mean they screw the citizens anyway?

[Mithreal]

16. Conceivable? Absolutely, yes. nt

[Chisox08]

17. It seems all that will come out of the Congress is a plan

To push us all into the loving arms of the big health insurance cooperations with little to no real regulations.

[MissPuddy]

33. The media is giving him a home run...IT WAS A GIFT TO INSURANCE COMPANIES

The speech was a speech....that's it. Thin. How can Ed Schultz sit here and spin this...

[slipslidingaway]

18. They already have done so, they removed a not-for-profit system from the table...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6499259&mesg_id=6499259

Single-payer was marginalized and taken off the table during the Clinton health reform debate. We are repeating the same mistakes in 2009 by ignoring the polls which say that the majority prefer a government run, national health insurance, system similar to Medicare.

It's Time for a Real Debate on National Health Insurance - by Jeff Cohen and Norman Solomon

May 12,1993..."


"In 2006, a Congressional Task Force created by the 2003 Medicare Modernization Act hosted 29 town hall meetings across the U.S. to ask Americans what type of health care reform they favored. The results of the “Citizen’s Health Care Working Group” were overwhelmingly in favor of single payer health insurance..."


How do you win a fight if you silence the harshest critics of those who hold power....

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/slipslidingaway/86

Posted by slipslidingaway in General Discussion: Presidential
Wed Sep 02nd 2009, 01:04 PM

Please do not tell me that you are fighting the entrenched interests when you invite them to the discussions and private meetings and exclude those who have been fighting the For Profit companies for decades...

[DaLittle Kitty]

35. Agreed and The Propaganda Is ONLY Just Beginning Defending this Crap!

The mods here are not interested in encouraging people to think. Clearly I was not the only one who felt this way as my post was LOCKED! Obama has been the King Obfuscator and is bought and controlled by Corporate America! Democratic Underground is protecting a President who is afraid to speak up and defend himself!

The more the koolaide drinkers unrec my post the more important is the post. Obama sold out America tonight and you are acting to limit the damage! Pure corporatist Money Party! Pure BS! Now I'm hearing ED Schultz Propagandizing! This IS the depths to which our once great nation has SUNK! Brutal! I am for Medicare For ALL btw... Check my Journal sometime!!!!!

[Faryn Balyncd]

19. "Q Are you saying K Street got it; you guys haven't? MR. GIBBS: Not surprisingly, yes."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8636273

[truedelphi]

20. Shouldn't he have said, "Surprisingly"

Instead of not surprisingly?

Funny lil slip of the lizard tongue there, huh?

[Faryn Balyncd]

21. Maybe Gibbs"s strategy is to surprise them with truth?

[dmr]

27. Hell, K Street probably wrote it!

Just like Congress sure didn't write the bankruptcy bill a few years ago.

[MissPuddy]

34. How can Ed Schultz spin this drivel?

Please Ed...Obama is selling the Progressives out!!!

[flyarm]

46. he is part of the GE package! eom

[Peregrine Took]

56. Naive fool of a Took that I am - I was shocked how Big Ed fell for the speech

hook, line and sinker. Rachel, too. It must be the MSNBC kool aid.

[truedelphi]

61. And his introduction to the spin was even worse.

he criticized the Repugs for their not voting in the 700 billion dollar Bush bailout - which was a good thing to vote against. (Due to the irresponsibility and expense inherent in the 700 billion dollar bailout, many of the Progressive Caucus voted against it also.) He mentioned several other actions that the Repugs had taken - and those ere not at all thoughtless and irresponsible but actually sensible.

Why would anyone vote in legislation that gives hundreds of billions of dollars without any meaningful oversight or regulation?

[Romulox]

23. Just like the multitrillion dollar bank bailouts, and GM and Chrysler bankruptcies,

Democrats can accomplish things for corporations that Republicans could never get away with...

Add NAFTA, MFN China, to the list as well.

[CoffeeCat]

24. K&R....

A very important post...

Can't wait until O's speech tonight.

[placton]

25. short answer? You betcha!

'10 & '12 primaries

[colsohlibgal]

26. Entirely Conceivable

Sadly this is what the official democratic party has become. This party used to stand for something and for the most part the best thing you can say about them today is that they are varying degrees of marginally better than republicans.

[Mari333]

31. remember when you had hope?

http://www.breitbart.tv/obama-in-03-id-like-to-see-a-single-payer-health-care-plan/

[MissPuddy]

32. A great speech.....and nothing more...What's the Public Option?

I wanna' know...

[truedelphi]

64. The Public Option. It is vague - it is amorphous

What's not to love? Sure no one has defined it - and as to scope, the President has only said that the public option is not the reform in its entirety.

So is it a big part of his plan for reform? Or a small part?

And that is the wonders of the Obama Presidency. There are enough Obamaphiles out there that asking the above questions is enough to put them off their feed. Why can't a citizen just relax and trust that he will put it all together and it will be all terrific.
For everyone. One only has to experience the amazing jobless recovery that is chugging along and working so well with all of our tax dollars for the good of the investment class and those on Wall Street.

