If this bullshit bill with mandates in it is passed and signed into law...

[Leftist Agitator]

I am never voting for a Democrat ever again. Any Democrat. Anywhere. EVER AGAIN.

Tax credits instead of subsidies for the poor? You have got to be fucking kidding me.

I make $9.00/hr. Last week, I worked 23 hours, because business has been very slow lately. This week, a little less. I think I'll end up with about 21 hours this week.

Even when I'm working 40 hours a week (which isn't often), I only bring home a little more than $1000 / month.

My bills take every penny of what I earn in a good month. In a bad month (like this month is shaping up to be), it's back to my ever-dwindling stockpile of ramen, dry beans and dry rice, what wild foods I can forage for, and no driving at all, no matter how far I need to go, I walk.

Just where in the fuck am I supposed to get a few hundred a month for mandated private health insurance? Hell, even with a so-called "public option", unless the premiums are ridiculously inexpensive ($25 / month let's say), there's no way I can afford another bill.

This is a fucking scam, and by God, if it comes to fruition, not only will I never vote for a Democrat again, I might actively consider working for the Green Party the next time an election rolls around.

[GreenPartyVoter]

1. Do you not qualify for Medicaid? :^(

[Hello_Kitty]

5. Not if s/he doesn't have kids. eom

[dflprincess]

103. Even then, the income limits for medical assistance tend to

be totally out of touch with reality.

[Orrex]

2. It's your own damn fault for not being independently wealthy!

Shame on you for not bootstrapping your way to prosperity in this time of unprecedented economic growth.

[stray cat]

3. It sounds like you will qualify for free insurance or Medicade with the new plans

are you better off right now than that?

[Matariki]

7. Sure, until someone like Reagan comes along and tosses about words like "Welfare Queen"

[Greyhound]

87. Utter and complete bullshit. This woman lives in WV, where $9 p/hr is considered a "living wage".

There is noting at all to help her in this corporate POS, but much that will make life harder for her.

Get a fucking clue, this Congress and this President do not give a shit about poor people!

[SammyWinstonJack]

105. How much clearer can this be?

this Congress and this President do not give a shit about poor people!

Or anyone else who isn't extremely wealthy, or isn't a power wielding Corp., for that matter. :shrug:

[flyarm]

4. didn't you know ..you are not supposed to whine ..you could be considered a "HATER" around here..

and the least you are is.. never happy " WITH ANYTHING ".:sarcasm:

DIDN'T YOU KNOW you are supposed to cheer with pom poms at the ready for any bone that is thrown your way??????.:sarcasm:

What????... you say you can't afford to buy food and shelter and health insurance from the big boys this white house made a deal with..why you selfish thing you..go without food damn it..and be greatful!.:sarcasm:

We must have nothing disturb the simple lives the Cheerleading squad have set up for themselves...like the fact that you might starve should you be mandated paying the big insurance guys and big pharma boys bonus's...and Martini time on their yachts..:sarcasm:

Shhhhhhhh..don't tell anyone you would lose your home..if you have to pay the fines of $3,800.00 if you can not buy the insurance you will be mandated to purchase...You would be considered "negative" or a terrible whinner..at the least..:sarcasm: .:sarcasm:.:sarcasm:

I hope you know I am being sarcastic ..and you have my full empathy..not that that will help you ..real true reform would..but I doubt you or this nation is going to get that..we have already been sold out .:sarcasm:

[sandnsea]

10. This is a legitimate question

that has gotten lost in all the other whining.

The OP will qualify for the expanded Medicaid. If we focused on legitimate questions instead of bullshit whining, like your post, we'd get a lot further in getting real help to more people.

We're not going to get single payer. To continue to whine about that instead of fighting to make sure the OP has help he can use is what is stupid.

[Kansas Wyatt]

13. And the smart ones can't figure out why people would vote against...

Their own 'best interests.'

[earth mom]

50. Make that a "hater" & a "teabagging rethuglican"-that's the slime that's being flung today on DU.

Well, FYI DU: Only teabagging rethuglicans would support this bullshit health care "reform" that only serves Corporate America.

[truedelphi]

64. May I join you in your rant

Or at least offer you a :toast: ??

