How deep does all this run? HCR opponents, how do you feel about supporters here?

[CreekDog]

:shrug:

(I just want to know how mad/betrayed people who oppose the bill here are at supporters here that advocate for the Senate Bill) :hi:

[Hello_Kitty]

1. They tend to resort to personal attacks when their arguments are rebutted. eom

[ZombieHorde]

24. You just described the internet. nt

[Prism]

2. Depends

Some people I very much respect despite the disagreement, because I believe through past experience with their posts that their opinions are in good faith.

Others are simply attack dogs out of devotion to a personality rather than as a matter of sound policy.

It's not very difficult to distinguish the two.

[CreekDog]

3. thanks for sayin

:hi:

[emilyg]

4. Yes. Well put.

[tblue]

17. +1

[NJmaverick]

27. Are you talking about Howard Dean and the people letting him do their talking?

[eridani]

5. I'm still looking for a rational justification of why setting MLRs counts as regulation

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7324816&mesg_id=7324816

Haven't gotten any so far.

[lapfog_1]

8. MLRs are worse than that.

What they do is turn the unregulated monopoly (legal) health insurance industry into the worlds largest cost plus award fee government contractors. Cost+ contracts are the absolute worst deal for taxpayers. Instead of containing costs, they provide every incentive to game the system to INCREASE costs, because only by increasing the cost can the contractor increase their own profits.

[eridani]

9. I agree, though I mainly object to regulation after the fact

You have to have regulations that help people BEFORE they get fucked over.

[snot]

15. An equally big objection is, how is all that going to be ENFORCED?

Are the feds going to audit all these companies every month? What agency is being created to do that, and how will it be funded? What are the penalties if they find "errors" on the part of insurers -- will the CEO go to jail? Will the company forfeit all profits for the year? And as your original post suggests, what restitution will be made to those already dead from said errors?

For once, I agree with free marketeers, inasmuch as competition would seem to do better so long as we can't expect any meaningful regulatory enforcement.

[waiting for hope]

14. Nicely done. Speaking of the Sarkisyan's -

Did you see this?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x397222

[eridani]

57. Yes. CIGNA is run by sociopaths n/t

[lapfog_1]

6. More like the straw that broke the camel's back.

I was a huge supporter of President Obama in the primaries and in the general. No one here was more frequent or forceful in their support (with the possible exception of grantcart). I still like him and think that he is better than the alternative. I think Ms. Clinton would have been just a big of a corporatist and a war hawk.

I don't blame Obama for not going after the Bushies. It's a political calculation, an error in my view, but there it is.

I think he has surrounded himself with too many DLC types, including the aforementioned Ms. Clinton.

I knew how he felt about Afghanistan, I had simply hoped he would re-evaluate his position.

I still hope that he goes about fixing DADT and DOMA, but I had little hope for equality for GLBTers.

He was boxed in for the bailouts, and the majority of that program happened under Bush. But he hasn't taken steps since becoming President to fix the underlying problem of Wall Street greed. We need to rebuild a manufacturing base, a new one based on 21st century technologies and requirements. We can't simply turn everything over to China.

He didn't have to bring in Rahm as COS.

He could have picked others to lead his economic team, rather than a bunch of Wall Street game players.

He talked about green jobs, but failed to make any bold moves in this arena.

He talked about Health Care reform, but what we got is Health Insurance "reform" and that looks like a corporate giveaway to me.

The Dems have caved to Lieberman and the DINOs at every turn. Progressives have been shut out.

The margin of his victory, plus the margin in the House and Senate, are likely the biggest we'll see in my lifetime, if we get nothing but table scraps or less now, we aren't ever going to get a seat at the table. That realization is hard to swallow.

And yeah, the people here that are pushing the "with us or with the enemy" meme are not doing themselves or their cause any good. All they are doing is pissing off the folks that are hugely disappointed with the turd of a bill.

[HughMoran]

11. "The Dems have caved to Lieberman"

I have no issue with anything you've said in you post with the exception of this one line.

Since Lieberman is not a Democrat (if giving a speech at the RNC isn't evidence enough of this, then I don't know what is), why is "caved to Lieberman" any different than "caved to Snowe" or "caved to Kyl" for that matter?

What special powers do Dems have over Lieberman that would have forced him to stop being an Independent caucusing with the Democrats? Taking away his chairmanship would simply have driven him into the arms of the Republicans and assured defeat of HCR for another generation. I'm extremely interested in how (besides extracting his brains and implanting an android replacement) the Dems would have coerced him to not act like an infant? And how exactly does one negotiate with an infant?

