Tulsi goes after Kambama's health care plan so Kambama attacks ByeDone

Submitted by snoopydawg on Wed, 07/31/2019 - 11:02pm

Tulsi Gabbard called out the corruption in Kamala Harris’s Medicare plan, and Kamala quickly pivots back to Biden because she can’t defend herself #WhyTulsi #Tulsi2020 #DemDebate2 pic.twitter.com/2eRY9eRWV0

— BAXTER (@baxtervaz3) August 1, 2019

Tulsi slams Kambama's record as attorney general.

Tulsi Gabbard going after Kamala Harris pic.twitter.com/qksRPhwNAp

— (@_MarcusD3_) August 1, 2019

Boo ya!

This is even better. Kambama gets to respond to Tulsi, but Tulsi gets the last word.

Tulsi takes down Kamala Harris over her record on criminal justice reform, the death penalty, and the war on drugs -TULSI2020 #DemDebate #Tulsi2020 https://t.co/7XQoiqHThu pic.twitter.com/epf58iQNYI

— Tulsi Gabbard (@TulsiGabbard) August 1, 2019

She calls out ByeDone for lying about Saddam having WMDs and says that Trump is supporting Al Qaida. She has also called out Obama for arming and funding ISIS. At least people are hearing the truth. Whether they believe it or not is up to them.

We were all lied to. We were told that Saddam had WMD, was working w/ Al Qaeda & that this posed a threat to the American people. But not only have we not gone after Al Qaeda, they are stronger than they were on 9/11 #TULSI2020 #DemDebate https://t.co/cl7xcK02rV pic.twitter.com/ckdQvIQMp8

— Tulsi Gabbard (@TulsiGabbard) August 1, 2019

The debate format sucks. But of course it does.

The debate tonight was as big a disaster as last nights so I'll probably add to this.

At around the 5 minute mark she talks about how bad the TPP is and the ISDS clause in it. This is what people need to know about why it would be bad for Americans.

[video:https://youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=WMT5-C3igZ4]

Im impressed with how Tulsi nails the important issues. This is one of the reasons why she isn't getting any media coverage.

Daily Kos debate poll:

Percent
Tulsi - 15
Kambama -14
Booker -14
ByeDone - 13
Castro - 7
Yang - 26

The Tulsi hate is strong there. But of course it's not sexist or misogynistic. This only applies to Herheinous.

Tags:

debates

Vote

Comments

Submitted by snoopydawg on Wed, 07/31/2019 - 11:29pm

Umm what?

This is it: the message that will win back the Rust Belt https://t.co/ycVgbqXvBL

— Will Sloan, the 6ix Dad (@WillSloanEsq) August 1, 2019

From what I've read ByeDone had a bad night. Low energy, Joe.

Perez was the warmup act. Lmao.. sure the democrats passed lots of progressive legislation, but they knew that McConnell wouldn't bring them up for a vote.

remember when obama drafted this guy to run against ellison https://t.co/zT5VQHzr3a

— David Vaughan (@waxlion) August 1, 2019

Submitted by HenryAWallace on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 1:29pm

Yep. All part of DC kabuki.

@snoopydawg

sure the democrats passed lots of progressive legislation, but they knew that McConnell wouldn't bring them up for a vote.

Submitted by MinuteMan on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 10:24pm

Cynical thoughts?

@HenryAWallace I don't have a problem with the house passing legislation that's going to die in the Senate: it's a way to make the case that things would be different with both houses in democratic hands. What worries me though is the thought that if there was a Dem Senate and president that these bills would never exist since that would rile the PTB who are savvy enough rho overlook empty symbolism.

Submitted by Cant Stop the M... on Fri, 08/02/2019 - 4:57am

I have a problem with

@MinuteMan

the Democratic Senate ignoring climate change legislation passed by the House. I also have a problem with people who tell me the Republicans are an existential threat and then don't bother to work together as an effective opposition.

Can't have it both ways.

—

"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver

Submitted by HenryAWallace on Fri, 08/02/2019 - 5:11pm

Except that is a very false picture of what happens

@MinuteMan

when Democrats have a majority in both Houses.