[Creena]

74. Fuck it, I need to whine.

As of 9/1, the county decided to revoke my insurance because mom and I living off her SS Disability evidently does not qualify as needy anymore. Declined by BCBS for pre-existing conditions and offered $500/month high risk insurance. Declined by Medicaid for the household possession and income falling over the limit. Declined by county insurance for the same Medicaid reasons.

How is mandated insurance going to help?

How can I afford insurance if I spent the past week debating whether the extreme pain on my right side is my appendix thus requiring an ER visit, or just my insanely painful ovarian cysts requiring smaller payments? (I chose the latter. Appointment is next week.)

How can I afford insurance if, I can't pay for the dentist let alone the oral surgeon for my bothersome wisdom teeth?

How can I afford insurance if I can't put together the money to pay for the medication that helps to clot my blood if I'm cut or bruised?

This is NOT the reform I want.

:rant:

[mdmc]

6. another low wage working person

peace and low stress to you my friend.

[sandnsea]

8. You'll get Medicaid - but subsidized premiums

could be as low as $25 a month - IF we stop bitching and start fighting for what's important. The tax credits are a different part of the plan, for small business and higher income workers.

Still, the bottom line is how much will each person have to pay. If it's too expensive for the individual, it will be killed before it's launched. You are living proof of what I've been saying for weeks.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

9. in other countries they pay for health care same way they pay for roads and police

through taxes.

Much better system.

[sandnsea]

11. Useless post, we live in the US n/t

[Overseas]

97. I agree. But that is anathema to the right wing-- nothing as deeply personally beneficial

as health security must come from that horrible act of paying taxes. They're all about crushing anything that reminds us of the good government can do. And if Democrats ushered in Medicare for All, the people would be so grateful that the Republicans would lose a lot of support.

But we've let corporate cash become the ruling power in our country. So even 77% for a public option on healthcare doesn't move all the Democrats we elected to stand together and fight for it. They need the corporate cash to hold on to their great jobs.

My silly idealistic hope is that with Republicans refusing to give up their poisonous lies and fear mongering and professional bullying, enough of our Democrats will get fed up that they'll band together and say-- Screw You Republicans, we're voting in Medicare for All.

[saltpoint]

12. In the United States, the Green Party is a teensy gaggle of the

muddle-minded.

Before you align with it, check Cynthia McKinney's vote totals in 2008.

Seriously. You're joining a pack of very well-meaning leprechauns who live in a row of hedges alongside an abandoned phone booth.

[sandnsea]

14. I wish they'd find a good adult like Howard Dean

rise up and become a strong second party. We'd all be better of for it.

[saltpoint]

16. Howard Dean is a good man, no question. But he's also a Democrat.

In Europe, the Greens have significant profile. And significant influence.

Not here.

[nadinbrzezinski]

19. And that is because of the nature of our system

you intro proportional representation you will see MANY parties rise.

Problem is... that requires changes to the Constitution and none of the two dominant parties are up to that

[saltpoint]

21. The germinal potential is there now. But capitalism has a firm hold

on the system, having pretty much defined it from the beginning.

"Rum to New Bedford and codfish from Maine
They were building a wall that would always remain
The Crown and the Cross
The musket and the chain
The white man's religion
The family name
Two hundred years later and who is to blame --
The captain or the cargo or the juice of the sugar cane?"

--from James Taylor's dark lullabye about the slave economy, "Sugar Cane"

There's some un-doing to do. Were Dean to express an interest in the Green Party, he would certainly give it a much-needed lift and some long-missing definition. But as a political entity it is no more attractive or workable to Dean than to someone else too soon to abandon the modern-day Democrats.

Lincoln was felt to be a yahoo, a fool, a hilljack, a high-pitch-voiced provincial. Turned out, his education held him in good stead and he prevailed in a savage, brutal era.

I believe Obama also is underestimated, by both the media and his political detractors.

I personally feel that a shove toward the Green Party at this juncture would be ill-considered. It is too young on the American landscape to have earned its wrinkles and scars. It is not peopled with resonant (secular) spirits. It is at least a generation away from anything like reaching critical mass. Not least, it was on the ballot last November and by the dozens of millions, voters rejected it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

36. My only beef with that is that we do not live in a capitalist system

in recent years I have taken upon myself to read silly shit like The Wealth of Nations and Ricardo's expansion on it.

If we were living in a capitalist system those monopolies would not be allowed, too big to fail is not capitalism.

