I'm Down With Dennis

[davidswanson]

Let me get this straight. The Senate will pass a public option if the House will. And the House will, because it already did. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi won’t allow it. So the mortal enemy of public-option backers is . . . Dennis Kucinich.

Why? Because when Congressman Kucinich said he'd stand for a public option he stupidly thought he was supposed to mean it.

Let's review a brief history of the disease known as "health insurance reform."

When the president and the speaker of the House thought it would be strategic to censor any talk of single-payer healthcare, almost every member of Congress and almost every astroturfing party-before-country activist group and labor union, and almost every follower of those groups, fell obediently into line. "We'll open the debate with the least we'll settle for, a pathetic token public-option," they thought cleverly, rubbing their hands together. "Then we'll compromise down from there."

But after demanding the "public option," too many people refused to toss it overboard, and public pressure grew to keep it in. So 60 congress members signed a letter to the speaker last summer insisting that they would not settle for a health insurance bill that lacked a serious public option. When they were presented with a bill that did not meet their demands, almost all of them voted for it anyway.

Now 51 senators say they will pass a bill including a super-pathetic token public option of the sort passed by the House last summer, but Pelosi wants to pass a bill without anything even called a "public option" in it. Almost all of the congressional public-option stalwarts want to go along with the speaker and the president. And almost all of the astroturfing party-before-country activist groups want to fall obediently into line.

Meanwhile several states are moving single-payer healthcare bills through their legislatures, but they face likely lawsuits from insurance companies over conflicts with federal law if they try to actually get their residents healthcare. Senator Bernie Sanders is advertising the Senate bill as solving this problem, routinely failing to mention that his solution, if it is one, does not kick in for seven years. But an amendment passed in a House committee last summer would have clearly and unequivocally taken care of states' concerns. The president told the speaker to strip that amendment out of the bill, and almost no members of Congress complained when she did so.

Where does Dennis Kucinich fit into this story? He's the reason the word "almost" appears in it so many times. He didn't open negotiations by proposing the lowest he'd accept. He pushed for a real single-payer solution. He single-handedly framed the public option as a compromise rather than a communist plot. Kucinich signed the letter committing to take a stand for at least a public option. But he made the mistake of thinking people actually wanted him to mean it. So he took that lonely stand. And he introduced and passed the amendment that would have allowed states to provide their residents with a serious healthcare solution.

Now, all the astroturfers applauded and encouraged taking a stand for a public option when there were 60 congress members pretending to do it, without apparently giving any thought to how greatly weakened progressives would be in Congress if they didn't follow through. Did they think the chance that a bluff might work was worth damaging all future campaigns? Did they disbelieve all their own talk about how the bill would be worthless without the "public option." It's hard to know. The so-called public option had shrunk to such a token gesture that it was always hard to know what good they imagined it would do if included. And today they talk about passing a bill without even that token included, and passing it "for political reasons," usually avoiding the question of whether the bill is actually better or worse than nothing.

But suppose that you honestly thought the public option was worth at least pretending to take a stand for, and now you no longer do, but you think the remaining bill does more good than harm. Why would you have no complaint with Pelosi who could put the "public option" back in and pass the bill? Why would you have no complaint with congress members who oppose the bill on the grounds that it protects abortion rights? Why would your complaints be focused on the one guy who stuck to what you used to want him to stick to? Could embarrassment be a factor here? Shame? Humiliation? Do you feel uneasy about asking that ever congress member be an obedient slave to the president? Do you sense that progressives would then be excluded entirely? Does it worry you that you're protesting insurance companies in support of a bill that causes insurance companies' stocks to rise?

Even the activist groups that have acted on principle throughout this ordeal have fallen short of Kucinich's actions. Kucinich knew that real progress would come through the states, so he worked to pass an amendment permitting state single-payer. And virtually nobody backed him up. Activist groups either prattled on in a fog about national single-payer, or they focused exclusively on the so-called public option. These two camps wouldn't talk to each other, but they both agreed on leaving states' concerns by the wayside.

If, in stark contrast to what was done, labor unions and activist groups and progressive media had taken their agenda from their membership and brought it to Washington, rather than the reverse, then very quickly Kucinich would not have been alone in demanding single-payer, and the right-wingers would have soon been begging for a token public option as a compromise.

Healthcare is only one issue. There are dozens of stories like the one above, with different issues but the same characters and plot. When dozens of congress members commit to opposing war funding, Kucinich commits and then follows through. When it comes to ending the wars or impeaching the war criminals, Kucinich leads, in opposition to his political party but in support of his constituents, the American people, the rule of law, and the stated goals of progressives.

I hope self-loathing partisan sycophants realize that the corporate media will equally depict either passage or nonpassage of a "health insurance reform" bill as a defeat for Democrats. And, in this case, rightly so. But the long-term impact of a reform that doesn't reform, one that rather compels Americans to pay their hard-earned money to institutions even more hated than Congress, namely health insurance companies -- THAT would be the real political loser, with or without a privately run program for 3 percent of us called "the public option." And, again, rightly so. Kucinich is saving the Democrats from themselves by helping to block their health insurance bill, but they can't see what's in front of them through the fog of their constant dreaming about mountains of money and a naked Rahm Emanuel poking them in the chests.

[PeaceNikki]

1. Who are the "self-loathing partisan sycophants"? People who disagree with DK?

Just to be clear.

[jonathon]

5. This isn't about Dennis - this is about the dems selling out to big insurance

And, demonizing a man who refuses to let them get away with it.

This bill is another corporate bailout. This time of the health insurance companies. The very companies that brought our health care system to its knees.

Massachusetts has this system and it is not working. The for-profit insurance companies continue to cut benefits while upping premiums and the entire program will be financially insolvent next year. Massachusetts is going to have to cut back on providing subsidies to buy the plans (which are grossly expensive)

Forcing people to buy a shitty expensive private insurance plan is not a solution for the healthcare crisis. These plans continue to deny benefits on whatever excuse they can dream up, so even if you have the insurance, there is no gurantee it will cover you when you need it.

This is insane. You actuallly want this?