We've seen what happens when Democrats have a majority in both houses and the white house--and it ain't passing a bunch of leftist legislation.

What Democrats do when Republicans control one house and Democrats the other is "pass" a bunch of laws they are 100% certain Republicans will kill.

And realism is not cynicism and taking things that politicians do or pretend to do at face value is not realism.

Submitted by Alligator Ed on Wed, 07/31/2019 - 11:52pm

My sincerest thanks for the three Tulsi clips

Go Tulsi!

If people voted with their brains then they might vote for Tulsi. But alas, there are still people who #RunHillaryRun#. Frightening number from a brief survey I just watched on H.A. Goodman. So many hash tags relevant to the Evil Queen, such as (gasp, choke) #StillWithHer#.

Never underestimate human stupidity!

That motto served me well in dealing with the public. One must be tolerant to those unaware of life's basic facts.

I hope Hillary runs. I got money on this plus a big birthday extravaganza with guests coming from 300 miles away--but only if HRC runs.

But, please forgive the diversion, snoopy. I don't want to threadjact your inspiring essay.

Here is my reptilian sense of Tulsi's plan:
1. Tulsi knows she won't win the nomination--this time.
2. TG knows she will earn more national notoriety (in the positive sense the word used to convey), which exposure will steadily increase because...
3. Tulsi will introduce important legislation, likely doomed to failure until TGD (That Glorious Day) when the Evil Queen accomplishes what Republicans have tried to do since the 1850's--Destroy the Democrat Party
4. TG is already recognized by those aware of her that she is common-sense and straightforward.
5. Even MSM mentions her and CNN gave her talking time with a hot mike, unlike previous debate.

Trump wins in a landslide.

2024 may be Tulsi's year. I can hope.

Submitted by snoopydawg on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 12:08am

People are hearing what Tulsi is saying

@Alligator Ed

and they like it. So far she is the only one talking about our murderous foreign policy and saying how bad it is. She talked about how the obscene military budget is costing us so much while it's making a few people rich.

If you have friends who are voting for Kambama hear is a great article that tells people exactly how bad she was for Californians. From putting parents in jail for their kid's truancy to keeping prisons full to letting people use them for cheap labor to not going after cop killers and more.

Kambama is a cop

I'm not seeing much of Herheinous putting herself out there except for deriding Trump for keeping kids in cages and getting her butt handed to her for what she did to people's countries. But I'm still thinking that she is ByeDone's fail safe.

Submitted by Alligator Ed on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 12:39am

Obstinately, I insist on Deus ex Machina

@snoopydawg The matter is definite. The question is when. She Who Shall Rule the Known Universe (blessed be her name) will descend from the heavens to rescue the Democraptic party and restore it to its recently abandoned principles--such as looting, asset stripping, patronage, skimming, washing and, of course, pandering.

I propose the new logo of the Democrat Party be a Pander Bear, appropriately made in China.

Submitted by Wally on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 6:12am

You may be right AE

@Alligator Ed

I'm not going to discount the possibility of HerHeinous coming in on a second ballot to "unite" the party. She really beat Trump by more than 3 million votes in 2016, doncha know? She'll be able to argue that she can increase that margin this time around. Lord knows, she ain't hurting for Clinton Ca$h. She's still got the #I'mStillwithHer crowd, many of whom will be superdelegates again.

Submitted by Unabashed Liberal on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 12:45am

Hi, AE--think you might be on to something, that is,

@Alligator Ed @Alligator Ed

that TG is 'possibly' running to introduce herself, in order to run in 2024.

There's one thing she needs to correct, though. (Well, possibly two--if Harris is correct that Sebelius didn't write her bill, just endorsed it.)

Medicare Advantage is NOT a private insurance company.

(Replayed the clip numerous times, and sounded like she said that to me.)

From Wikipedia,

Medicare Advantage - Medicare Advantage is a type of health insurance plan that provides coverage within Part C of Medicare in the United States.

Medicare Advantage health plans pay for managed health care based on a monthly fee per enrollee (capitation), rather than on the basis of billing a fee for each medical service provided (fee-for-service (FFS)), which is the way Original Medicare Parts A and B work.