As I like to quip, currently the US has as much in common with The Wealth of Nations, as the USSR had with Das Kapital.

Now if you said fascism is firmly ingrained... you'd have no argument from me... and yes when looking at Benito's definition of corpiratism, the fit is there.

Of course we do not have a left that is organized in any way, shape or form. and what passes for left is the center left, best case, in any other country.

[saltpoint]

38. Yes -- the "capitalism" here is more of a travel cheque for the

Corporation and goes unchallenged because from the very start, "goods and services" were the defining commodity and not the society they are meant to serve.

The United States, then, from the days of the colonial economy, understood wealth as a 'right,' which come first over the rights of citizens as citizens.

It would be interesting to see a grid of the sections of say, Indiana's rural counties and also many southern counties from the Cotton South where attitudes toward slavery aligned versus a study of the same regions now as to the strengths of unions, social acceptance of gay marriage, general attitudes toward public education and scientific research, etc.

[timtom]

53. I found a source that says it does not

require change to the constitution:

http://www.worldpolicy.org/projects/globalrights/democracy/abcs.html

"So How Do We Change From “Winner-Take-All” To PR?

In many states it is possible to convert to PR simply by changing applicable laws. Amendments to the U.S. Constitution are not required. The laws can be changed by a simple vote of the legislatures, or in many cases via a voter initiative. PR can be adapted to local, state and national levels, bringing the democratic promise of “one person, one vote” closer to fulfillment.

If the political will could be mobilized, it is possible to convert immediately to a system of proportional representation for electing representatives to city councils, state legislatures, and even the U.S. House of Representatives. U.S. Senators could be elected by Majority Preference Voting (MPV), giving voters more choice. As a bonus, PR would spare states the torment of legislative redistricting, an arduous, bitter and partisan gerrymandering affair."

Whether I am right or wrong, this is too important an issue to let sink as an almost afterthought.

Thanks, nadinbrzezinski. This is why I love DU.

[sandnsea]

32. Because they have no sensible leadership

We all need them to. Howard Dean is the only one I can think of who has both common sense and credibility with the left.

[saltpoint]

34. Dean is a decent human being and that alone makes him

an appealing figure.

He'd be a feather in their cap but again, he's a Democrat. He was Chariman of the Democratic Party, in fact, so he's a kind of high-profile, deeply-invested Democrat.

In one narrative of the future he draws the Teddy Roosevelt card from the deck and goes independent. It would be a big shake-up but even extraordinarily gifted folks like T. Roosevelt and Howard Dean have to navigate their chances through an electorate that is not usually predisposed to third party campaigns.

In another narrative the economy makes a modest-to-fairly good turnaround and health care reform's final legislative form is seen as a discerinble improvement in the number of covered Americans, and Obama, unchallenged for the Democratic nomination, sails to re-election against the clueless Pukes.

[eridani]

44. And he is advocating that voluntary buy-in to Medicare be the public option

Just like Thom Hartmann.

[bertman]

20. Absolutely right, saltpoint. And ten years ago so was the Japanese political party that just

took over the government by a landslide.

Agitator is going to have a LOT more company if this administration doesn't start acting like a Democratic administration instead of a bought-and-paid-for corporate arm.

[saltpoint]

25. Hi, bertman. I thought the news from Japan was astonishing.

It isn't getting a whole lot of press in the U.S., not surprisingly. We're a bit too anti-intellectual for that sort of thing, plus a dangerously high percentage of high school graduates couldn't find Japan on a map if their lives depended on it.

There are scenarios out there where swift recalibration could dramatically alter the political landscape in the United States.

I don't count out anybody or anything in engendering that change, but do propose that for it to take place at all, there has to be either definitional reconsideration of social values (which then are reflected in political influence); one or more pre-eminent historical shifts (unfortunately brought about by tragic crises, such as a full-throttle Depression or a war-gone-awry, etc.); and an elevated response to the crisis in the form of newly-aligned entities. A fourth component would be an already-popular or otherwise appealing personal figure on whom a sturdy third party could hang its hat.

[bertman]

33. All good points, saltpoint, but to me they sound like the old adage that says something

like "if you think nothing's gonna change, then it probably won't". Self-fulfilling prophecy type of deal.

As much as I'd like to think that we can get the Democratic party to represent the interests of the people, every day I am seeing more and more evidence that it is just one, slightly more centrist branch of the Corporate Party. They just have lots of ways of making us think/hope that is not happening.