[PeaceNikki]

7. He used "Dennis" in the title and "Kucinich" ten times in the OP.

But it's not about Dennis?

hmmm. ok.

[proud2BlibKansan]

110. It's actually quite clear

Sorry you don't get it.

[sui generis]

125. agreed. There are always going to be "it's better than nothing"

people who will take what they can get without any standards for what might be better.

I am quite frankly suspicious of any democrat who thinks that mandated health insurance is the best solution, and I'll get right up in their grill and let 'em know.

You CAN be both a purist and pragmatist, so while this is the ONLY solution in front of us it sure as fucking hell is not the best, and in fact, quite disappointing.

A rose by any other name smells as sweet . . . but this turd for sure ain't chocolate.

[Action]

126. Why it should pass

If nothing passes, it will be decades until we get the chance again.

If we pass it, we will be able to change it down the road. This is how it was done with Social Security and Medicare.

Too many folks just don't know how politics works. It's messy, dirty and not very much fun to watch. But Dennis is just going to totally destroy any chance we have.

That's the way it is, folks!

[pundaint]

129. Why I disagree

If nothing passes Congress is screwed, they know that. That's why there's all this smoke right now. If this doesn't pass they'll have to expand medicare at least. That would be reform that could be built upon. This bill isn't.

Congress has been beat up for a year over this. As soon as something, anything, is passed it will be glossed by all Democrats as absolutely the BEST thing possible, by Republicans as a travesty, and more pressing matters of State will push it into history. Both of those bills were coherent in who got the benefits - this bill is a zero-sum calculation, benefits to the corporations will have to be rescinded to provided more benefits to the People. WE will forever be pitted against a foe who has more resources available for the battle, and our Government will be mandating the funding of those battles agains us with our own money.

Too many of us have bought into how we have Allowed politics to stop serving the People first. WE GET THE GOVERNMENT WE DEMAND, and nothing more, because other interests are demanding too.

That's the way I see it, and I hope you can too.

[sui generis]

131. why will it be decades?

Seriously. And what are the mega million numbers for tomorrow night?

If it passes we'll be stuck with insurance mandates as the main thrust of the solution, and a bunch of insurance companies who will claim that changing the law would be unfavorable to their continued profitability. Oh wait, they do that now. It may be decades before we have a solution no matter how the vote turns out, at this rate.

Oh you don't know nothin' about messy politics if you think people who disagree with your are naive.

welcome to DU! :hi:

[sabrina 1]

47. What do they disagree with him about? Do they oppose

what they once supported now? I think the OP is clear. Democrats have flip-flopped on Health Care reform for political and financial reasons, (misguided on the political reasons as the Brown victory in Mass. demonstrates).

Kucinich has remained committed to the goals Democrats claimed to have. How, out of that scenario, does he become the bad guy?

[jonathon]

2. Bravo, David, Bravo!

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

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

[asdjrocky]

4. With us or with the enemy?

Now, let me see, where have I heard that before?

[AnOhioan]

21. My thoughts exactly

[asdjrocky]

22. The group think is pretty scary.

[liberation]

38. I also find the cult to personality frightening too...

... I am not interested in supporting a Kucinch vs. Obama or whatever weird debate intellectually dishonest and divisive debate we are being force fed.
I would like to people make arguments focusing on the policies themselves, and facts, regardless of the person uttering/standing behind them.

I find myself agreeing with Kucinich position in this issue, but not because of him. At some point we replaced politics based on policy and ideology, with a weird popularity context removed from the reality of policies.

So I am not "standing" with Kucinich or any one. I stand with policies and approaches I agree with. I'd love to see people removing the whole personality component out of these debates (as hard or impossible as that may be). I guess I am naive, oh well...

[asdjrocky]

50. Yes, I gave up on the idea of politician as all knowing hero.

I've learned my lessons with that. Sometimes I'm all for Kucinch sometimes I'm not. It's issue and policy driven, not personality. There is a singularity of mind and purpose that I find disturbing, and even perplexing with some people on DU. I like our Prisident, I really do, that makes me all the more disappointed in what I have seen so far, more than a year into his term.

I'm also capable of having conflicting thoughts in my head, I know lately it's a strange concept around here, but it's not all that unusual in the real world.

All that being said, I find myself on the siding with Kucinch far more than I side with the DLCers and the New Dems so because of that I find Dennis admirable, but still no hero.

[liberation]

54. Agreed, Politicians are human, and as such are flawed (as the rest of us)

I rather focus on policy and facts, and leave all the personal nonsense to the schoolyard where it belongs.

I really get annoyed when those advocating Obama's policies resort to make it a personal issue for anyone disagreeing with his points of view. On a personal level, I like the guy... he is a well educated and articulated person. And his family is lovely (I used to have a crush on Michelle). But that has nothing to do with the fact, that a very basic level (regardless of his self described pragmatism) he adheres to a moderate conservative slant, while I am an unabashed progressive. So I disagree with the content and direction of his policy proposals. And that should be no surprise to the rest of moderate conservatives in this site who don't seem to understand why progressives are not going to be walking in lock step with their conservative policy proposals.

Now, there is nothing wrong with ideological differences. And frankly political differences in both ethos and approaches are fundamental for a working democracy. However, it gets tiring when people try to submit diverging opinions into submission by trying to turn it into a personal issue. And same goes for Kucinich et al (or at least his supporters).


I just gets really disheartening when any criticism is viewed with utter contempt, and it is equated to all sorts of intellectually dishonest analogies. The MO of which starts to resemble in a very troubling way to the same nonsense the Bush acolytes were uttering for those long 8 years.

[tcaudilllg]

104. Goodbye politics of ideology, and good riddance!

[fascisthunter]

120. Agreed

I think most of us base our support on his actions and proposals, not because of his name alone.

[liberation]

31. The more things "change" the more they stay the same...

... let's see if we oppose mass firings of teachers, we are supposed to hate the children.
... if we oppose corporate giveaway legislation labeled as healthcare "reform," we are supposed to hate sick people.
... if we don't toe in line with the DLC, we are aligning ourselves with the batshit crazy right wing.