[lapfog_1]

12. One big difference... Lieberman is still in the Democratic caucus

even though he isn't a Democrat AND he is chair of a subcommittee that oversees the second largest federal department.

I would rather a deal have been made with Snowe. At least you know that once a deal is done, she wouldn't stab you in the back. Lieberman did what he did (he pushed for expanded Medicare coverage for the last 8+ years) because of spite. Pure and simple. If the liberals wanted it, he was going to be against it... even if it was something that he said he wanted as little as 3 months ago.

The "60 vote majority" is largely a myth anyway (what with Bryd - god bless him - having to be wheeled in from his hospital and all of the other ConservaDems) and we really got it by hook and by crook, converting Specter to vote "D" because he was afraid of by primaried next election.

Kick the asshole out. Make deals with Republicans that are likely more liberal than Lieberman anyway.

[mdmc]

50. You primary him and support his opponent

Ned Lamont would have been a great ally for Obama.
Obama jocked Joementum and the DLC, and is now jocking for-profit over for-treatment health insurance.

Perhaps Obama would prefer it this way. Perhaps Lamont would have been a better way to go..

[HughMoran]

51. Yes, we should get rid of him

...until then, we are stuck with him. I'll not address the free shots at Obama - Lieberman was elected in 2006, 2 years before Obama was elected President. We are stuck with him until 2012.

[tblue]

19. I agree with everything you said.

Wow. It's like you're reading my mind (except I was never a huge Obama supporter. I like him, I voted for him in the primary, and I volunteered many hours for him, but I always knew he was too centrist for my taste, and he sure hasn't disabused me of that thought).

[yourout]

29. Amen brother/sister

Well said.

[ChiciB1]

37. Words Well Spoken... I Agree! n/t

[depakid]

7. At times, I feel sorry for some

knowing that the insurance industry parasites who have now been empowered will likely cause them serious personal and financial grief down the line (and will remain a major drag on the US economy).

[girl gone mad]

10. I just don't get all of the hatred directed toward progressives.

This site used to be a shelter from the storm. Now there are multiple daily threads attacking private citizen bloggers and activists who have no power and virtually no influence on policymakers. It's a tactic that I find entirely offensive and creepy, bordering on something even more sinister.

I can only conclude from the supporters' actions that the bill itself must be indefensible.

[JoeyT]

13. I'm not angry at the people that are supporting it.

I think a lot of them think it's probably going to do a lot of good. I think they're wrong, but they feel the same about me, so there you go. ;)

By the way, none of us are opponents of HCR. We just don't like this particular bill. Frankly if it didn't mandate buying things from corporations, I'd consider it a huge step in the right direction.

[snot]

16. I'm not angry at them; but they scare me.

And I would be delighted to see a DU rule against ad hominem attacks. I don't care what side you're on of what issue; if a poster is calling people names rather than analyzing issues or sharing facts (preferably supported by links to sources), I consider their action destructive; for at the very best, it wastes our time.

[Jamastiene]

18. That really depends.

There are a few who support the bill who have just stated their case and that's that. I have no qualms with them. To me, they just see things differently than I do.

Then, there are those who have been as condescending and belittling as possible about it. Those really piss me off. Then again, those are the same ones I really didn't like before this anyhow. So, it balances out.

I feel more betrayed by the corporate giveaway aspect of the bill and the mandate without a public option and the special jab at reproductive rights for women (a redundant addition to the bill that was highly unnecessary).

After all is said and done, meh, I see more problems than just health insurance. I started a thread to discuss the other factors that cause health problems for those of us in poverty, and it could have been discussed by both those who oppose and those who support this bill, but that thread was DOA.

That doesn't surprise me really. No one wants to scratch the surface and really see the ugly truth that is costing us way more for health care in this country than it should.

There are other actions that could greatly reduce our costs for health care in this country, but that would hurt someone's stock portfolio and possibly make them have to store all of their vintage cars in separate buildings(as per the documentary I wish people would just watch). Nobody really cares.

The only thing, other than that little factoid, that I really am pissed off about is that I resent being used as a pawn by those who don't have a clue what the daily lives of poor people are really like. There is so much more to this than just this HCR bill can even begin to address.

