Useless Democrats to come to Republicans rescue
The Republican effort of repealing Obamacare and replacing it with a horrible alternative is on the verge of collapse.
"Better than 1%. Not yet above 2% in my opinion," a senior Republican source told CNN on the chances the health care bill will pass Senate at this point.
This is a golden opportunity to not just confound the Republicans, but to stand up for the working class and present Medicare for all as a real alternative.
Democrats badly need this win. So what do you think they will do?
Ten House Democrats will unveil a new plan to fix Obamacare, highlighting the parts of the law that have struggled to work and offering modest steps to improve them....
“We need an alternative to the ‘just say no’ policy that has pervaded Democrats up until now,” says Rep. Kurt Schrader (D-OR), who is involved with the new proposal. “Let’s have that conversation. Let’s fix the damn thing and get real.”
Oh, goody. Defenders of the status quo. That was sooo popular in the last election.
“Some Democrats are fearful to talk about what is wrong with [Obamacare] for fear we’ll be seen as abandoning it,” says Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT), a relatively progressive Democrat who supports Medicare-for-all. But he says now is a moment to talk about fixing Obamacare, and not single-payer. “There is the practical reality that we’ve got a Republican president and a Republican Congress,” he says. “That’s not the opportune moment for Medicare-for-all. We’ve got to defend what we have.”
Yes, defend the status quo, and you can't have a pony.
That's what always motivates a political base.
So what are these wonderful Obamacare fixes?
Create an annual $15 billion reinsurance fund. ObamaCare had a reinsurance program for three years from 2014 to 2016 to provide payments to insurers that enroll higher-cost, sicker individuals.
Continue ObamaCare's insurer payments, which reimburse them for giving discounts to low-income patients. Insurers have blamed the uncertainty over whether these payments will continue as a reason for their proposed double digit rate increases in 2018.
Have "robust marketing strategies" to ensure that more people enroll during open enrollment periods.
Allow a buy-in option for Medicare for people nearing retirement age.
Expand tax credits by age, geography and income to help people buy insurance. Currently, about 84 percent of ObamaCare participants get a subsidy.
Expand the availability of catastrophic health plans that include essential health benefits and coverage for primary care for younger enrollees. These plans, meant to protect people from worst-scenarios, tend to have low monthly premiums and high deductibles.
More taxpayer subsidies for people to buy private health insurance, and a backstop for the health insurance industry.
WhooHoo. That sure excites me.
Why do these ideas sound familiar?
Some of these ideas, like the reinsurance fund and the permanent cost-sharing reduction subsidies, are broadly quite similar to reforms recently proposed by the liberal Center for American Progress think tank.
The Center for American Progress was founded by John Podesta, who has served as White House Chief of Staff to U.S. President Bill Clinton and as the chairman of the 2016 presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton.
This is pathetic. Losing one election after another can't seem to shake the Democrats away from their commitment to neoliberalism, which is the problem. It's not that the Republican message is better. It's that the Democrats have no message at all, and refuse to take a hint from it's own base.
And yet these demonstrators, who had organized themselves on Facebook, had a clear, singular message that dominated the event.The Democratic Party speakers, who rhetorically wandered through a variety of issues, including women’s rights and the 1st Amendment, did not.
Many party speakers noted, in response to the demonstrators, that they’d been vocal supporters of single-payer healthcare, and in some cases had co-sponsored bills to enact it. But they were ad-libbing on the defensive, instead of setting the agenda for their own meeting, or sharing a vision for how to make a unified push for single-payer healthcare. Demonstrators didn’t come to see legislators talk about their collective helplessness — they wanted a plan of action.
The event came on the heels of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s decision to release a series of slogans that sunk like a lead balloon with many in the base. While none were particularly inspired, one rankled the most: "Democrats 2018: I mean, have you seen the other guys?" The slogan made it abundantly clear that, after a bruising loss in November, Democrats wouldn’t be presenting new ideas or deeply examining their policy stances. Instead, they were doubling down on a visionless strategy of vanilla centrism, selling themselves as better than the worst dude.
And to think, it was only a year ago that people were actually talking about the GOP as being the broken political party.
Comments
After a bruising loss in November...
Shouldn't the author have written 'bruising losses in 2010, 2012, 2014 and 2016'? And how about 'almost no wins since last November'!