The last one is especially full of projection, since at a very basic level the DLC are indeed the ideological bethren of the same right wingers us liberals are supposed to be "aligned" with for opposing this milquetoast piece of garbage legislation. The logical dissonance required to come up with that false analogy must be a glorious one...

Oh, well... same feces, different sphincter. The story of the world in a single sentence.

[asdjrocky]

51. Movies have been in color forever, but people still see the world as black and white.

For some, simple is best.

[sabrina 1]

107. Think tanks, which spend millions of dollars on creating

'perceptions' are responsible for your Orwellian list. They pay big money to come up with those talking points.

Before they moved to the internet, you could have a rational discussion with someone you disagreed with, (on the left) without being bombarded by talking points which are designed to stop rational discussion. They are not meant to make sense, they are meant to distract.

Around 2002, the rightwing engaged in these tactics. I remember wondering if I was talking to the same person all the time. Eg, 'you are either with us or against us' or if you opposed the war in Iraq 'you are a supporter of Saddam Hussein'.

The left didn't catch up until around 2004. At first I was glad assuming those tactics would be used against the right. But that's not what happened. It was against the 'left' that they were used.

The DLC wing of the party, really Reagan Republicans who probably hate the left more than the right, split the party in two. The liberal wing of the party was not prepared, I know I wasn't. But arguing with DLCers, watching their frenzied efforts to smear and discredit anyone who stands up for Democratic principles, is no different than than arguing with rightwingers. You know it is organized by the talking points.

I hope before it's too late, that the base of this party starts organizing. They will need money to fight both the DLC and the Right. The goal of both groups is to wipe out all liberal ideas. So it will take a lot of money and a lot of organizing to retake this party from the right.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

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

[sabrina 1]

58. DeMint and Bachmann support

a Public Option?

[Truth2Tell]

71. I heard they support single-payer.

Along with Palin.

[sabrina 1]

76. What great news, first I heard of it! Lol!

Thank you Dennis! :rofl:

[rpannier]

98. You left out higher taxes on the wealthy and corporations

to pay for these things

Oh... And new strict regulations of businesses

[LWolf]

60. "The enemy" is anyone who opposes

labor, public education, and health care as a right, who favors corporations over citizens, to start with.

Who do YOU stand with?

[ncteechur]

6. Dennis Kucinich = Bart Stupak

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

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

[liberation]

32. Let me guess....

... you still don't know why you did so poorly in the analogy section of the SATs ;-)

[sabrina 1]

49. Not exactly, the leadership of the Dem Party made a deal

with Stupak and allowed his anti-women amendment to be included in their Health Insurance Reform Bill.

But when Kucinich attempted to make a deal, making it legal for states to adapt a Single Payer system if they wanted it, Democrats weren't interested.


That is the difference between Stupak and Kucinich. Stupak is apparently in line with Democratic policies, while Kucinich is not.

[mod mom]

57. you are certainly poorly informed.

[rhett o rick]

79. T-bomb. nt

[Greyhound]

8. K&R, good summation. n/t

[MineralMan]

17. I am SO sick of that signature photo.

It tells us nothing. Just my opinion, mind you, but that's my opinion.

[liberation]

33. Would you like a shirtless pic of Obama instead?

[MineralMan]

61. Why do you ask? Were you going to suggest that to the poster?

I don't understand.

[pocoloco]

74. Do you have a spare?

[liberation]

83. see, right there... you're taking life too seriously

... should think about taking up on the advice you're dishing out to others in your signature

:-)

[sabrina 1]

64. I love that photo.

Dennis deserves to be happy. He certainly has had his share of sadness over the past two years with the loss of two of his brothers, and his beautiful sister, all of whom he loved dearly. Still, despite his own personal grief, he continued to fight for the benefit of those who have no voice in DC. We need hundreds of representatives like him, with the courage to stand up for what is right.

DC is crawling with oportunists and liars and compromizers and weaklings. He stands out, as the number of threads on all these boards, and the number of baseless and lying attacks on him demonstrate, for his honest, convictions and integrity.

[earcandle]

67. You are so right on!

[MineralMan]

68. OK. You like the picture. I hate it.

Opinions differ. I don't like it because it has nothing to do with Kucinich's political life. You can't even see the man's face.

He has a very attractive wife. That's good for him. I'm not sure what it means for anyone else, though.

[sabrina 1]

75. It means he's happy in his personal life.

Do you like similar photos of Obama and Michelle? I like those too. It shows they are happy. I never saw anyone say they hate the photos of Michelle and Obama being affectionate with other.

You hate the photo because you hate Kucinich based on political disagreement. That's a shame. There is no reason to hate political opponents. You spend your time, an awful lot of it, attempting to demonize Kucinich, with not much success I might add. In your view, a photo that is appealing doesn't help your campaign so you hate it.

If I were you, I would try to not make politics so personal. It isn't about individuals, it's about the country. Kucinich loves his country, and clearly loves his wife. You seem a bit obsessed with him to be honest.

[fascisthunter]

121. well, look at your avatar...

actually, I think the blob fish is ugly yet fascinating. Check out the Sea Pig when you get a chance.

[Greyhound]

92. Well, whenever I've had to deal with the incompetents, dimwits, fools, and assholes that

seem to constitute the majority of Americans today, that picture always makes me smile. So, I guess you'll just have to deal with it.

Besides, you've got a blobfish avatar.

[Greyhound]

91. wrong place

Oops.

[berni_mccoy]

9. First off, Dennis voted against the House version of the PO. Secondly, there aren't 51 votes

there are only 46 confirmed. Whipcongress.com says there are 51, but when you look at their numbers they have only confirmed 27 by signing the petition, 19 via statements. The rest are unconfirmed.

So, if you are down with Dennis, then you are absolutely not supportive of the House PO. And you are for someone who has no legislative accomplishments outside his pinnacle achievement of funding for the Museum for the Ukraine.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

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

[sabrina 1]

62. You mean accomplishments like these guys?

http://www.govtrack.us/

Barney Frank has sponsored 380 bills since Jan 6, 1987 of which 317 haven't made it out of committee and 12 were successfully enacted. Frank has co-sponsored 5,325 bills during the same time period. (The count of enacted bills considers only bills actually sponsored by Frank and companion bills identified by CRS that were themselves enacted, but not if they were incorporated into other bills, as that information is not readily available.)