Most such plans are health maintenance organizations (HMOs) or preferred provider organizations (PPOs). Medicare Advantage plans finance at a minimum the same medical services as "Original" Parts A and B Medicare finance via FFS. Public Part C plans, including Medicare Advantage plans, also typically finance additional services, including additional health services, and most importantly include an annual out of pocket (OOP) spend limit not included in Parts A and B. A public Part C Medicare Advantage beneficiary must first sign up for both Part A and Part B of Medicare in order to choose Part C.

That was a pretty blatant error, and, worrisome (to me) if she really doesn't understand something that basic. (I understand that foreign policy is her strength, but, she needs to be better informed about healthcare, IMO.)

Anyhoo, will continue to root for TG, in that I appreciate many of her stances. Smart move to jump in race this election cycle, and establish a national profile.

Have a good one.

Mollie

“Dogs have given us their absolute all. We are the center of their universe. We are the focus of their love and faith and trust. They serve us in return for scraps. It is without a doubt the best deal man has ever made. ”
~~Roger Caras

—

Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.

Submitted by Centaurea on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 1:31am

Medicare Advantage

@Unabashed Liberal technically is not itself a private insurance company.

But MedAdvantage is most assuredly operated by and for the benefit of private for-profit insurance companies. MedAdvantage has been written into the federal Medicare law, at the behest of Big Insurance's enablers in the US Congress.

MedAdvantage plans do not operate like original Medicare coverage. Unlike original Medicare, which is a single-payer system with no networks, MedAdvantage is managed care. It has networks, pre-approval requirements, HMOs and PPOs, and the insurance company getting between doctors and their patients. Same old, same old; the very thing we're trying to get away from with Medicare 4 All.

Medicare Advantage is an attempt by Big Insurance to take over and privatize Medicare. Someone who signs up for original Medicare does not have to sign up for a MedAdvantage plan. However, Big Insurance is slowly but surely creating a situation in which people have no effective choice but to buy MedAdvantage.

They do this by exerting pressure on the health providers in their networks, to get the providers to only accept MedAdvantage and not original Medicare. This is happening where I live. You can still sign up for original Medicare Plan B, but you may not be able to find a doctor who will accept it.

I doubt seriously that the health insurance industry will be satisfied with having this de facto monopoly in SW WA State. They want it all, they want it everywhere in the US, and unless they are stopped, they will make it happen everywhere.

Kamala Harris's proposed version is modeled on Medicare Advantage. I'm glad that Harris's proposal has prompted people to start talking about Medicare Advantage. They need to understand what it is, and why it is a danger to M4A, just as it is to original Medicare.

#2 #2

that TG is 'possibly' running to introduce herself, in order to run in 2024.

There's one thing she needs to correct, though. (Well, possibly two--if Harris is correct that Sebelius didn't write her bill, just endorsed it.)

Medicare Advantage is NOT a private insurance company.

(Replayed the clip numerous times, and sounded like she said that to me.)

From Wikipedia,

Medicare Advantage - Medicare Advantage is a type of health insurance plan that provides coverage within Part C of Medicare in the United States.

Medicare Advantage health plans pay for managed health care based on a monthly fee per enrollee (capitation), rather than on the basis of billing a fee for each medical service provided (fee-for-service (FFS)), which is the way Original Medicare Parts A and B work.

Most such plans are health maintenance organizations (HMOs) or preferred provider organizations (PPOs). Medicare Advantage plans finance at a minimum the same medical services as "Original" Parts A and B Medicare finance via FFS. Public Part C plans, including Medicare Advantage plans, also typically finance additional services, including additional health services, and most importantly include an annual out of pocket (OOP) spend limit not included in Parts A and B. A public Part C Medicare Advantage beneficiary must first sign up for both Part A and Part B of Medicare in order to choose Part C.

That was a pretty blatant error, and, worrisome (to me) if she really doesn't understand something that basic. (I understand that foreign policy is her strength, but, she needs to be better informed about healthcare, IMO.)