And the horseshit of not talking about it now because the repubs hold all the power. This is the perfect time to talk about it. To scream about it at the top of their lungs and every day between now and the 2018 elections. Sure nothing will happen but that isn't the point.
Bill C. won with a background message of "It's the economy, stupid." If the Dems would spend the next year-and-a-half yelling "It's the health care, stupid" they just might flip the House and build a base for the Senate and Prez in 2020.
What are the odds that any of that will ever happen?
Dear Dems: You lost the WH, Senate, House, dozens of governors, state level SOS and AG and about 1,000 state legislative seats. Maybe...you're doing something wrong.
@coloradoblue Two Democrats won races
Two Democrats won races in Oklahoma yesterday. At other places on the internet, this proves that the Democrats don't need to change anything. They're doing just fine.
The democrats used this tactic in 2006
remember when they ran on rolling back the Bush abuses? And what Pelosi said after took the bait and returned them to power?
They will do that same thing again, only this time on health care.
And people will buy it. Again.
Was Humpty Dumpty pushed?
@coloradoblue
Does anyone outside of the top fraction of the 1% and other deluded people who believe this to be survivable for themselves really want the TPP -pushing, (off-shored domestic law to corporate courts where only maximized corporate profits matter and the publics being drained and poisoned 'for-profit' have no standing - which would, I suspect, require that Constitutional change the Repubs almost have the majority for - due to well-earned Dem losses) fracking-advocating (in the face of drought, too, with massive ground- and other water supplies used for this poisoned along with life, the air and the soil) corporate Dems in to continue the Two-Corporate-Party Trade-Off cycle until planetary life fails?
What more do they have to do to America, Americans and the world to prove that destructive billionaire/corporate self-interests and their lackeys must be removed from politics and policy if any of us is to survive past this next decade, if we have that long?
If the Dems won't let actual progs win, what can be done to counter the propaganda and cheating, in the face of Homeland Security control of all infrastructure, including voter data, right down to ground level? There must be something, if it can be enacted in time.
Change must be possible, or Bernie and the better-aware portion of the public wouldn't be terrifying The Psychopaths That Be so much that they have to subvert/smear even indie media.
Voters have to quit thinking in corporate-propaganda-instilled two-party terms and crawl out of the mental box Americans have been trapped within for so long, before it's carried off the cliff.
They don't want to let voters out of that psy-ops cage or any other parties in for any real voter choice - but the very term '3rd-party' plays into this mindset. A fair voting system and multiple decent political parties to choose among is the last thing TPTB want - but why should the wealthiest country in history be 'can't-do' wherever the people and country are concerned? All continuing essentially because of a relative few being pathologically greedy and using both political power stolen from The People and intensive brainwashing...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qd1-S99Q0dc
I live in my fantasies - it's a better, warmer, kinder place...
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Nothing from nothing.
They don't want to be with me.
[video:https://youtu.be/aj5DccgBYeM]
Regardless of the path in life I chose, I realize it's always forward, never straight.
Just love how that Vox article
talks about them changing the enrollment period to after tax time, when Americans will have a little pocket change and feel they're able to afford something they're forced to purchase.... I admit though, I didn't finish it, as all the talk of who will vote for it and who won't just makes me even sicker. It's only another horse race after all, so what if people's lives hang in the balance? Bastards.
Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur
Democrats don't want or support universal healthcare
Let's face it. There will never be an "opportune moment" for democrats to act on it. They will kill it every time. Like Hilz said in the campaign, it will never, ever happen. That may be the one and only time she ever spoke the unvarnished truth.
Democrats when out of power pretend to support it, just like republicans when out of power pretended to want repeal of the ACA. Which it has now been proven conclusively was nothing but political posturing and completely false. Both parties are fully committed to the insurance industry. And, sadly, I've realized that there is not enough clarity and public demand to make them change.
Voting for Dems in the hope of getting universal healthcare out of them is a waste of time and effort. Much more work needs to be done first to create an actual demanding public that will pressure "both sides" before the Washington power elite even start to think about it. And we are a million miles away from that happening. I'm sad to feel so hopeless about it, but I do. We are not winning this one. Not in my lifetime anyway.
It's all kabuki.
You could expand this to so many other issues, but you're right on the money especially about this. I've been watching the current scenario play itself out and I feel like what we're seeing with the Republican ACA repeal votes is the similar to the kabuki that brought us the ACA in the first place. The reality is, the status quo is ok with both parties and you're also right that the public isn't really picking up on that.