[Sapphocrat]

20. +1

:hug:

[Jamastiene]

22. Hey, Sapph.

:hug:

[tblue]

21. How I feel about pro-this-HCR-bill DUers is, they're entitled to their opinion, period.

However, I resent like hell people trying to silence others, or calling them names, or demanding that others fall in line. I got no use for that bs, and it won't change anyone's way of thinking anyway.

[hollowdweller]

55. I think their heart is in the right place.

But I think they are thinking too small.

[saracat]

23. I really resent being told to accept the unacceptable and havingmy rights marginalized.

As a woman, I feel I am entitled to equal healthcare and as a loyal democrat for over 30 yars, I see that our current WH and Party leaders have little regard for women or any other part of our traditional base, including unions.This HCR takes a slap at all of us and I resent being told that advocating for the party platform and Democratic ideals makes me a fantasist.
I never expected much from Obama because I always felt he was a centrist and a people pleaser. It was obvious the bipartisanship he sold us out for was never going to fly but I never thought he would be as dismissive of his base as he is.

I am amazed that so many continue to trust that this Bill will get better when it is patently obvious it will not. Many said Stupak would never pass. Many said the Nelson Amendments or anything excluding choice would not be in the Senate Bill. Many insist these amendments do no harm when it is obvious they do.Many refuse to see the damage the mandates may do.Yet these same folks call those that see the reality of this HCR crazy, all in defense of a personality and not because of policy.

I am angry at all those folks who dimiss all those priciples most of us have fought all our lives to defend as less important than a win for a favorite politician.I am angry with those folks that place politics over people.

[dkf]

25. I'm tempted to buy health insurance stocks just to gouge them and

make them regret it.

[mmonk]

26. I love everyone here.

Some may feel differently about me though for speaking my mind.:hi:
But I am what I am. I mean no harm. I must stay with my convictions.

[TheKentuckian]

28. I think it is really sad that there is so much dismissing and demeaning

from all sides.

The demonizing of folks who think this bill is a raw deal and sell out is way out of hand. The victory laps are stomach churning in light of what is being exchanged and what we get in return.
I also don't like how the conservatives in the caucus are never accused of being a part of the circular firing squad despite being the real gremlins in our works. I don't get the anger at the left and the seeming acceptance of the right's bullshit. Friggin Ben Nelson gets way more slack cut for him in some circles than a blogger. I think Hamsher is being a totally reactionary batshit crazy idiot but why is she more on the shit list than Landreiu, Lieberman, Nelson, or Stupek? Why is it forgivable for them to hijack and ransom this issue but if a liberal does anything to try to apply some pressure that they become the devil incarnate?

I also don't get how easily people's goalposts change. Many of the same people who are now putting their soul into defending this piece of crap bill just months ago were deadset against anything like what we are getting now. It's neat to see a turd revalued as platinum and indefensible hailed as victory.

I said I'd be against this crap when it was more or less the Finance mark and a few months changes nothing. I would think some would be embarrassed to be so toolish.

[Laelth]

30. The Third Way is killing us.

The antagonism you see here on DU is but a reflection of a larger schism within the Party as a whole. It seems that "Third Way Democrats" are running the Obama administration, leaving those of us on the left feeling very unrepresented.

This essay explains the dynamic nicely.

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/144783/3_reasons_why_progressives_are_so_frustrated

:dem:

-Laelth

[PassingFair]

36. Well THAT was depressing!

It seems that there are only about 5 or 6 rabid DLC posters on this board,
but BOY, do they have a lot of time on their hands!

Where one goes, another rushes in. Insulting and taunting.

Clinton was the OBVIOUS DLC candidate in the race, we
picked the POSSIBLY NOT DLC candidate, but in the end,
we got the same anti-worker administration.

We weren't FOOLED, the outcome has just been worse than we
hoped for.

[VMI Dem]

31. After the treatment of the gay community and the defense of the Bush Doctrine?

Meh.

[Vinca]

32. The thing that distinguishes Democrats from Republicans is that

we don't think like sheep. There are all kinds of opinions here over health care, from stopping it dead in its tracks to enacting it and everything in between. Let's face it, we're all intelligent people here (unlike that other party) and we should be able to respect each others' points of view even if we disagree. To a person, I'm betting we'd all get behind single-payer. Since that is out, our disagreements revolve around different levels of pragmatism.

