If my history is correct, Congress passed a watered down civil rights bill in 1957,

[muntrv]

then revisited the issue & passed a stronger bill in 1964. Why not believe the same for health insurance reform?

[LaydeeBug]

1. seven years ia long time in the electronic age, dontcha think? nt

[2Design]

2. It lloks like for dems to think they can - they must have all the seats in both houses n/t

[treestar]

3. Yep!

the "I want it all now" babies have no sense of history.

[Roland99]

4. The DLC wasn't around then. Too many corporate-whore Dems now.

[anonymous171]

5. NAFTA. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. The Social Security Act was a dog in 1935

since it did NOTHING... serious, it didn't do much. It was that bad. Oh and the people at the time screamed to high heaven on how it was a betrayal, but that was all there were votes for.

The Medicare Act of 1965 was as weak as it can be.

In fact, this is close in what it will do to the 1965 Act. I will actually say that this is a tad better than the 1965 Act. Not by much, but better.

US reform is not achieved in one fell swoop in the US. and every time the Liberals scream on the betrayal. If history is prologue. I expect this thing to get better over the years

This is a generational fight thought and people need to remain engaged.

That means I will need to remain in a first name basis with the staffers.

Oh and you are right on your history... and lord knows Leader Johnson could not get anything better, and had to pull votes from thin air in '65 as President, and the same was for the Medicare Act of '65.

This is the reality... slow but steady.

[worthlesscitizen]

7. Yes, exactly,

This is just what I'm thinking.