Idolizing a politician is like believing the stripper really likes you.
Kabuki is art.
What the hack-ass pols do is kayfabe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kayfabe
Compensated Spokes Model for Big Poor.
Not Certain
To be honest, I'm not certain that that really matters. The entire country could rise up and fight for say single payer and both parties would fight against it. The ideas of keeping their feet to the fire or "pressure" are meant to have us believe that we as people have power. The thing is we don't. It's meant to always be outside our grasp, always meant to be our fault as people. The politicians didn't give you something? Must be the people's fault since they didn't push them hard enough. It doesn't matter what people want, they won't get it.
I agree. It doesn't matter how many people want things
from congress. They don't care what the people want and it wouldn't matter if 100 % of us want something, they will not go against their masters.
This video shows this.
And this article by Greenwald show how the democrats elected rotating villains to play the bad guys.
The Democrats deceitful game
Except it's not a game for us, it's our lives.
Amy Goodman had an ex-congress member on her show years ago who said that the parties take turns being in charge.
Edit for clarity. Geez, I messed up my first part of my comment. Doh!
Was Humpty Dumpty pushed?
I felt that way from a pretty young age
too although I still voted for Democrats. I once told my mother they all get together in back rooms and decide who's "for" what and who's "against" what and play us all of us with that. She asked how I could be so cynical, I asked her how she could not. That was during Clinton and Newt's big fight too, but somehow I always gave Clinton the benefit of the doubt. And who was the cynical one there in reality?
Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur
You came to this conclusion way before I did
I didn't get the message until Barack was elected. I started thinking this after his FISA vote, but it sunk home when he ditched the people who helped him win the election and re-hired the same people who crashed the global economy for his cabinet. I stopped voting after that. I naively thought that he would be a different president.
I finally understand why so many of the people I worked with didn't vote.
Was Humpty Dumpty pushed?
And for me, Obama was when
I finally saw it for what it really is. I wish I could say that I'd voted in accordance with my own cynicism but no, I bought into hope and change and ending racial discrimination just as easily and that cynicism was ignored. Until now, when it's been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur
Probably true, Strife Delivery
I guess somewhere deep inside I'm still naive or indoctrinated enough to imagine that a real, angry mass movement might make a difference. Probably a holdover from the hippy days, when it seemed like the antiwar movement made a real difference. (But I was just a kid then, and maybe I got that wrong too and there were other reasons they got out of Vietnam.) Or maybe it's the "new deal" history, when it seemed like the people rose up and chose a new leader who did some things to make life a little better. (After a ridiculous amount of suffering, of course.)
When it comes to universal healthcare, I used to hope that with enough people waking up and demanding an end to the predatory insurance industry, it could be the same. That we could, en masse, force them to listen. Maybe not. Thank you for reminding me.
In any case we'll never know, because there's no agreement on what we-the-people even want, and the public in this country is so easily swayed and scared by anti-government, anti-tax rhetoric, and generalized anti-poor attitudes about undeserving people getting something ("no using my money to pay for anything for those lazy deadbeat types" kind of thinking) that people will not rally en masse for it anyway.
During Bernie's rise, when he got yuge crowds actually cheering for universal healthcare, I was excited and heartened. Then the democrats, following Hillary, took up the same old supposedly "republican" anti-gov, anti tax, anti-poor messaging, and I saw it was a lost cause. They are playing us when they pretend to care about universal healthcare. It's a damn lie, and people need to stop falling for it.
@CS in AZI guess somewhere deep
I think a mass movement could change things, but it has to be directed at something that isn't within a politician's control. Regarding the New Deal, FDR had a choice: Save capitalism or let the rise of socialism occur. He chose the former. Sadly, whatever you can regulate, you can deregulate. It is the same choice Bernie made in 2016: Change American politics or keep the status quo. He kept the status quo.
I can easily give Bernie credit for shining a spotlight on issues that people were hungry for. Problem is he capitulated and folded just like that. If he would have led a 3rd party or something else, a mass movement of people could have gone on to potentially change things. But a mass movement of people working within the duopoly will be sentenced to die off. I think i saw the 84% of Democrats (people) want single payer, and yet the Democrats (politicians) don't. It wouldn't matter if all 100% of Democrats (people) want it, the Democrats (politicians) won't give it to them. A mass movement can potentially work, I just think it has to be steered clear away from the two parties.