I'm giving President Obama a chance to prove me wrong, but the healthcare reform efforts so far are not encouraging.

[saltpoint]

35. In a very political novel of South Africa in which racial hierarchies are

challenged, an educator tells the protagonist that History tends toward the intractable.

The protagonist is young, and holds fiercely-won values that equality should prevail against its absence, and snaps back that History, then, is wrong and will have to get a move on.

"But it punishes the people who try to hurry it," his teacher tells him.

In the U.S., there is a clinically vague but personally terrifying reality of liberal Senators dying in airplane crashes a week or two before an election, or civil rights leaders who have inspired critical mass and therefore social change being gunned down in southern cities; of wealthy liberal and anti-war candidates being murdered in hotel lobbies after primary election victories which would likely have ensured their nomination in Chicago in 1968.

History is unkind to people who rush it. All the same, I honor the ones who try even as I miss the victims History claims.

I see no one stopping anyone from bringing pressure to bear on this administration for the best possible components in health care reform legislation.

I also see no reason to abandon the Democratic Party when it has come closer than anyone ever has to that reform.

The Green Party would have to offer a pragmatic and viable and successful alternative to the work already done to get as far as we've come by Democrats to persuade me. Cynthia McKinney was nominated by the Green Party in 2008. She was crushed by voters in all 50 states and in all territories. McCain lost by 10 million or so votes, which is plenty. McKinney lost by an almost unanimous percentage.

[Silent3]

54. Ignoring social dynamics for wishful thinking can be a dangerous thing

Think what a small handful of Green votes probably did in the 2000 election. I still think the real winner was Gore anyway, but with Nader out of the picture the election wouldn't have been close enough to steal.

I understand the concept I believe you're talking about, that goes something like, "Maybe the Green party candidate (or other third-party candidate) can't win only because people say he can't win, and if we ignore that people say that, and vote the way we want anyway, maybe we'll energize people in this election or the next who also like the Green party guy, but aren't voting that way yet since they're afraid they'd be throwing away their vote."

There are a few problems with that line of thinking, however.

• First of all, history shows us that this hardly ever happens.
  
• Third party candidates, despite the hopes of many who vote for them, don't often really have the broad appeal their supporters like to think they do.
  
• You can't magically stop everyone else from voting strategically, from engaging in the practice of deciding on what they think is the most effective use of their vote, from making the perhaps cynical but nevertheless very real and honest calculation that some candidates, despite their virtues, might not be worth their vote.
  
• Even if everyone suddenly decided to vote purely by individual preference for the person they thought was the best candidate, not considering in the slightest the likelihood of other people voting for the same person, that would often be a recipe for disaster with the winner-take-all voting system that we have. A united minority can win out over a fractured majority which splits its votes among multiple variations of candidates who are closer to the majority philosophy.
  
• If you think the way you vote "sends a message", you might be right, but it might be the opposite of the message you intend to send. When Democratic candidates lost in 2000 they didn't walk away with a clear, unambiguous message, "We'd better start working to win back those Green party votes" by becoming more liberal and progressive, many decided the lesson of 2000 was to shift more the the right and try to mine votes out of the large Republican electorate, not to shift left to dig for more votes in the 1-2% they lost to third-party candidates.

For third-party voting to be effective...

• If you're going to vote to "send a message", do so only in "safe" elections, where your second-best choice can afford to lose your vote.
  
• Start small with winnable local elections, where party affiliation often matters much less than personality, community standing, and an appealing message.
  
• Otherwise, disheartening as in might often be, you probably should wait until conditions are very, very clearly ripe for a big change, when you can clearly measure, not just wish and hope, that a very large and significant number of other voters are ready to jump ship from a major party to the third-party candidate you want to see win.

[bertman]

58. So, because the Democrats and Republicans are established and dominate the political

arena, we disillusioned citizens must cling to one or the other of them because the other party (in this case, the Republicans) might maintain a stranglehold on power if we chose to try to establish a new party? That's what your arguments, admittedly well-stated arguments, are demanding.

So, no matter how unresponsive to the people these behemoths are, we must cling to them because they exist. That is unacceptable. Read some of what Jefferson and Locke had to say about entrenched power. They were not willing to give up the battle because the forces arrayed against them were massive and entrenched--entrenched as in, hundreds of years of enthroned imperial military power.