Barney Frank: 23 years in Congress. Sponsored 380. Enacted 12

John Kerry has sponsored 485 bills since Jan 6, 1987 of which 399 haven't made it out of committee and 13 were successfully enacted. Kerry has co-sponsored 2,711 bills during the same time period. (The count of enacted bills considers only bills actually sponsored by Kerry and companion bills identified by CRS that were themselves enacted, but not if they were incorporated into other bills, as that information is not readily available.)

John Kerry: 23 years in Congress. Sponsored 485. Enacted 13

Russell Feingold has sponsored 376 bills since Jan 21, 1993 of which 346 haven't made it out of committee and 6 were successfully enacted. Feingold has co-sponsored 1,207 bills during the same time period. (The count of enacted bills considers only bills actually sponsored by Feingold and companion bills identified by CRS that were themselves enacted, but not if they were incorporated into other bills, as that information is not readily available.)

Russ Feingold: 17 years in Congress. Sponsored 376. Enacted 6.

Dennis Kucinich has sponsored 97 bills since Jan 7, 1997 of which 93 haven't made it out of committee and 3 were successfully enacted. Kucinich has co-sponsored 2,924 bills during the same time period. (The count of enacted bills considers only bills actually sponsored by Kucinich and companion bills identified by CRS that were themselves enacted, but not if they were incorporated into other bills, as that information is not readily available.)

Dennis Kucinich: 15 years in Congress. Sponsored 97. Enacted 3.

You're going to have to find another talking point. That one has been debunked over and over again.

[berni_mccoy]

100. You're right. Dennis is exactly like them. Except that he runs for President every 4 years

and changes his political stance on important issues like Abortion before doing so. Oh, and he believes aliens are telling him what to do. Other than that, he's just like them.

[Name removed]

85. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[colsohlibgal]

10. Could Not Agree More

The more I read, the more I see that even the "good parts" so many democrats say are the good things aren't all that good and in some cases maybe quite the opposite.

Plus one has to worry with the herd mentality pressure, we need to pass this one bill or else the democrats fall off the cliff and we hang 31 million people out to dry. Wrong! The democratic leadership starting with Obama has sided with big insurance over these people all the way through. The deal, I suspect, was struck at the outset.

I find it totally immoral that the democrat's idea of health care reform is to further fatten the coffers of these blood sucking leeches at the expense, and I mean that both ways, of everyday citizens.

The fire has been lit and more and more people are catching on; if this fails we can get to something much better that hopefully cuts those slime balls (insurance companies) out.

[madrchsod]

11. agree...ya deal from the position of strength not weakness.

after all is said and done....money talks and bullshit walks.

[davidswanson]

15. i'm reading along

just not commenting because i can't make certain things sound any more misguided than they do on their own

[PeaceNikki]

16. Who are the "self-loathing partisan sycophants"? People who disagree with DK?

You should clarify.

[maxanne]

53. I will!

That would be Democrats willingly selling women down the river with this insurance giveaway bill! Democrats are supposed to support a woman's right to abortion, yet
here are the partisan sycophants, telling the women to take one for the team, because forcing us all to turn over a substantial portion of our income to a private, for profit corporation
is crucial to heath care "reform."

You're right PeaceNikki - progressives should not compromise on a bill that will strengthen insurance companies. I'm certain that Wellpoint and Aetna thank you for your pragmatism.

[sabrina 1]

77. Very well said.

It's very revealing that Stupak's amendment was accepted and that there are vitually no threads trashing this Blue Dog, woman hater. But Kucinich's amendment was rejected by this WH. All the focus from the party hacks is on the Congressman who has stood by Democratic Principles.

I think it's clear that the party has been taken over by the DLC.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

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

[PeaceNikki]

19. Oh the "message discipline team", and the "self-loathing partisan sycophants"

Y'all are really dramatic.

[icee]

73. Personally, I couldn't tell from your post whether you are for or

against the Senate Health Bill. Sooooo, I can't praise you or lambast you.

[johnaries]

20. Whoa! Once again you've got the facts wrong.

There are 40 Senators who are willing to pass a PO, not 51. That is why Pelosi said that it won't be in reconcilliation, because it doesn't have the Senate votes - not because she "won't allow it".

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/86447-pelosi-public-option-will-not-be-in-health-bill

"We had it, we wanted it ... it's not in the reconciliation," Pelosi said at her weekly press briefing. "It isn't in there because have the votes to have it in there."

Momentum had been building to reintroduce the government-run plan. Over 40 senators have endorsed a letter sponsored by the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC) that called for senators to pass the public option using the budget reconciliation process.


But the number of senators who backed the plan falls short of the 50 needed to pass the package, assuming Vice President Joe Biden votes to break a tie.

Durbin says he can whip up Senate support for the PO if it's in reconcilliation. Can he, or can't he? What if he can't? Maybe if he can get more Senators to commit before the House passes the reconcilliation bill then it can get put in. But obviously he has more faith in his whip abilities than Pelosi does.

The good news, if it is not in the reconcilliation bill then Sherrod Brown has said he will press for a separate bill to include the PO. So it is still not dead, and it's up to us to keep up pressure to both pass HCR and pass the PO - whether in the same bill or not.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

23. Thanks, David

It is PATHETIC what the mainstream Dems are willing to settle for.

This is the biggest waste of a majority in both Houses EVER. I can't think of a case in which a party with such a large majority was so craven about caving into a weakened opposition party.

Majorities in both Houses and a Dem in the White House and we get ... a slightly improved version of Mitt Romney's plan? :wtf:

Somebody must be doing a serious reverse LBJ maneuver (arm twisting to make the bill worse) on the Congresscritters.

[ChiciB1]

122. My Sentiments EXACTLY Lydia! It's PATHETIC & What's Worse Is that

BECAUSE it's devolved down so far, what THEY (Congress Critters) are willing to settle for is almost a joke. What many (even here) don't realize when they are spouting off about things like "no longer being able to deny coverage" the reality is that THOSE people who will need coverage WILL HAVE TO PAY THROUGH THE NOSE!! The "you can take it with you" provision isn't even all that great! I wonder how many people have looked into the PRICE they will have to pay!!!