In the end, I don't think you are naive, ignorant, or indoctrinated. Hell, I'm probably wrong in thinking a mass movement even outside the duopoly will work. The wealthy and powerful consolidated their power over several decades and the people don't really seem to care. In the end, we're watching the Titanic sink while everyone else is sipping cocktails.
Or watching the boob tube
or struggling just to stay afloat. That works for them too, the harder people have to work and struggle to survive the less time they have to even begin to untangle all the lies. And I too am always glad to see protests, even if they aren't overall that effective. Our owners are scared, that has had some impact. But since they own all outlets now people can be so easily swayed to let them get away with it.
And real protests just will not be covered. If they're really smart they stop with the over-reactions to protest, it's only when cops really get going that our media pays any attention to a lot of it. And sometimes because they have to once something has gone viral over the tubes.
Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur
Thanks SD. Agree 100% on this!
Yes, exactly this. That's what I was trying to express. Expecting it from democrats is a lost cause, and will be futile. I have no doubt on this anymore. I also completely agree that had Bernie taken his movement and run as an independent, it had the potential to change everything. It's very unfortunate that he didn't.
I then held on to hope for some time that the movement would live beyond Bernie himself, even though he personally chose to go back to the status quo and support the democrats, while they continually piss on him anyway.
But it's not. It's fading and splintering and too many people are thinking now of this life and death issue of healthcare as a messaging opportunity to help democrats win in the next election. Like that might work. sigh. I'm almost just mad at Bernie right now, for bringing this glimpse of hope and what could be, and then backing down, tail between legs, focus on fixing Obamacare... Russia, yada yada. What the hell happened to him.
@CS in AZ
But with the electoral system rigged, what other way than stymied attempts at voting in better is there around this which does not involve the violent revolution which all sane people would vastly prefer to avoid?
What is Bernie working toward, (using their system, lol,) that has the perpetrators so terrified and stimulated the massive 'divide and conquer' propaganda smear campaigns against him, using what had previously been considered reliable left/indie media?
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
I think that the only way we can change congress
and get them to listen to us and give us universal health care is if enough people can stop paying their health insurance premiums. This will even get the insurance company's attention.
This type of protest could be used on getting congress to start representing our wishes is to have enough people go on a general strike. Stop buying anything that we don't need for at least a week. If enough people didn't buy gas and other items, this would put a big hurt on the corporations. If enough people stop paying taxes for a month, this too will get their attention.
People need to pull their money out of the big banks and go with credit unions.
People should do this anyway before the next crash happens. The banks might do to us what they did to the people of Greece.
This is a great article about how Greece might have been an experiment .
Greece Has Been a Laboratory on a Way Out of a Capitalist Crisis
Was Humpty Dumpty pushed?
@snoopydawg
It seems evident to me that this was an experiment on how to 'legalize' the imposition of universal poverty, famine, servitude and looting in order to further enrich a relative few on an entire industrialized country literally taken over from The People of Greece by banksters, billionaires and corporatists on an excuse of debt, because 'harbouring terrorists' wasn't available for a profitable military take-over attempt.
This was set up, if I recall correctly, by Goldman-Sachs, using a right-wing politician anxious to get into the EU - which only takes countries wealthy/potentially wealthy enough to be worth looting in this specific manner, if not currently more useful otherwise.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
It's sad and disturbing to say this, but I am quite confident
That not a single thing will be done that is for the good of the masses until it's no longer just the poor doing the dying.
Honestly, I doubt anything will change until the people are so feed up that the less stable amongst us begin to take more and more frequent action similar to what occurred during the Republican Baseball practice.
They only operate based on two things, money and fear. We can't give them the money that the big corps can, but if enough of them start dying that they are afraid to leave their compounds than maybe, just maybe, we will start to see them responding to our needs.
It's cold and brutal to say it, but I for one hope that the day does come sooner rather than later that they develop a healthy fear for the masses
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
"Universal Health Care"
doesn't play well with most of the 99%. Neither does "Single Payer." Or "Socialized Medicine." All losers. They all sound a bit too commie. But... when you hit 'em with "Medicare For All" it's a home run. A slam dunk. So, why are we still using Frank Luntz meme losers?