When the political parties no longer function as representatives of the people of the nation, they deserve to be torn down. As saltpoint notes, highly-placed individuals who push for rapid change are eliminated. To me, that means the change must be from the bottom up. That will never happen as long as we Democrats are willing to accept the empty claims of our Democratic leadership, from President Obama to Reid to Pelosi and on down the line.

We the people spoke loudly and clearly last November, but the elected ones are not listening to us. Nor are the unelected Party leaders. Our money, our time, our energy went into bringing our Party back into power so we could make substantive changes. Now the mantra of our leadership is Slow Down, Don't Try to Change Too Quickly. I, for one, will not support a party that continues to advocate for the status quo or imperceptible incremental change.

Which party, existing or future, I might work with is a decision to be made when the time comes that I am unable to stomach the Hopeless and UnChanging rigidity of our party.

[Silent3]

60. I'm not saying you "have to" do anything

You can, and will, do whatever you want I imagine.

How effective your choices will be is another matter. Mere anger at having poor choices doesn't change the choices. If anger with those choices reaches a tipping point, the opportunity to make radical change may arise -- which can either turn into a moment of triumph, or, as sadly happens too often, the failed revolution where those swept into power are just a different flavor of bad or worse.

I'm not trying to tell you what I think is good or bad, or how things should or should not be, just my best analysis of how things are.

Probably the best way to break the hold of the two party system would be wide adoption of something like Instant Run-Off Voting. The problem with getting that in place is that those currently in power aren't likely to want to change the system that got them into power in the first place.

In the meantime, getting angry at me because I see voting Green as at best futile, and at worst, helpful to Republicans, doesn't help you. Even if I were to respond to your anger (not always the best method of persuasion) and say, "Gosh, darn it! He's right! Enough is enough!", you'd be one down and millions to go. I'd guess that there are currently far more people in this country who would abandon Republicans and go further right to an even more blatantly batshit crazy white, Christian, warmongering theocracy-loving party than there are people ready to jump ship from Democrats and go further left.

Until discontent with the status quo starts to clearly take shape as a progressive, liberal, anti-corporate movement, voting Green will likely be either ineffective or counterproductive.

Again, I'm not saying that's a good thing. That's just my best analysis of the reality we face. Don't shoot the messenger.

[bertman]

63. I certainly didn't mean to get angry at you, Silent3. I was just stating my thoughts.

I appreciate your candor and your thoughts.

[truedelphi]

67. Yep you have called it

THE ONE BIG MONEY PARTY NEEDS TO BE TORN APART

And if it is not done peacefully, it will be even worse. People need to remember that Hitler got in when the cycicism over the Weiamr republic was at an all time high. If actions are not taken to establish an alternative to this travesty - I think we will regret even being alive.

[BlooInBloo]

23. Why do you hate hedges?

[saltpoint]

26. I actually kinda like 'em. "Another hedge, another town that I've gone

walkin' thru..." sings Elvis Presley in his best recording, "Kentucky Rain."

[BlooInBloo]

27. Uhhh... yah...

Let me guess: you're much older than me. :P

[saltpoint]

28. "I am a child in these hills ..."

--sings Jackson Browne

[BlooInBloo]

29. Lawyers In Love!!!

I know that one! (happydance)

[saltpoint]

30. BlooInBloo, you rock, period.

(I like that one, too.)

:thumbsup: :hi:

[salguine]

15. I think the 46 million uninsured should ALL refuse to buy the insurance. What the hell

are they gonna do? Throw 46 million people in jail?

Of course, I suppose they could just seize our wages. That'd help those of us who are one paycheck away from being homeless.

I really think 46 million people need to march on Washington and start burning shit down.

[rug]

17. Don't worry, the full screw won't kick in for four years.

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. two words: EXPANDED MEDICAID

you will qualify...

And yes, that will give you access to health care.

[alcibiades_mystery]

22. Tantrum

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[saltpoint]

42. Before you snap at someone to perform an act which I believe is

physiologically impossible, or should be, at least wait until the final legislation has been negotiated.

A lot of people who have been quite poor and disenfranchised voted for Barack Obama and IMO are likely to support his re-election.

I thought the OP's threat to vote Green did in fact constitute a tantrum.

[BlooInBloo]

24. emo kitteh...