I was listening to some alternative TV recently and became quite irritated when certain facts were being discussed. Sure there WILL be coverage, but people WILL pay, and some who don't WANT to pay will be obligated! To me this is NO WAY to go about HCR, but to hear many Democrats talk they just say "we can re-visit" it LATER!

Yeah, LIKE that's gonna happen!! Kinda like the way they re-visited NAFTA! I been trying VERY hard not to tune in as much as before because it keeps me up at night. Just thinking about HOW BAD things have gotten, and what I personally think will GET WORSE, my already frayed nerves go into over drive!!

And yes, I AM a BOOMER who knew a VERY DIFFERENT America, even when all the demonstrations and uproar went on back then. Yes, it was scary to some extent, and things got out of hand and people died because of it, but NOTHING can compare to what I see NOW!

What is going on NOW, is ALL ABOUT MONEY... those who have it want to keep it for the most part, and those who don't, well "we the people" aren't in the loop enough to make that much difference! Especially when you can't even get your Congress Critters to listen to you!

For now, we're holding on, but we have cut back a LOT! I won't even go to yard sales anymore for fear of buying something I REALLY don't need! If only we could get a strong "bartering system" going some might be in better shape! I know that next month I'm having an extremely LARGE yard sale because I've found sooooooooo many things I really don't need! While I have seen some sales that actually have NEW stuff still in boxes for sale at costs of 1/10th of the price, it makes me wonder!

That's one good reason NOT to go, because far too many people can't resist buying brand new items and don't really need them. But I've gotten off topic like I do much of the time... still we as a Nation have fallen to levels that are astounding! Our kids aren't being educated in ways that other countries are doing and we don't have health care for so many, many who need it!

AND THIS BILL, doesn't look like it's going to be something I can say I'm proud of! I'm sick to death that the WH AND our Congress Critters have sold us down the river!!

JMHO!!! :grr: :nuke: :shrug:

[nightrain]

24. knr. Sad that desperation leads some to throw DK under the bus for his principled being-ness.

Absolutely with you here David. We are in for a worse ride, no doubt.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

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

[PeaceNikki]

28. Who? Where? Do tell!!

You should alert on them!

[theFrankFactor]

27. CONGRESS APPROVAL RATING = 18% Does that mean anything to anybody?

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

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

[PeaceNikki]

30. Press secretary for Dennis Kucinich's 2004 presidential campaign, it says.

In April and May 2007, Swanson consulted part-time for Kucinich for President 2008

Interesting indeed.

[G_j]

34. so????

please explain why there is anything at all wrong with this.

unbelievable...

[PeaceNikki]

42. Not on the surface. But the OP called people who disagree with DK

"self-loathing partisan sycophants".

A) I think that doesn't get a conversation moving in a productive manner at ALL
B) Especially when you factor in his ties to DK

DU in general doesn't like "paid shills"... unless DU agrees with them, it seems. :shrug:

[G_j]

46. seperate issue

working for someone does not make one a shill!
I think it's safe to assume David worked for Kucinich because he shared values with him.
So that is a very intellectually dishonest assertion.

shill
- 4 dictionary results
shill
Show IPA Slang.
–noun
1.
a person who poses as a customer in order to decoy others into participating, as at a gambling house, auction, confidence game, etc.
2.
a person who publicizes or praises something or someone for reasons of self-interest, personal profit, or friendship or loyalty.
–verb (used without object)
3.
to work as a shill: He shills for a large casino.
–verb (used with object)
4.
to advertise or promote (a product) as or in the manner of a huckster; hustle: He was hired to shill a new TV show.
Origin:
1920–25; orig. uncert.
Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2010.
Cite This Source
|
Link To shill
Word Origin & History

shill
1916, "one who acts as a decoy for a gambler, auctioneer, etc." (probably originally circus or carnival argot), probably a shortened form of shillaber (1913) with the same meaning, origin unknown. The verb is attested from 1914.
Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2010 Douglas Harper
Cite This Source
shill (sh?l)
n. One who poses as a satisfied customer or an enthusiastic gambler to dupe bystanders into participating in a swindle.
v. shilled, shill·ing, shills

v. intr.
To act as a shill.
v. tr.
To act as a shill for (a deceitful enterprise).

To lure (a person) into a swindle.

[PeaceNikki]

48. I am sure that is true. "Shill" does not have to be derogatory .

I sincerely do not question that these are David's beliefs, it just puts his posts in support of Kucinich in a different light when disclosed. His site boasts that he has and will continue to consult on presidential campaigns. Like I said, if it were a politician with whom you tended not to agree, you'd also raise an eyebrow. And rightfully so.

In any case... paid or not, I think it's a shitty tactic to call fellow Democrats "self-loathing partisan sycophants" when they disagree.

It's very "Rahmy". But at least Rahm would but a far less pretentious and much funnier spin on it.

[bertman]

55. '"Shill" does not have to be derogatory.' And I'm sure you meant shill in the complimentary way.

Right PeaceNikki?

:rofl: :rofl:

[sabrina 1]

65. Did you have a problem with Rahm

calling the base of the Dem Party 'fucking retards'?

The WH sets a very bad tone for political discourse. And that is another promise broken. To raise the level of political discourse.

On second thought, Rahm and the WH speak to Republicans with the utmost respect. I suppose we should have asked for more detail on who would be included in that 'respect' for the opinions of others.

[liberation]

35. You guys really want to play the "bad connections" game....

... you sure about that? :-)

[Starry Messenger]

36. You might want to check this out

http://pumasunleashed.wordpress.com/2008/10/11/obamas-change-uncertainty/

scroll down to the comments...

[PeaceNikki]

37. .

:o

[G_j]

39. chuckle

:think:

[sabrina 1]

63. Don't you usually work for politicians you support?

Not particularly interesting. Interesting would be if David had worked for Boehner eg.

It does mean however, that he probably knows the man far better than the talking point dispensers who cannot even say on what issues they disagree with him.