Anyhoo, will continue to root for TG, in that I appreciate many of her stances. Smart move to jump in race this election cycle, and establish a national profile.

Have a good one.

Mollie

“Dogs have given us their absolute all. We are the center of their universe. We are the focus of their love and faith and trust. They serve us in return for scraps. It is without a doubt the best deal man has ever made. ”
~~Roger Caras

—

"Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep."
~Rumi

"If you want revolution, be it."
~Caitlin Johnstone

Submitted by Unabashed Liberal on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 7:03pm

Centaurea--Please read Bernie's proposal, and the piece

@Centaurea

I reposted (LL posted from NC) about his UMFA bill allowing ACO's--as in 'managed care.' (And, the screenshots that I post from the bill.)

IOW, it's because the UMFA proposal shifts away from FFS to managed care that I can't support it.

In addition, I've repeatedly pointed out two other aspects of his UMFA proposal (in addition to the ACO's) that are features of managed care systems--UM (Utilization Management) and Global Budgeting which works like capitation fees in HMO's and other managed care programs.

The logical step would be to keep the 1965 FFS OM/TM program intact, expand the services covered (to include hearing, vision, etc.), and, open it up to Everyone. No reason that insurance companies could not be mandated to operate as non-profits, or close their doors. That's what is done in most Scandinavian countries.

Don't need to reinvent the wheel. Doing so only allows the PtB the opportunity to pass on more costs to the Medicare beneficiaries, and throw in 'managed care' guidelines--which currently mostly don't exist in Medicare Parts A and B. Period.

Of course, all RX's should be paid for in Part B--not just infusion drugs. And, Medicare Part C (Medicare Advantage) and Medicare Part D (RX Plans) should be abolished/repealed.

And, all medical charges should be paid in full--whether charges incurred by network providers, labs, pharmacy, etc.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Hey, no problem with TG or any candidate dissing MA! I wouldn't enroll in it if someone held a gun to my head. IIRC, I'm probably the most outspoken person (here) when it comes to not wanting part of any managed care--including Bernie's proposal.

What is necessary, IMO, is to be 'factual.' And, what TG said, was not.

If anything, it might cause her to lose credibility--with folks who have an iota knowledge regarding the numerous proposals, that is.

This is too important of a topic for any candidate to just sling out a bunch of gibberish, and expect it to be acceptable.

Stick with fact and policy details. Period.

That's exactly what is lacking in most of the Presidential Debates, and even blog discussions, in general.

As of late, DP candidates are throwing around absolute lies and totally misleading statements, which will only further confuse people who do not have knowledge or understanding of healthcare policy, especially, the Medicare program.

Anyhoo, we have no disagreement about the privatized version of Medicare being toxic. It is. And, it's exactly why I'm not going to be drug into a 'new' system which incorporates many of the same (or similar) tools to 'manage' my healthcare.

Mr M and I currently enjoy complete autonomy when it comes to making our own healthcare decisions--minor and major.

(within medical guidelines, of course. obviously, I can't sashay into a doctor's office and demand an operation that is not 'medically necessary,' nor would I ever dream of doing so)

And, we present two cards--and pay absolutely '0' out-of-pocket.

Whether the bill is $50 or $5 Million dollars--it doesn't matter.

And that's the way we want to keep it.

As far as I'm concerned, the PtB can take their so-called managed care 'gatekeepers' and stick 'em where the sun don't shine.

Off soapbox . . .

Hey, have a good one!

Mollie

“Dogs have given us their absolute all. We are the center of their universe. We are the focus of their love and faith and trust. They serve us in return for scraps. It is without a doubt the best deal man has ever made. ”
~~Roger Caras

—

Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.

Submitted by Centaurea on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 7:27pm

That would be the logical thing

@Unabashed Liberal
to do, wouldn't it?

No reason that insurance companies could not be mandated to operate as non-profits,or close their doors.

The most obvious, and simplest, approach would be to:

Repeal Nixon's Health Maintenance Organization Act of 1973.