[rug]

31. Where's the emo?

"My bills take every penny of what I earn in a good month. In a bad month (like this month is shaping up to be), it's back to my ever-dwindling stockpile of ramen, dry beans and dry rice, what wild foods I can forage for, and no driving at all, no matter how far I need to go, I walk."

Oh yeah, you relate to lolcats.

[Hannah Bell]

47. another solid union brother heard from.

[lumberjack_jeff]

37. Good news. Under the new plan, you'd qualify for medicaid.

... which includes blood pressure meds.

[berni_mccoy]

40. Based on your income as you described, you would not pay any premium under Obama's plan.

HR3200 says anyone under 130% of poverty level income would not pay a dime.

[saltpoint]

43. It would be interesting if the OP would respond to your post.

I think it would make a really good starting point for the rest of the discussion.


:thumbsup:

[maryf]

49. 130% of poverty level

OOOh HOOO! wow he/she just might squeak in at $12,000 a year:

The 2009 Poverty Guidelines for the
48 Contiguous States and the District of Columbia
1person $10,830
2 14,570
3 18,310
4 22,050
5 25,790
6 29,530
7 33,270
8 37,010

[stevenleser]

70. No, Mary. Even if he was over, he would pay on a sliding scale that goes to 60K/yr

so even if he missed the 100% free cut off, he would only pay a small amount.

[Fire1]

89. That gives them nothing to bitch about. Save it. n/t

[Selatius]

45. I got laid off. I was making 8.00/hr with tips. Still, I wouldn't break 20K with the job.

The Public Option would be where I would be enrolled, most likely. I hope...unless they royally fuck it up and make it extremely difficult to stay on it once you get a good job.

[truedelphi]

65. My experience with the type of Democrats that don't fight

For a strong public option, but that manage to get mandates and then "Work arounds" be they tax credits or whatever, is that those work arounds often involve the citizen needing to be forever filling out paper work and what not. So you have a hard time keeping enrolled in a program if you are also working close to full time.

SINGLE PAYER UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE NOW

[Douglas Carpenter]

46. I cannot imagine how helping to elect a party that is dominated by crazies who think like Glen Beck

would help matters or send the right message.

[maryf]

48. I guess you might have to pay the premiums or the fine...

and keep eating those rice and beans, (dontcha know they're preventative medicine?) or maybe go to jail, prisoners get all their health care needs taken care of anyway... Now that's what I call a public option! (do I need the sarcasm smilie?) K&R and keep speaking the truth!!

[earth mom]

51. It's a fucking scam all right. That's exactly what it is. Reminds me of the Mafia.

The Corporate Mafia.

[court jester]

55. Whats the difference between the Feds and the Mafia?

The Mafia understand Respect

Ok so its an old joke.

[earth mom]

61. The majority of the people in this country ain't got any respect from the powers that be.

I like your joke! :hi:

[Bonn1997]

52. I understand what you're saying but...

I think Thom Hartmann made a great point yesterday. We liberals are the only thing preventing the Democratic party from being entirely identical to the Republican party. They may already be half-way there but they're not fully there. We just got stem cell research, more money for education, and I doubt we'll start any wars of choice under Obama. Hartmann said--and I agreed--you should stay in the Dem party even if you don't give any money, at least vote in the primaries, and donate to and volunteer for progressive movements.

[truedelphi]

66. For some of us our line in the sand is

That we are needing UNIVERSAL SINGLE PAYER HEALTH CARE and not insurance mandates to help the Insurance "Providers" soak us even more.

Hartmann is not quite as radical as those of us who have been wiped out by medical bankruptcies, or lost family members because of denied treatmenst and who thus see enabling the insurance execs as a travesty.

And why should we let Obama off the hook? A HUGE PART of his platform last year was that the govenrment must start working for people and not for lobbyists.

http://tinyurl.com/lfqc94

[Bonn1997]

80. Self-delete--double post by accident.

[Bonn1997]

81. No, definitely don't let Obama off the hook. The pressure progressives put on him is crucial...

His point was: Just don't leave the party. At a minimum keep voting in primaries for progressive candidates.

[truedelphi]

85. To paraphrase Michael Moore -

"No I don't like my party. But I am not leaving!" He used the word "Country" but I think Party is appropos as well.