"And, sadly, I've realized that there is not enough clarity and public demand to make them change." You're right about that. But, if we use "Medicare for All" it will help clear the Frank Luntz fog. "Medicare for All" wins this fight. Or at least brings most people to the table.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
It's not the name that matters
I'm sorry, but simply using other words won't do it. We don't need Medicare for all. Medicare is inadequate and not a magic bullet. I just had this discussion on here in another essay a few days ago. People talked about the serious deficiencies and problems with Medicare. Others brought up undeserving poor people getting things, as bad. Even here. Medicare doesn't cover reproductive healthcare. Why would it, since it's for over 65s. That would have to change. The Hyde amendment has to go. Basic dental and eye care needs to be included. No premiums and copays and excluding services that are "controversial" like end of life planning and palliative care. So much more than Medicare is needed.
We need true universal healthcare in this country. That is, healthcare that is universal in acccess, and universal in that all basic health needs are included, free at the point of delivery. No medical bills, no insurance bills, and no medical bankruptcies. We need to get away from fee-for-service models that encourage fraud and over treatment. A national health system.
Too bad we won't get it. You can call it Medicare for all or any other magic name, it still won't happen.
I disagree
This is politics. Words mean everything. Both to clarify and obscure the issue.
I don't understand your last sentence
In any case, that whole argument is based on the idea that what people say on an opinion poll about which words they like more is going to translate into actual support for a policy that wouldn't be "Medicare for all" even if it did come to pass. I wouldn't support "Medicare for all" because as I said Medicare is inadequate and falls far short of the actual policy we need.
How about instead of caving to opinion polls about advertising and spin and using dishonest language to cater to the uninformed, we instead advocate for the actual policies we need, and try to educate people about what it means. If there is any point to advocating for change, at least it should be based on honesty and real information. I'm sick of the language of spin and lies. From all sides.
Frank Luntz beats us
to a pulp with his memes. Politics is about "the message" and Luntz owns the mold. If "Medicare for All" is the one that "sticks" I'm running with that. You can try to sell "Single Payer" or any of the others, and all you'll get is blank stares at best.
"what we're going to do is expand Medicare so it covers blah blah blah... so it covers your eye exams and eye glasses and... and... Is that something you could support??" I'm running with that.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
Tell it to Bernie then
Please see my comment below as I don't want to repeat it. Bernie called his plan universal single payer health care and people loved it. I'm running with that.
(Edit) Respectfully, I disagree--if it's called Medicare-For-
All, it should be our current Medicare program with revisions to eliminate deductibles and co-pays. Otherwise, it's deceptive.
I'm still curious to see if Bernie, or any other Dem lawmaker, puts forth new health care legislation after they work with Repubs to 'reform' the ACA. I'm hoping Dems refuse to negotiate with Repubs, since I figure the Repubs' current bills will fail, and we'll be stuck with the ACA as it is today. Getting a bipartisan consensus on 'reform' will only mean that we'll never get a single-payer program in place. (IMO))
Bernie's 2013 legislative proposal dismantled all government health care programs, including Medicare and Medicaid--except for the VA program, which has since begun to undergo privatizaion--and the IHS (Indian Health Service).
Personally, I want the unvarnished truth about any future legislation. Look what we got when Dems lied last time!!!!!
[Edited: Added 'health care']
Mollie
Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.
Huh? "Medicare for All"
is just the phrase that's been used for the last 2 years to alt-reference single payer. There's no deception. It's simply fighting fire with fire. Luntz uses "socialized medicine" or "government run health care" when the better description is "Medicare for All." You know he just hates that one. And that's Not to say that Medicare, as it stands, is the end all be all. It ain't. But, it's easier to expand a program that's already running than to build a new one. And, to tell people we're in favor of expanding Medicare is not deception neither. That is in fact the intent. Whether that can get pushed thru congress or not depends on who controls congress, but it ain't impossible.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
@CS in AZ
Problem is that so many Americans have been propagandized into having knee-jerk reactions to specific words and phrases, (edit: regarding concepts) to which they may have an entirely different reaction when broached under different terms.
We all have mental associations to various words, which may carry very different connotations to different people - and the corporate media campaign in America has been carefully conning people into voting against their own interests for a very, very long time.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
yep. Cleverly crafted words,
phrases and memes (many of them by Frank Luntz) have helped Repubs convince too many voters into thinking those Repub ideas are best for them and America. Dems never bothered to counter those "Talking Points" on the Sunday wonk shows, and here we are defending Health Care For All from too many Americans who think that only those that can afford it deserve it, fuck those that can't.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
@Wink
Scary, ain't it?