[flyarm]

47. nope..i never had hope..not that kind of bullshit words..HOPE?..that was for fools! eom

[tooeyeten]

36. Corporations are killing Americans

by keeping health care out of the hands of their doctors.

[Vidar]

37. Great post. Highly recommended. This reform only helps the insurance companies.

[Triana]

38. Yep. Consider who bought and owns 'em.

It ain't you and me. We're not why they're there, nevermind what the propaganda is.

[glinda]

39. I think Backass is setting up a run for GOP presidential nominee.

[MadHound]

40. Then the question becomes whether or not liberals stay within the Democratic party, or flee it

Frankly at this point, with no public option, I say liberals need to show the Democrats what happens when they take us for granted one too many times, see how well they do in 2010 and 2012. Hard lesson, but it is past time that the Democratic party and the DLC relearned it.

[flyarm]

41. [b]The Bad Max Tax By: emptywheel[/b] ( who's kidding who here..we don't matter to congress or

the white house..the deals have been made and we are fucked ..again..


http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/09/08/the-bad-max-tax/

The Bad Max Tax
By: emptywheel Tuesday September 8, 2009 6:02 am

Update: Here's Bad Max's "framework."

Bad Max Baucus' health care plan is, best as I can tell, an attempt to turn the middle class into serfs to the health care industry.

Consider the "limits" he places on health care costs for those who make between 300% and 400% of the poverty limit (between $66,150 and $88,200 for a family of four):

Another section of Mr. Baucus’s proposal would help pay insurance premiums, co-payments and deductibles for people with incomes less than 300 percent of the poverty level ($66,150 for a family of four). It would also provide some protection for people with incomes from 300 percent to 400 percent of the poverty level (up to $88,200 for a family of four), so they would generally not have to pay more than 13 percent of their income in premiums.

So Bad Max says that he will prevent these people from having to pay more than 13% of their income in health care premiums. For the family of four making $67,000, that's $8,710. For the family of four making $88,200, that's $11,466. For the family of four making $90,000, apparently, there are no such limits, so they may be paying much more. For what may well be utter and total junk.

Now, frankly, there are a lot of middle class families already paying more than that. Heck, mr. ew and I are paying more than $8,700, and that's just for two of us, and that's before Blue Cross starts whacking us for my pre-existing condition next year.

But that's just the premiums.

Then, Bad Max has a limit for total out-of-pocket expenses (and this appears to include everything). For that family of four--regardless of whether they make $67,000 or $88,200, that limit would be $11,900.

Mr. Baucus would impose limits on out-of-pocket medical costs — the co-payments, deductibles and similar charges for covered items and services. The limits would be $11,900 a year for a family and $5,950 for an individual. The comparable numbers in the House bill are $10,000 and $5,000.

Now, of course families would only have to pay that limit if they used enough services to reach that limit--though in Bad Max's plan, health insurance companies are asked to cover far less of actual expenses, so in Bad Max's plan, families are going to reach that limit relatively quickly. If Bad Max asks families to pay 35% of their costs, then that represents just $34,000 in costs, or less. Bad Max says insurance companies have to provide 73% of costs if they want to be subsidized.

And the only way to keep those costs down under Bad Max's bill is the co-op. So what's to stop the hospitals for charging $10,000 for you to walk through the door? Or for Pfizer to charge you $5,000 a year for your required medicine? What's to stop the insurance companies from charging everyone that 13% rate on premiums, as a matter of course? Under Bad Max's plan, because it requires everyone to have insurance, corporations actually have more of a guarantee (and therefore an incentive) to charge such exorbitant fees.



snip:

Aside from the atrocity that Bad Max thinks middle class families should pay more to his donors than they pay for housing or for their Federal taxes, assuming these middle class families come close to hitting the max in a given year (something Bad Max doesn't do much to prevent), it would leave them just $7,215 for all the rest of their expenses. That's simply unsustainable and would all but preclude things like college. Thus, Bad Max's health care "reform" would basically institutionalize a condition in which the middle class continues to fall further and further behind, paying far too much for health care and/or avoiding necessary treatment. It would keep the middle class drowning under debt. It would continue to force the middle class to choose between health care and things like college or fixing the roof on their house.

[Hissyspit]

49. .

[leftstreet]

45. K&R

[Greyhound]

48. Yes, just as they've paved the way for the entire fascist agenda.

Nothing new.

Oh, and we did tell you so.

[western mass]

50. Yes, it was the banking bailout. This is scam # 2.

american liberals seem to have alot in common with a certain river in Egypt...

[katandmoon]

53. Yes and it wouldn't happen if that wasn't what Obama wanted

[western mass]

57. true that

[ProudDad]

54. Soon, we will finally achieve the pure Fascist state...

Mussolini would blush...

My response soliciting my take on the speech...

========================================

You're assuming that there will ANY kind of "public option"? Unless Barack is ready to threaten the veto pen if there is no "public option", there will be NO public option.