Then amend the Medicare Act to a) repeal the parts of the Medicare Act pertaining to Part C; b) eliminate the 80% coverage cap and thus the need for supplemental private insurance; and c) bring everyone under Medicare, regardless of age.

#2.2.1

I reposted (LL posted from NC) about his UMFA bill allowing ACO's--as in 'managed care.' (And, the screenshots that I post from the bill.)

IOW, it's because the UMFA proposal shifts away from FFS to managed care that I can't support it.

In addition, I've repeatedly pointed out two other aspects of his UMFA proposal (in addition to the ACO's) that are features of managed care systems--UM (Utilization Management) and Global Budgeting which works like capitation fees in HMO's and other managed care programs.

The logical step would be to keep the 1965 FFS OM/TM program intact, expand the services covered (to include hearing, vision, etc.), and, open it up to Everyone. No reason that insurance companies could not be mandated to operate as non-profits, or close their doors. That's what is done in most Scandinavian countries.

Don't need to reinvent the wheel. Doing so only allows the PtB the opportunity to pass on more costs to the Medicare beneficiaries, and throw in 'managed care' guidelines--which currently mostly don't exist in Medicare Parts A and B. Period.

Of course, all RX's should be paid for in Part B--not just infusion drugs. And, Medicare Part C (Medicare Advantage) and Medicare Part D (RX Plans) should be abolished/repealed.

And, all medical charges should be paid in full--whether charges incurred by network providers, labs, pharmacy, etc.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Hey, no problem with TG or any candidate dissing MA! I wouldn't enroll in it if someone held a gun to my head. IIRC, I'm probably the most outspoken person (here) when it comes to not wanting part of any managed care--including Bernie's proposal.

What is necessary, IMO, is to be 'factual.' And, what TG said, was not.

If anything, it might cause her to lose credibility--with folks who have an iota knowledge regarding the numerous proposals, that is.

This is too important of a topic for any candidate to just sling out a bunch of gibberish, and expect it to be acceptable.

Stick with fact and policy details. Period.

That's exactly what is lacking in most of the Presidential Debates, and even blog discussions, in general.

As of late, DP candidates are throwing around absolute lies and totally misleading statements, which will only further confuse people who do not have knowledge or understanding of healthcare policy, especially, the Medicare program.

Anyhoo, we have no disagreement about the privatized version of Medicare being toxic. It is. And, it's exactly why I'm not going to be drug into a 'new' system which incorporates many of the same (or similar) tools to 'manage' my healthcare.

Mr M and I currently enjoy complete autonomy when it comes to making our own healthcare decisions--minor and major.

(within medical guidelines, of course. obviously, I can't sashay into a doctor's office and demand an operation that is not 'medically necessary,' nor would I ever dream of doing so)

And, we present two cards--and pay absolutely '0' out-of-pocket.

Whether the bill is $50 or $5 Million dollars--it doesn't matter.

And that's the way we want to keep it.

As far as I'm concerned, the PtB can take their so-called managed care 'gatekeepers' and stick 'em where the sun don't shine.

Off soapbox . . .

Hey, have a good one!

Mollie

“Dogs have given us their absolute all. We are the center of their universe. We are the focus of their love and faith and trust. They serve us in return for scraps. It is without a doubt the best deal man has ever made. ”
~~Roger Caras

—

"Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep."
~Rumi

"If you want revolution, be it."
~Caitlin Johnstone

Submitted by Unabashed Liberal on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 8:48pm

There you go, Centaurea! We're on the same page, after all. ;-D

@Centaurea @Centaurea

EOM

Mollie

—

Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.

Submitted by wokkamile on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 9:14pm

I'm actually glad

@Unabashed Liberal you two could get together because this was getting ever more complicated. Someone above was in the process of making a very good case but it got thrown overboard with a tidal wave of acronyms. Must lie on the beach for awhile to stop head from spinning.

Submitted by FuturePassed on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 10:03pm

Medicare Advantage . . .

@Unabashed Liberal
is a plan that transfers revenue from Medicare to other insurers, more than half for profit. IMO that makes TG more right than wrong. They "compete" with Medicare by getting government subsidies that allow them to offer additional services. (See how much more efficient they are than the government.) Additionally, their coverage is so convoluted that it's hard to pick out the policy that's best for you without professional assistance.