[carolinayellowdog]

33. I feel bullied

At this point I could not be counted as an opponent, but am an extremely ambivalent and lukewarm supporter. Nonetheless, I have put about two dozen supporters of the bill on ignore because they have adopted the tool kit of right wing bullies. The taunting and scorn, the scapegoating and stereotyping of progressives has been absolutely disgusting. There are other places to go if one wants that kind of thing.

[katsy]

34. I'm opposed to the bill without a po but am not mad or betrayed by

its supporters. On the contrary, there are DUers here whose analysis I find to be interesting and thorough whether they support HCR or not. The discussions are always gratifying and educational of sorts. Most DUers are considerate of other people's opinion.

My hope is that they are right about the faith they put in government, the Democratic Party and this bill, because the alternative doesn't bode well at all for people like myself. If my instincts are correct about how far right this country is heading, it's a dim future for progressive thought, the environment, basic civil and human rights. I want to be wrong. So I listen and hope they are right.

Then there are the people who attack all opposing viewpoints regardless of the discussion and they are there through all DUs ups or downs. They don't discuss ideas or events, they attack. Same old shit no matter the topic. I ignore them no matter what they have to say. I'm a "Deaniac". I'm not the "real base". I'm a "hater". No. I'm. Not. I'm none of those things and don't fit into any measured box. My opinions change and evolve as more info is unveiled.

When they first chucked the public option I was never going to vote again or support any Democratic candidate financially again. I came back from that abyss. Whenever possible, progressives will get my full support, but the gop is never an alternative. That asshole who wants to drown the government in a bathtub is never my ally and he is never ever right. Ever. Because I oppose the bill for not taking the profit factor out of what I perceive is a basic human right. He opposes all human rights except as defined by the profit margins of the elite. I will never join forces with right wingnuts for any reason.

[totodeinhere]

35. I am opposed to the bill as it presently stands.

And I am very pessimistic that it will be improved very much in conference. However, I respect the vast majority of advocates for the bill at DU. It's just an honest difference of opinion among well intentioned people. There are a few on both sides who have resorted to personal attacks and innuendo. That's regrettable, but we have to realize that this is a very important and emotional issue for many. After all, health care can often be a matter of life and death.

[Starry Messenger]

38. It depends on what kind of supporter.

People who use the term "leftbagger" immediately go on my shit list. That said, my own mother is a supporter of the HCR and I'm hardly going to hold DUers to a different standard than I do my mom. :) However, when I told my mother that I was going to be spending nearly $2000 a year on health insurance despite the fact that I make $27,000 a year and would have very little money left over to actually pursue care she said "Well, you can keep yourself well and try not to have to see a doctor." Um, that's what I do now with no payments to anyone...basically I'm taking a pay cut in the Bay Area. I just want people to understand the implications of that.

[CreekDog]

54. I didn't even realize people were using "left bagger" but that term has got to go

just like "pout" and "pony"...of course those terms are still in use too. :eyes:

[Tailormyst]

39. I think they have a right to their view

And I also think that some (only a few very vocal people) have gone a little overboard in the ugly, nasty, bully category in defense of the legislation. But, it is the internet so that is to be expected.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

40. I think that some are misinformed about the true nature of the bill,

and are genuinely desperate for help, not realizing that the bill does NOT contain the help they need, while others are shills...but for whom, I don't know. They respond to facts with typical right-wing maneuvers such as resorting to personal attacks, changing the subject, and arguing against something the other party didn't say.

[LWolf]

41. I feel that they are wrong.

Why?

If you are looking for feelings of betrayal, I've got them. They are directed at those who helped Obama win the Democratic candidacy in the primaries. And no, I was not a supporter of HRC, either. I wanted someone actually left of center.

The party nominated and ran a center-right candidate who is escalating the war on terror and the privatizers' war on unions and war on public education.

The health care bill? I never expected anything any different. It pisses me off, but I understand why some defend it so desperately. Just as I understood why so many needed to cling to the fictional hope for "change we can believe in" last year, even though I didn't agree with it.