And he won't.

It also sounded like he threw a couple of pieces of red meat toward and then undercut the Progressive Caucus. Very clever...

My primary beef is that he didn't touch the essential issue (except in passing without mentioning the elephant in the room); the obvious USAmerican selfish, greedy core that can't stand the idea of someone "getting something I'm not", especially poor people (too lazy to work), undocumented immigrants (illegals) and other despised humans.

And it would have been so easy. He could have put it into focus for the ignorant by quoting from an article I read recently (I paraphrase):

"So you complain about paying premiums all your life and not getting it all back in the form of Health Care. You think that when someone else 'gets' more out of the system than they put in you have been cheated. HEY, YOU WON! THEY LOST, YOU IDIOT! You were healthy, they got sick or injured!"

The key question, Barack, is "can we agree that Health Care is part of 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" and that all persons residing in the United States deserve complete, comprehensive access to Quality Health Care?

Health Care for All should be an axiom, a no-brainer, an "of course!" premise -- but it obviously isn't.

There was a large block of people in that audience, dems and republicans who do not believe that essential truth. And until there's a strong plurality who believes it to their core, who internalizes the desire to cover everyone as the civilized world has already done, the forces of evil and profit will continue to win here in the belly of the beast.

He temporarily refocused the attention on PolicyWonkSpeak instead of the mindless screaming of the past month or so but this will die down since he didn't make an argument for nor a good enough emotional connection to my point above to begin a process that could result in most people saying, "Hell, why not health care for everyone. That just sounds right!"

I don't have any real hope for this year's "effort". I believe that again (see Medicare Part D), it will be a give-away to the worst of the worst, the insurance corporations and drug companies. And more people will die needlessly, through neglect and hatred and fear, and there will be no substantive change for the better in the USAmerican system of 'sick care'.

I wouldn't even applaud forcing the insurance companies to accept people with pre-existing conditions and be barred from removing people who get sick from their rolls if I were you. They'll just jack up the premiums for everyone to cover expenses and a health, constantly growing profit for shareholders (and them selves). That's what they do. Corporations are psychopaths in pursuit of profits for their shareholders.

This whole "health care debate" is further proof that the USAmerican attempt at democracy has been highjacked...finally and for good.

==============================================================

And, here's another MAIN indication that the health insurance reform "debate" has been highjacked by the forces of Evil:

"If the Court reverses Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce and the relevant part of McConnell v. FEC, critics say corporate wealth will re-enter and dominate campaigns in ways that have not been seen in more than a century.

“Since the dawn of the Republic, the Court has recognized that corporations are artificial entities that enjoy unique advantages and must therefore be subject to greater government oversight,” said Doug Kendall of the Constitutional Accountability Center. “If the Court turns its back on this constitutional text and history, it will blatantly disregard the will of the people and unleash corporate influence on elections.”

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/analysis.aspx?id=22052

"The Obama administration will defend the restraints on the grounds that corporations are different from individuals. “Corporations are artificial persons endowed by the government with significant special advantages that no natural person possesses,’’ solicitor general (and former Harvard Law School dean) Elena Kagan has written.

"She’s right, because a publicly traded business corporation, driven to maximize profits by market competition and its own charter, can’t rise above that mission any more than it can dance nude. Corporations aren’t “voluntary associations’’ with republican intentions, as Justice Antonin Scalia claims; in a civic sense, they’re mindless, because their shareholders change with every stock-price fluctuation.

"Even a “nonprofit’’ corporation like Citizens United doesn’t deliberate openly with Americans as fellow citizens; it exists only to advance a business agenda in politics and is closed to persuasion."

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/09/05/corporate_free_speech_since_when/

============================================

Even with the weak "protections" of current campaign finance law the deep, deep pockets filled with corporate money dominated the "debate" and own the "back rooms" of the corporate-funded Congress and White House.

When this court, packed with pro-corporate ideologues, rules in the matter of "Citizens United v. the Federal Election Commission (FEC)", the final nail will have been driven home in the coffin of the USAmerican experiment in Popular Democracy.

This decision will open the floodgates of corporate (psychopath) money taken from OUR pockets with nearly every purchase we make, which will be used against our own best interests and allow the final balloon payment for the purchase of our institutions of government and regulation.

You think the last twenty-eight years were bad?

Well folks, you ain't seen nothing yet!

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

There is hope but only by disengaging from their system...

Relocalize, don't feed the beast.

www.transitionus.org
http://www.attractionretreat.org/CFOL/index.html

[truedelphi]

63. Great post, Proud dad

You did yourself, um, PROUD!

[JVS]

55. This is heinous

[info being]

58. Actually, that appears to be the most likely outcome...

...and we all know it.

[DaLittle Kitty]

65. NOOOO Question About IT!

:think: idiots!

[TBF]

66. I guess it's time for the insurance companies to get their bail out -

I'm still wondering when we normal folks are going to get our turn. Something tells me we're not even on the list...