As far as making the Medicare Advantage non-profit, take a look at the salaries of CEOs and other top officials in the subset of Blue Cross/Blue Shield that are nonprofit.

I want one government run Medicare for All with the same coverage for everyone.

#2.2.1

I reposted (LL posted from NC) about his UMFA bill allowing ACO's--as in 'managed care.' (And, the screenshots that I post from the bill.)

IOW, it's because the UMFA proposal shifts away from FFS to managed care that I can't support it.

In addition, I've repeatedly pointed out two other aspects of his UMFA proposal (in addition to the ACO's) that are features of managed care systems--UM (Utilization Management) and Global Budgeting which works like capitation fees in HMO's and other managed care programs.

The logical step would be to keep the 1965 FFS OM/TM program intact, expand the services covered (to include hearing, vision, etc.), and, open it up to Everyone. No reason that insurance companies could not be mandated to operate as non-profits, or close their doors. That's what is done in most Scandinavian countries.

Don't need to reinvent the wheel. Doing so only allows the PtB the opportunity to pass on more costs to the Medicare beneficiaries, and throw in 'managed care' guidelines--which currently mostly don't exist in Medicare Parts A and B. Period.

Of course, all RX's should be paid for in Part B--not just infusion drugs. And, Medicare Part C (Medicare Advantage) and Medicare Part D (RX Plans) should be abolished/repealed.

And, all medical charges should be paid in full--whether charges incurred by network providers, labs, pharmacy, etc.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Hey, no problem with TG or any candidate dissing MA! I wouldn't enroll in it if someone held a gun to my head. IIRC, I'm probably the most outspoken person (here) when it comes to not wanting part of any managed care--including Bernie's proposal.

What is necessary, IMO, is to be 'factual.' And, what TG said, was not.

If anything, it might cause her to lose credibility--with folks who have an iota knowledge regarding the numerous proposals, that is.

This is too important of a topic for any candidate to just sling out a bunch of gibberish, and expect it to be acceptable.

Stick with fact and policy details. Period.

That's exactly what is lacking in most of the Presidential Debates, and even blog discussions, in general.

As of late, DP candidates are throwing around absolute lies and totally misleading statements, which will only further confuse people who do not have knowledge or understanding of healthcare policy, especially, the Medicare program.

Anyhoo, we have no disagreement about the privatized version of Medicare being toxic. It is. And, it's exactly why I'm not going to be drug into a 'new' system which incorporates many of the same (or similar) tools to 'manage' my healthcare.

Mr M and I currently enjoy complete autonomy when it comes to making our own healthcare decisions--minor and major.

(within medical guidelines, of course. obviously, I can't sashay into a doctor's office and demand an operation that is not 'medically necessary,' nor would I ever dream of doing so)

And, we present two cards--and pay absolutely '0' out-of-pocket.

Whether the bill is $50 or $5 Million dollars--it doesn't matter.

And that's the way we want to keep it.

As far as I'm concerned, the PtB can take their so-called managed care 'gatekeepers' and stick 'em where the sun don't shine.

Off soapbox . . .

Hey, have a good one!

Mollie

“Dogs have given us their absolute all. We are the center of their universe. We are the focus of their love and faith and trust. They serve us in return for scraps. It is without a doubt the best deal man has ever made. ”
~~Roger Caras

Submitted by smiley7 on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 10:06pm

Amen.

@FuturePassed

Submitted by Unabashed Liberal on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 11:06pm

Don't disagree, FP. My 'only' objection was to

@FuturePassed @FuturePassed

the mischaracterization of "Medicare Advantage" as a company.

It left me wondering if TG lacks understanding of our current Medicare system, or, if she was just a bit sloppy in the use of language. (Probably, the latter.)

OTOH, "it's clearly not the end of the world." And, I never implied that it was.

I simply want, and expect, to see a person in a position of power use the 'correct' terminology when describing something as important as a (potential) new healthcare system/plan.