I'm happy to hear that as he's not just some jerk on the internet spouting off support for or opposition to someone he doesn't even know.

Go Dennis! Maybe the only remaining true Democrat in DC!

[Bluenorthwest]

40. Dennis has my support because he gives his support

That is how politics often works. He gets much leeway from me for being in my corner when others are busy hiring their preacher friends to call me cursed by God.

[EFerrari]

41. Natch.

:kick:

[bvar22]

43. Great summation....K&R.

We really have crossed the Rubicon into Bizzaro World.

It was infuriating watching the year long Kabuki Theater of corrupt "Centrist" Democrats pretend to be FOR legitimate Health Care Reform, but sliding ever to the right "in compromise", "seeking Bi-Partisan Consensus", slowly giving away Issue after Issue to the Republicans until there was nothing "Democratic" left in the Bill.

Then, and only then, AFTER everything "Democratic" has been given away, the "Democrats" decide to ram this mostly Republican Health Insurance SCAM through reconciliation.

Individual Mandates to BUY Health Insurance + NO Public Option + Cadillac Tax (Anti-LABOR) + massive transfer of Public Money to Private Pockets + $500Billion de-funding of Medicare = Republican Health Insurance SCAM. (SEE: RomneyCare)

To CAP it ALL off, the Democratic Party Leadership has given it ALL away to the Republicans without forcing the Republicans to take ANY Political risk!!!
The Republicans got every major issue they wanted, but can STILL sit back and say,
"Yep. We opposed it. The Democrats raised YOUR Health Insurance Premiums and Rammed it down your Throats!!!"
This WILL play very well with Low Information America in addition to losing the activist Left Wing in 2010.

NOW, the supposed "Democratic Party" leadership is demanding that all "good" Democrats line up as support what is essentially a REPUBLICAN Bill, and the one REAL Democrat who STANDS up and says,
"Wait a minute. THIS is NOTHING like what you promised. THIS is a Republican Bill, and I can't vote for it" gets attacked by the "Centrist" Democrats for "voting with The Republicans."

That IS INSANE.
.
.
.
If you haven't already moved to The Woods and planted a Veggie Garden, its probably too late.

[theFrankFactor]

80. THIS is a Republican Bill, and I can't vote for it...

bvar22, I feel your frustration. You summed this up very well. Since the Obama administration began I have seen what my party looks like with the lights on. I remember a similar experience as a younger man when getting that girl from the bar out into the light. I belong to a party that makes its own failure a guaranteed outcome. Then... after the failure many insist on taking no responsibility for the outcome.

The Democratic party at the highest levels has been very successful- at creating the illusion of being helpless and bullied by evil Republicans. There's no shortage of "faithful" party members to keep the scam alive and well. It looks more and more like the people of this country are well trained. The bar is so low that anything left of Cheney is a "Democrat" and boy you better get in line!

[ProSense]

44. "I hope self-loathing partisan sycophants " Question:

When Kucinich promised to push for a floor vote on single payer, did you believe him?

When he decided against it because it didn't have the votes, was that because he previously lied?

Now, he's refusing to support a bill that includes a better state single payer provision than his own.

Does supporting Kucinich no matter what make one a sychophant?

[Name removed]

82. Deleted message

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

[bvar22]

119. Supporting Dennis when he STANDS with the vast MAJORITY...

...of the American People is the right thing to do.

Standing with the "Party Leadership" when THEY are speaking for LESS than 30% of the American People is the WRONG thing to do.

* Would you favor or oppose the national government offering everyone the choice of a government administered health insurance plan — something like the Medicare coverage that people 65 and older get — that would compete with private health insurance plans?

Favor 82%

Oppose 14%

Not Sure 4%
http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010010320/poll-shouts-message-massachusetts-voters-were-sending

It IS that simple.

[Dinger]

45. K & Rec # 42 (nt)

[ShamelessHussy]

52. lol - 'a naked Rahm Emanuel poking them in the chests' - Excellent sumation, and charecterization

Thank you for sharing :toast:

K&R

[bertman]

56. Great stuff, David. We can always count on you! Rec. nt

[johncoby2]

59. I'm DONE with Dennis!

[sabrina 1]

66. Great summation, David.

Kucinich couldn't be more correct in his opposition to this giveaway to Private Insurance.

[earcandle]

69. Thanks, David! I am down with Dennis too! I hope some Democrats join him in NOT voting for this

bill without a robust public option so that our reps don't
appear to be unrepresentative of the people.
If this passes, we are cleaning house in the fall with newer
better progressive versions of democrats.

[KoKo]

70. Good Points, David... Thanks for Posting this! eom

[joeybee12]

72. HRC is now a sick dog both sides want to put down, but they don't know how

to do it..by both sides, I mean Dems who want real reform, and Dems who are in bed with Pharma and Big Insurance. Some believe it will hurt them if they pass it, others believe not passing it will hurt them. No one, however, wants to be the one to pull the trigger.

[pattmarty]

78. This is one huge reason "liberals/progressives" can't accomplish........

........shit. Does ANYONE here remember when this started last year? Almost everyone on this board in posts was in support of a "public option". Probably a majority here were in favor of single payer or Medicare for all. Now this is what we're going to settle for after 60 yrs of fighting for universal healthcare in this country? Folks, we're a bunch of fucking pussies. Does the RW ever give up? Did Bush and his evil corrupt cronies EVER give up? This is one of the biggest problems we have as liberals is our willingness to "compromise". I'm pissed at all the Dems in the House & Senate that said "no way" would they vote for "reform" w/o a public option. Well, almost every one of them has caved. This bill is a fucking piece of steaming shit and most here know this. I'll tell ya, this is one "liberal" that hopes this anti progressive bill goes down in fucking flames. This has been a disaster over a year in making with little support from Obama until recently when he finally realized that the Dems are going to get a severe ass whipping in November unless he finally does SOMETHING that he said he would. This is not a bill that an FDR, LBJ or even an Eisenhower would have supported. The people voted for the Dems because I believe they wanted the Dems to support working people as the Democratic party has done in the past. Well, the people were wrong. We now effectively have a one party political system in this country and the primary cause is MONEY.