[nightrain]

91. it sure sounded good at the time, and I hoped Obama was being truthful about

gvment working for people.... Now, I feel betrayed.

[truedelphi]

93. Probably you feel betrayed because

We have been betrayed --

This OP link contains two video citations of what Obama said last year, and how it is not measuring up

http://tinyurl.com/lfqc94

[nightrain]

99. yes. Thank you for the links. Good stuff.

Yes, on the betrayal--I think we are closing in on being betrayed if Jane Hamsher and Cenk are correct on what Rahm and Obama are after in terms of the lobbyist money amd 2010.

[truedelphi]

102. I appreciate Hamsher and Cenk very much

And the fact that You Tube makes everyone running for office totally accountable - they can spin whatever way they desire, but in the end there is no way to forget that a year ago, Obama was all about how lobbyists should not be running the people's agenda in Washington. That he would operate things differently. And all that.

Everything that he has forgotten after being elected. ("Change we can beleive in.")

Those campaign promises were just a ticket to being elected and having the biggest lobbyist controlled Adminsitration ever.

[TBF]

56. In Solidarity.

We need a strong labor party. We're getting robbed blind by the current pols on both sides of the aisle.

[ipaint]

57. And don't forget if you are "fortunate" enough to get medicaid

ANY attempt to better yourself by a pay raise or second job will immediately kick you into the working poor but subsidized category and that bit of extra money you make will immediately be siphoned off to wealthy, bloated private ins. companies- they apparently need it more.

[Freddie Stubbs]

59. If you are telling the truth about your income, you probably qualify for Medicaid

[sandnsea]

79. Adults have to have almost no income

to qualify for Medicaid. Like be on the lowest income disability, which is around $600 a month right now. It is really hard for adults to get help with health care in this country.

[BzaDem]

83. That is changing with this bill.

Anyone under 133% percent of poverty would get Medicaid. That is a huge change compared to what some states cover today.

[Echo In Light]

106. Yes. Several yrs ago after losing my job (insurance) due to an on-the-job accident...

... we didn't even qualify for food stamps. The social safety nets are always set up to stave off the largest % of those who would benefit.

[Stand and Fight]

62. I'm with you on that...

While I have a considerable single income coming in, there is no way I can afford to continually pay the rising health care costs and my other bills. Lump this in with the fact that I have college funds for my son -- and my daughter due in November -- there is no way I can afford a mandate. I'm of the same opinion as you.

[TK421]

68. What I'm pulling in right now ( from unemployment ) would compare

to those wages now....if not just a TAD bit more...they are offering an additional $50.00 every pay period for that program, which does help. If the public option is only $25.00 a month, that would be something I could afford...manageable, barely. As I stated in another thread I barely make enough to buy food and have gotten accustomed to Ramen Noodles ( now, the Chicken-Mushroom would be my favorite ...Spicy Cajun probably my second ). I am hoping to find a job soon, as being unemployed and sitting around drives me fucking NUTS!!! Nobody seems to be hiring at a rate that would be comparable to what my last job paid me...and all I try to do ( all I've been doing for the past year ) is pay off closed credit card accounts and rent and utilities and phone and cable-internet....to find out I could possibly be fined if I don't buy into some private health-care subsidiary makes me want to just pack up and get the fuck out of this country....IF IT COMES TO THAT...I know some people here will jump on me assuming that will not happen, but I am assuming it will to be safe.

Good luck getting that $3800.00 out of me people.....GOOD-FUCKING-LUCK

[Orwellian_Ghost]

69. K&R

[stevenleser]

71. It would have been better had you educated yourself about the plan before ranting.

then you would not have ranted at all since you would have found out that you would qualify for extended medicaid any pay nothing or a tiny amount.

[Hello_Kitty]

73. Which means she'd better not take on any more hours

Because then she'll make "too much" and have to purchase private insurance. Which will be subsidized, yes, but will the subsidies come in the form of a tax credit that she has to wait a full year to get?

[stevenleser]

75. Again, no.

The subsidies do not come in the form of a tax credit.

[Hello_Kitty]

76. Do you have a link to that? eom

[Slit Skirt]

72. my kids are in the same situation

I am so pissed over this mandate
I am so pissed over PO that doesn't allow everyone in...