Wanting to correct the record, doesn't mean that I harbor any 'ill feelings'for TG. I've already said that if she runs as an Independent, she'll likely get my vote. (Unless Gravel's on the ballot.)

Bottom line, IMO, she should make it a general practice to use the correct/appropriate industry terminology.

Don't forget, there are more than a few folks that might take her literally--and actually believe that there is a company by the name of 'Medicare Advantage.' And that would be ridiculous.

As I pointed out in my initial comment (by copying and pasting)--Medicare Advantage is an insurance product (plan)--not a company.

Hey, pardon me for being a bit picky, but, this is the nuclear fam biz. Okay? Guess you could say that I just can't help myself!

Mollie

“Dogs have given us their absolute all. We are the center of their universe. We are the focus of their love and faith and trust. They serve us in return for scraps. It is without a doubt the best deal man has ever made. ”
~~Roger Caras

—

Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.

Submitted by entrepreneur on Fri, 08/02/2019 - 6:00am

Yep. If any portion of the contributions are being siphoned

@FuturePassed
siphoned off for corporate executive pay then money is either being wasted or medical care is being witheld. People's medical needs should not be used as a tool for extortion by fat cats.

Submitted by Wally on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 7:05am

Tulsi went after Harris for going after Biden. . .

. . . in the first debate.

Snoop, you suggest:

She calls out ByeDone for lying about Saddam having WMDs

I looked at the video and it doesn't seem like she directly called out Biden on that. She didn't comeback at Biden after he pretty successfully squiggled out of his support for Bush's war. Tulsi's attacks were squarely aimed at Harris throughout the debate. And for sure it should be clear she drew blood.

It amazing that Tulsi jumped all the way up to 17% (as of this morning when I looked) in the dkos debate poll (they've freaking hated her with a passion over there). But entrepreneur Yang had 29% of their votes as to who won last night's debate. And let's wait and see how their next straw poll re TOP actual voter preferences pans out. I'm guessing maybe she'll get 5% if she's lucky. And let's not forget, TOP ain't the USA or even the Democratic Party.

I dunno. All speculation on my part, but I'm getting the feeling Tulsi might be dancing with Biden a bit. She could have really honed in and doubled down on Biden about Iraq and she didn't. She let him squiggle his way out of it (maybe his strongest accomplishment of the night) She concentrated her attacks on Harris.

And as besieged and feeble as Biden was all around, I really don't think he's "Bye-done." It's still his to lose but it's early and there's always the Obama factor out there in the wind. Keep an eye out on all the polls this week and next week on Real Clear Politics to see how much Biden drops. I think he will drop but I betcha those votes will be going to Bernie and the candidate some now refer to as "Dances with Wall Street."

Submitted by tle on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 8:21am

I agree that she could have done plenty to hurt Biden.

@Wally And she may not get another chance. I think she would have been well advised to bring up the fact that Biden consistently voted for the Pentagon (NDAA), which means financing wars worldwide, financing nuclear weapons, and now - financing the border wall. Who else has been a consistent supporter of the Pentagon? Harris, and Booker, and O'Rourke. And Warren, who has voted for Pentagon funding twice as often as not. (Don't know about Delaney).

Submitted by snoopydawg on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 11:38am

Tulsi went after Harris for going after Biden. . .

@Wally

that is what i wrote...

Tulsi goes after Kambama's health care plan so Kambama attacks ByeDone

In the first tweet vid Tulsi calls out Kambama on her health care bill and instead of answering Tulsi, Kam addressed her comments to ByeDone's health care plan. That is mentioned in the tweet"

Tulsi Gabbard called out the corruption in Kamala Harris’s Medicare plan, and Kamala quickly pivots back to Biden because she can’t defend herse

As to whether she called out Biden for what he said it's hard to know since the video doesn't include what he said iirc. I can't watch videos on my current device so I am going from memory here, but as I have admitted that is pretty f'cked up on most days.

Tulsi's attacks were squarely aimed at Harris throughout the debate

In the last video she is talking to Byedone so not sure what you're saying here?