[theFrankFactor]

81. Tone Deaf Fanbois...

This whole disgusting debacle is a testament to the success of Fox news and manufactured consent. Democrats are officially defanged and safe for Corporate consumption. Will we ever see these majorities again in our lifetimes? Not bloody likely! And what have we to show? Shame and embarrassment! I'll never see my party the same again, and that's a good thing. It needs its diapers changed but that's a dirty job!

[Greyhound]

95. "they wanted the Dems to support working people as the Democratic party has done in the past."

:thumbsup:

[rhett o rick]

84. I respect Kucinich but will vote with Bernie Saunders. nm

[pattmarty]

87. I love Bernie and wish he would run, maybe he actually WOULD........

....institute "change we can believe in". The thing is that with this bill he's wrong if he decides to vote for this. You do know that Vermont receives a "Medicaid deal" in the legislation, don't you? I have not a god damned thing against "deals", that's politics, but it just goes to show that even the "best ones" have to make political deals now and then. I just can't quite figure where all the public option supporters went when the chips were down. Again, fucking liberals don't stand their ground and fight for it.

[kestrel91316]

86. K&R

[neuvocat]

88. Dennis isn't down with you.

Many of the "spineless" democrats are looking at the end of their careers in Congress once they cast a "yes" vote. Kucinich has never stuck his neck out his entire career for anything and he won't do it now for anyone.

[Greyhound]

94. That's probably the stupidest thing written in this thread and proves you don't know the first thing

about DK, his life, or career.

What he does is stick his neck out when everybody else is trying to get out the door with their loot. He knowingly sacrificed his first political career to save the people of Cleveland from an economic catastrophe. He knew it would cost him his office, he knew it was the right thing to do, and he knew nearly everybody would hate him for doing it. He was, as usual, right on all counts and a little over ten years later Cleveland honored him and sent him to DC.

He is "primaried" every cycle by the same "business community" that he stopped before and continues to stand up against.

[tcaudilllg]

105. Dennis does too much, too fast.

At the end of the day, sometimes it's best to take baby steps towards your goal, put things in perspective, and acknowledge political realities -- particularly when the alternative is not taking any steps forward at all for anybody.

[Greyhound]

139. So he should have just let his city be looted go into default?

Thankfully, the people of Cleveland district 10 are a little brighter than that.

[theFrankFactor]

117. You're kiddin' right?

[flyarm]

89. David ..DID YOU KNOW THIS?? PLEASE LOOK..

I AM ONLY POSTING A LITTLE OF THE INFO..MORE AT GOOGLE..

I was a former elected delegate for Florida..someone in Fla politics sent me the first info..i went googling and found more..please check this out..

Maybe you can get this info to Dennis K.???

Thanks..

fly


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

James Roosevelt, who was chair of the Rules and Bylaws Committee that decided to dock Michigan and Florida half of their
delegates and award 4 of the delegates Clinton won in Michigan to Obama, as well as all of the uncommitted delegates,
is the CEO of a health insurance company – Tufts Healthcare. Okay? Got that? The guy who made sure that Obama had the necessary
to delegates to win the nomination – even to the point of assigning delegates another candidate won to him arbitrarily –
is the CEO of a health insurance firm.
And what Roosevelt wants in a health insurance reform, is a reform that relies entirely upon private insurers.
He does not want a public option. He wants a plan like Massachusetts has
: http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/04/09/healthcare_lets_build_on_what_we_know/

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

do some googling..you will find lots on James Roosevelt, Jr. and the DNC Ways and Means committee on the delegate decisions in Michigan and Florida..
http://search.aol.com/aol/search?q=James+Roosevelt%2C+who+was+chair+of+the+Rules+and+Bylaws+Committee+that+decided+to+dock+Michigan+and+Florida+half+of+their+delegates+and+award+4+of+the+delegates+Clinton+won+in+Michigan+to+Obama&page=2&nt=SG2&oreq=66ea2dd1351a45ce9c7de9133d8c39d8&s_it=keyword_rollover

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://www.tuftshealthplan.com/visitors/visitors.php?sec=about_us&content=senior_management_group

Senior Management Group
Our mission is to set the standard for outstanding quality health care, service, and value. Our dedication to excellence makes us one of the leading health plans in the nation. Meet our senior management group.

James Roosevelt, Jr., President and Chief Executive Officer


es Roosevelt, Jr.
President and Chief Executive Officer
Mr. Roosevelt joined Tufts Health Plan in 1999 as senior vice president and general counsel and held that position until June 2005, when he became president and chief executive officer. As the general counsel, he presided over the legal department and the company's compliance, privacy and government relations functions.

Before joining Tufts Health Plan, Mr. Roosevelt was the associate commissioner for Retirement Policy for the Social Security Administration in Washington, D.C. He has also served as chief legal counsel for the Massachusetts Democratic Party and as co-chair of the Rules and By-laws Committee of the Democratic National Committee, for which he currently serves on the Change Commission. Mr. Roosevelt spent 10 years as partner at Choate, Hall and Stewart in Boston. He is past chairman of the board of trustees for the Massachusetts Hospital Association, past president of the American Health Lawyers Association and past chairman of the board of trustees for Mount Auburn Hospital. Currently, Mr. Roosevelt serves as chairman of the board of directors for Massachusetts Association of Health Plans, and as a member of the board of directors and co-chair of the policy committee at America’s Health Insurance Plans. He is a member of the Massachusetts Heath Care Quality and Cost Council and the board of directors for the Rhode Island Quality Institute. Mr. Roosevelt is also a board member at Emmanuel College and the Kenneth B. Schwartz Center, and is co-chair of the board of directors for the Tufts Health Care Institute. In November 2008, President-elect Barack Obama appointed Mr. Roosevelt to his transition team to co-chair a review of the Social Security Administration.