This is democratic bullshit

[wroberts189]

77. I have voted in every election since I could. Straight Dem. I am having the same thoughts. nt

[Johonny]

78. welcome to the Republican party

Not MANDATES. Heaven forbid a program of social reform have mandates in it. Only like every great liberal program of the last 100 years had mandates in it. I swear this anti-mandate crap is so Teabaggerish I don't believe this people are really dems.

[Maru Kitteh]

84. They have much in common. "I WANT!" but simultaneously "I WON'T"

If there's been any failure by the Dems and the Admin, it's explaining to the poor and working poor that they will not have to pay for their premiums.


Even as I typed this, I realized. It's not a failure. Duh. If the Dems highlighted the fact that it will be free to low-income persons, the pugs would trot out the "welfare" meme again.

[BzaDem]

82. The mandate would not affect you in the slightest bit.

$9.00/hr * 23 hrs/week * 52 weeks a year means you would qualify for Medicaid under this bill. Everyone under 133% of poverty qualifies under this bill.

And single payer is exactly the same thing. There is a mandate, and everyone above a certain percentage of poverty pays (not just the rich). Something tells me you would be fine with single payer.

You may go join the green party. But please don't insult our intelligence as to why you are doing it.

[Greyhound]

90. Please don't insult our intelligence by claiming that single payer (HR 676) is the same thing.

Under that plan, there is no Medicaid, no profit-driven health care, no insurance industry middlemen, and no increases in current spending.

It also includes Mental, dental, and vision.

[BzaDem]

96. In terms of the mandate, it is the same thing.

Your post has nothing to do with the Mandate. As far as the mandate is concerned, both single payer and a private mandate are a MANDATE to spend a percentage of one's income to get a certain level of health insurance. If you claim otherwise, you are the one insulting our intelligence.

[nightrain]

86. kick. yeah, it's awful for so many of us these days, and the proposals coming out of Congress

are sooo inadequate and unaffordable, even with the subsidies. I'm sorry it's so tough for you, and hope it improves.

I don't think that Congresspeople have any idea what real people are actually faced with on a daily basis. I keep thinking of the former Cigna exec who Bill Moyers interviewed who finally got a dose of reality when he visited the healthcare fairgrounds in VA and saw the distress and need. That's real.

[Juche]

88. Not all democrats are the same. Seriously.

The goal is better dems, not any dems.

I can understand not wanting to vote for blue dogs or conservadems. And I can understand not wanting to vote for moral cowards.

However there are dems who are both progressive and who are fighters. the CPC has 80 members and is using that weight to get a public option passed. Almost 100 dems are members of the CPC, black, hispanic & asian caucuses and they are working on a public option and trying to use their bulk.


Not all dems are bad. We need to vote in the good dems, and use pressure (primaries from the left) on the conservadems, blue dogs and moral cowards.

It took the GOP over a decade to reshape the GOP from a libertarian northern party to a right wing authoritarian southern party. Its not going to happen overnight. It'll take unions and the netroots working to elect better dems.

You shouldn't give up on the party so quickly. Devote your anger and energy at electing better dems in general elections and primaries from the left for shitty dems.

[debbierlus]

92. Good. Get angry. Let's call the progressive caucus and get ready for a FIGHT

They are doing their whip count this week. They need to know we stand with them.

[johnaries]

94. So you make less than $12k a year? Then you either get

Medicaid or a hardship waiver. If you get a hardship waiver, then the bill provides for increased Community Health Centers that you can go to.

No need for such a knee-jerk reaction.

[theophilus]

95. Take a chill pill. You'll feel less agitated. n/t

[Vinca]

98. I got the impression they want to make more people eligible for Medicaid.

It's ridiculous right now. I checked it out while covering all bases in my search for a way to get a hip replacement and the amount of money you are allowed to make is so small I don't think anyone other than a homeless person could qualify. It varies by state, so maybe your state is more generous.

[alarimer]

100. I no longer consider myself a Democrat.

The Democratic Party is full of spineless weasels. Including most of those in Congress AND most especially the President.

What Democrats need is to run a primary opponent to EVERY SINGLE DEMOCRAT except for the actual progressives, regardless of what the DNC says.

As for me, I plan on never voting again. I am certainly not automatically voting for Democrats. Fuck those bastards.

[anonymous171]

101. This entire bill seems like a bunch of upper middle class bs to me. nt

[Joe Fields]

104. WTF is this still doing on the front page? PHEW!!!!!