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
It's why I grabbed
my S.S. bennies early, at 62, rather than wait 'til 66 (and why I'm glad Medicare replaced my ObamaCare). I could see this coming a mile away, even four years ago. I was (and still am) just hoping to be "grandfathered in" when they kill Medicare and come for S.S.
I recommend those about to hit 62 to do the same. Don't bother waiting 'til 66, it may not be here. You can still work for a certain amount, so you won't lose that much income, and at least you'll be covered (and "grandfathered") should they end it. And you know they will, given the chance. And turns out that if you live to 78 you would have been paid as much had you waited 'til 66, so... not guaranteed but a reasonable bet. Take the money now.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
@Wink
Oh, I hope that works out for you and others! And at least you have Medicare now!
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
I made a remark about money
in that thread but I in NO WAY said undeserving or any thing like it. I pointed out that I have a sibling who's not only spent a huge wad of cash but also has never even tried to save. And I have friends on SSDI and Medicare.
My problem with my sister has a lot more to do with intentional waste than money and even she is deserving of universal health care and SS and maybe even a basic income. When I watch others struggle with money, when I read some of the stories on this blog, you'll pardon me if her utter waste pisses me off and I vented it. Sorry.
Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur
I wasn't referring to your comment
It was this one, and the 10 people who agreed with it, that knocked the last bit of hope out of me. It's not my intention to name names, but since you took it as directed at you I will clarify.
We're not going to rally a mass movement for universal healthcare or basic income if this is how it's viewed by "progressives" who I thought believed in fixing income inequality, not blaming people without money for their problems or railing about lobster dinners for people who need help.
Thanks for that.
It did bother me, obviously. Even my sister is not undeserving although she pisses me right off a lot of the time!
But I do think that other poster was more making fun of people who're so spoiled that they would expect a UBI to cover an Escalade payment, but that's just how I took that bit.
Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur
BTW, Bernie called it single payer and universal health care
From his 2016 campaign website:
Yes! Exactly what I'm talking about. This message is the one that excited me, and millions of others who rallied around his campaign. Ironically the page is titled "Medicare for all" -- but it wastes no time getting past that and merging these terms - the system he proposed isn't Medicare for all, and he wasn't afraid to say "bad words" that explain what is really necessary. Seemed to work pretty well. If we're going to get anywhere with this issue, this is the way.
Yes, that phrase is
embraced by BernieBros and Berniecrats. Not so much everybody else.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
Scary Putin!
What are seasoned kabuki warriors to do?
If they don't snatch defeat from the jaws of victory are they still Democrats? We have watched this shadow play for decades now. With a majority. Without a majority. Is it any wonder that people don't vote?
Sadly, Kurt Schrader is my
Sadly, Kurt Schrader is my congressman.
Oh boy
Oh Lord. This is terrible.
Have a robust marketing strategy? That's the thing? People aren't signing up because they either A) Can't or B) Don't want to due to cost.
Oh yes, the young people plan. Force young people to buy useless plans that they can't even use when they need it. High deductibles, well, why the hell do I want the plan then?
In the end, it is all about keeping the gravy flowing for the insurance companies.
$2-3T Per Year of Flexible Investment in Friendly FIRE Vehicles.
Gravy train, indeed!
That is why there is going to be no change. That's 1/4 or 1/5 of GDP. Which Establishment Tool™ is going to nationalize that?
I really think we, Lefties, should publicize that aspect of the problem. Insurance companies invest our copays and deductibles into their companies and friendly companies investment vehicles. State mandaged private health insurance is a constant flow of new money.
Just let me know when congress is OK with killing off 1/4 of GDP. To say nothing about the friendly neighborhood corporate sponsors.
“Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” ~ Sun Tzu
Don't both wings of the
Don't both wings of the Corporate Party essentially serve the same masters: those who bribe them?
Funny, the public pays them a good salary, yet even much smaller bribes from various self-interests are often sufficient for public servants to betray them. Of course, these bribes are from a wide variety of self-interests so that even the smaller bribes add up quite quickly, while those billionaires can manage really big ones. Too bad that the whole mess is set up to keep politicians dependent upon bribes...
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Insider trading works wonders
and it's legal for them. Look at the Feinsteins, she's in government, and he makes money from it. Their net worth is astronomical.
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
@dervish
Lol, I'd rather not have to look at people like that, but somebody with authority to eliminate such abuses certainly should...
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.