Mr. Roosevelt received his J.D. from Harvard Law School and his A.B. with honors in government from Harvard College. He has also completed the Advanced Management Program at Harvard Business School.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03.aspx

The DNC weighs in on Michigan

Posted: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 10:40 AM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: Democrats

From NBC's Mark Murray

DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee co-chairs Alexis Herman and James Roosevelt issued the following memo to members of the committee:

"We have recently been asked whether the legislation as proposed by Michigan would fit within the framework of the National Party’s Delegate Selection Rules. Our review of this legislation indicates that it would, in fact, fit within the framework of the Rules if, it were, passed by the state legislature and used by the Michigan State Democratic Party as the basis of drafting a formal Delegate Selection Plan. If a formal Delegate Selection Plan is received we will convene a meeting of the RBC to consider such a Plan."

[gimama]

90. thanks, David, AND DK! nt

[SlingBlade]

93. K & R We Progressives Didnt leave the Party ....

[kenny blankenship]

96. The party went Reagan Republican

it's so corrupt, I'm not sure anyone should bother trying to save it.

[tcaudilllg]

102. Well ya know what buddy? Reagan Dems are 1/4 of the party, and that ain't gonna change.

[kenny blankenship]

108. Look everybody - a Reagan lover!

enjoy your stay however brief it may be - buddy.

[upi402]

97. Clinton-Republicans showed me the door

I never left, they left me. I'm with politicians like Dennis.

It's all over now though. Supreme Court unleashed the dogs of corporatism.

[Iggo]

99. .

:thumbsup:

[laughingliberal]

101. Spot on! K & R. nt

[tcaudilllg]

103. You're down with a narcissist?

[theFrankFactor]

118. That's a good one! LOL! Kooch, a narccisist! Holy sh*t, you should do comedy!

[democracy1st]

106. K & R

[DisgustedInMN]

109. K & R

[Echo In Light]

111. "He didn't open negotiations by proposing the lowest he'd accept"

k/r !

[freddie mertz]

112. K & R. I would like to encourage Dennis to continue to stand tall.

The pressure must be very intense, and we've seen the wave of (orchestrated?) demonization here.

I am willing to stand with any progressive who votes their conscience and speaks their mind on this issue: no matter which way they end up voting, I will listen and try to understand.:patriot:

The DLC and Insurance Company spammers, on the other hand, can eat my shorts. :spank:

[NorthCarolina]

113. I'm down with Dennis too nt

[mmonk]

114. Your first three sentences say it all and show how convoluted

the excuses are for this corporate bill.

[FarLeftFist]

115. I stand with the little boy who plead to congress to pass health reform

Thanks to the holdouts millions will continue to suffer, and we will have no one to blame but ourselves (the Left). Those millions won't be mad at the republicans, they will be mad at us.

[slipslidingaway]

116. knr nt

[inna]

123. Thank you for this, David.

:thumbsup:

[kstewart33]

124. DK is a sellout.

So tired of purists who will kill the bill because it isn't liberal enough for them.

Give me a break. So he can't get the perfect bill. So he's taking his ball and going home. Looking like the oh-so-principled leader.

Who is he leading? The people who are dying because they don't have health insurance? The families who are caving under the weight of 39% higher health insurance premiums?

Big, principled, pure guy, that DK is.

Sorry. I'm not following the lemmings on this one. Count me out.

[Echo In Light]

127. You've got it backward; the lemmings are headed the other way

It's not about being "liberal" enough, it's having the wherewithal to oppose a mandated corporate give-away masquerading as HC "reform."

[madrchsod]

128. all these new mandated customers that may someday face the fact...

that they will be filing chapter 7 on their medical bills. after the bankruptcy is filed they better make sure they wait another 7 before a family member has disastrous medical bills. 50% of the medical bankruptcies are people who have insurance

my wife and i just went through bankruptcy over my bills..yes i have insurance. so i have around 20 months before i can have the surgeries i need...why? no one can garnish my social security/medicare. they can file on my estate.

[Echo In Light]

130. As did my wife & I several yrs back, all over medical bills. We didn't/don't even own a credit card

[julian09]

132. Kucinich playing russian roulette with all chambers full

but pointing the gun at someone else head, how principaled.

[Ignis]

133. That word does not mean what you think it means.

Or if it does, please tell us exactly to whom DK sold out. :shrug:

[kstewart33]

134. Insurance companies.

In all his liberal purist glory.

He's giving them just what they want - no HCR.

And in the process, he's giving the 30 million with no insurance, the tens of millions trapped in a policy that won't cover pre-existing conditions, and millions more who can't get insurance because of a condition - he's giving them a big fat NOTHING.

But of course, his principles will be intact. And to him, that's all that matters.

What a dickwad.

[Ignis]

135. So where's the "sell" in sellout? You think he's been bought?

Again, I don't think you understand the word you're using here.

[nightrain]

137. actually, if he stands with his convictions, he's giving us all the opportunity

to get an affordable, comprehensive, universal health CARE (not insurance) program.

(Unless you prefer to give more of your money to Cigna's execs, or BC's, or United's?? I don't.)

[Generator]

136. I've come up with a new taste

in my mouth, utter revulsion at the Democratic party.

Move On and Donna Brazille are making Kucinich the enemy? That's the last straw for me. I don't we be a part of whatever this party has become, because like Obama's supposed progressiveness it's all a blatant sham. Blatant. Sham.

Chip Khan. I guess that's our answer to the public option. Look it up. He's the health care lobbyist that was promised by Obama there would be no public option. Obama is a liar. I don't like liars. I don't vote for liars. You can call that just being a politician but I am done. You could not pay me money to help re-elect this fraud.

I've heard about this deal for some time that Obama made to sell out the people that voted for him. Ah well, I'm sure the money from big pharma and the hospitals will make up for us little people.

Wendell Potter is another fraud. (Mr. insurance company insider) Don't tell me this bill is the worst piece of crap ever for months then magically change your mind the minute the senate passes it. How dumb are people? Anyway, I have had it with the church of Obama. I don't like those that think faith is all you need. They won't make this bill better. They didn't do that with medicare part D. They didn't do that with Nafta. They won't magically pass a public option after they pass this, Ms. Woolsey. I have had it with the stupidity.

Enough with the religion. Faith is not the answer. Open eyes are. And I am no longer part of the Democratic church. They believe in lies. I believe in my eyes.

[swilton]

138. Is Dennis 'Down'?

Down seems wrong in this context - I'm up with Dennis too!