[Blasphemer]

42. I'm neither mad at nor do I feel betrayed by the supporters

Heck, I was a reluctant supporter up until the last round of compromises. It is very rare that anything said on DU angers me. I am angry at certain politicians. Ultimately, they are wholly at fault. As for the supporters here, there are many (not all of course) who have been inordinately condescending and belittling. There are those who actually seem to not want to hear ANY criticism of the President. There are those who are clearly engaging in some sort of political maneuvering. I don't appreciate the attempts to ram their opinions down the throats of those who disagree and I especially don't appreciate the fear mongering ("you will be responsible for electing the Republicans"!). I have not seen any HCR opponents suggesting that supporters should leave the site but I have seen supporters make just that suggestion to opponents. I don't have a problem with supporters who clearly don't have an agenda and are just hopeful that the bill is a starting point. However, many do seem to have an agenda and it's pretty disturbing. Some have even picked up the GOP tactic of accusing others of what you are doing. I am highly suspicious of anyone accusing a health care opponent of being a freeper or undercover operative. So, while I am not angry, I definitely have my guard up.

[Blue_In_AK]

43. I think supporters are trying to make lemonade out of lemons.

I don't fault them for that. It's a glass half full, half empty, kind of debate.

[Armstead]

44. Depends on their attitude about it

I'm fine with those who support the final bill who are reasonable and do not insult those who even question it and who discuss the actual policy issues. :)

There also the category of those who might get momentarily overheated, but leave openings for building bridges when it's all over. They're okay too in my book.

The ones who I resent are those who berate critics, and who use idiot terms like "bill killers" and "leftbaggers" and who make idiot claims ("you just want Obama to fail because he is not pure enough")....And those who use this as yet another opportunity to castigate "the leftists" or who spout off other nasty talking points. :mad:

I'm generally nice to those who disagree civilly, but I can act like an asshole myself in response to the latter category.

[dflprincess]

45. Exactly

for me the difference is between those who have honestly been duped and those who are coming off as (paid or unpaid0 shills for the DLC and/or the insurance companies.

[girl_interrupted]

46. Everyone is entitled to their opinion

even if they are wrong. People should agree to disagree, in a civil manner. I really don't pay much attention to some of the posters here, they would defend Obama if he killed someone in cold blood on tv. I just can't go along with that mindless "we can't criticize the president" robot think. People often think politicans "disappoint" them, but I think it's more that we disappoint ourselves by excusing or ignoring promises made and not kept and continuing to vote for them. What does a politican have to lose? He doesn't feel he has to earn your vote...just expect you to vote partyline. The only way to keep them honest, is to remind them of what they said, and hope they wake up and listen& change course. That makes it better for all of us. Staying silent, never helps anyone.

I think it's more important to look at the people around you in real time...what they are saying, how they are feeling, what they are afraid of with this bill, their pro's and cons, and how they will be voting. I think that gives you a better idea of what's really going on and I find people do that in a more genuine manner, than on a board.

[CreekDog]

53. +1

and another +1

:hi:

[cherokeeprogressive]

47. I feel that some supporters are so heavily invested in seeing President Obama "succeed"

that they're blind to the drawbacks, and ignorant of how this will affect mid-term elections, as well as the 2012 GE.

[mdmc]

48. Well, I think we are all on the same side

To be honest, I never really thought about health care before I got sick.
Now the status quo has been proven to me NOT TO WORK.
I know we need change - for profit health insurance is counter-producitve to medical treatment.

So I understand how someone making $100k and fully insured would think that this bill is great - it will help 58 million to "get health insurance". Since "health insurance" equals medical treatment to a fully insured professional making $100k, I can understand how someone would want to support Obama and this bill.

I also have a place in my heart for Obamabots. Most people could care less about politics (just like most DU'ers could care less how SUNY Albany's football team has done this year). So if people are passionate about "having Obama's back", I can dig that.

I have a lot of respect for people that "have it all" - looks, brains, money, health... I have even more respect when these fortunate people care about those without. I love it when fortunate people continue to have compassion.

So, I would love to be able to afford medical treatment and avoid being disabled by a treatable illness. I am fully insured, but cannot afford out of pocket $ required to secure medical treatment.

But I don't mind the rich comfortable people jocking Obama. I don't mind people thinking that medical insurance equals medical treatment. I don't mind purist calling for medical treatment being prioritiezed over profit. They are all my people and I love them all.

I just hope they remember me when I am disabled, on welfare.. due not to the lack of health insurance, but due to the lack of affordable medical treatment.

[Yavin4]

49. I Think That Most of Them Are Looking At The Politics Instead of the Policy

They want a political win more than good public policy. Ironically, this bill is both bad public policy and bad politics.

[freddie mertz]

52. I understand their point of view and respect it.

I don't appreciate the personal attacks on critics and calls for censorship, however.

[donheld]

56. I'm just really pissed that Obama lied about the public option