Submitted by Alligator Ed on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 3:46pm

Tactics and strategy dictated Tulsi's attacks

@Wally In debate numero uno, Tulsi clobbered Biden with a blow from which he shall slowly but certainly wither. She won't be the last to knife him but she was glorious first to wield the knife--like a scalpel, may I add. She knows she only gets short time on the debate stage. She already made her mark by fatally wounding Biden (like snoopy says, ByeDone). Botox Joeis a political dead man walking. Fall over already, Joe. You've been forked--the holes therefrom will not heal.

The point I struggle to make is that TG took on her second closest threat which is the Camel. She is a political sniper, knocking off targets with a single well-aimed but lethal shot. Her next attack, in debate numero tres will be possibly Warren. Pocahontas should be scalped before this Kavalcade moves on further.

Submitted by Centaurea on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 7:34pm

Tulsi is a warrior

@Alligator Ed That's one of the main things she's accomplishing here: letting the voters see that about her.

She's directly confronting and exposing the old guard and their heirs presumptive. She's taking on the "powers that be", right to their faces, with strength and confidence.

And she's demonstrating to the American people that she is fully willing and capable of doing so.

—

"Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep."
~Rumi

"If you want revolution, be it."
~Caitlin Johnstone

Submitted by entrepreneur on Fri, 08/02/2019 - 6:09am

That's a scary thought that she might be positioning for a VP

@Wally
slot under biden. But it's totally plausible. And it's just the kind of bone that TPTB might be willing to toss the left to get them hold their nose and vote for another one of their neo-liberal con artists like Biden for POTUS.

Submitted by tle on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 8:30am

I was struck by her closing remarks.

While I enjoyed her exposures of Harris (a lot!), her closing remarks were compelling. If she was acting, she deserves an Oscar. She pretty much dropped the "I'm in the military" schtick, and brought the danger of nuclear war front and center. What I saw in her eyes was not passion, but anguish. Indeed, there are no shelters for nuclear war.

Just as there are none for ecological apocalyse.

Submitted by wokkamile on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 8:33am

Excellent job by TG

and better than her quiet first debate appearance. I have sent her another chunka change. She showed a welcome feisty, fighting spirit going after the previously untouched Harris, and this attitude is what's needed going forward. Put the gentle Aloha spirit to the side for awhile until nominated and elected.

On Harris' MedAdvantage for All plan, TG was essentially correct in calling out its basis in private health insurance (nitpicking inconsequential distinctions about company vs plan aside). And according to Michael Tracey, TG was correct in noting that Sebelius, working for MedAdvantage, helped craft Harris' plan, and didn't merely endorse it as Harris claimed.

Biden, while he did somewhat better last night, even playing defense most of the time, still is showing his age. I see a lot of pinched, scrunched up squintiness in the eyes, as if he's struggling to take in what is happening, where exactly he is, what he's supposed to say. The halting voice rhythm. On the issues, he has far more to answer for, apologize for, attempt to explain away, than he has bold, positive messages. And his positioning in the compromised center is out of step with the current Dem progressive-leaning spirit of bold change. I see his support, currently a half-mile wide and half-inch deep, softening further.

As for Booker, apparently the corndog-fed undecided CNN focus group from Iowa liked him (and Castro). I see a lot of slick, insincere pol in him, like Bootajudge and Beto, so he's unlikely to go far. Harris had her harsh, uncaring prosecutorial side exposed last night by TG, as well as her inability to directly answer challenges to her AG record, and her support is likely to stall and maybe fall, as it should. One can hope.

Gillibrand did herself some good. She definitely nailed DeBlasio for not firing that murdering NYC cop. She has been badly performing in the polls, but this might be her chance to move up. I would prefer her over Harris and Booker easily, she has fewer negatives than them, and would put her approximately with Warren as my #3 pick. Need to review some of her positions, e.g. on M4A.

Submitted by Alligator Ed on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 3:52pm

Count me in on Gillibrand better than Spartacus et. seq.

@wokkamile Booker, Buttigiggle, and other corruptocrats (there are no centrists running except TG). The rest are would be establishment cronies or far left space travelers venturing where no man has ever gone (including "womxn" the PC term about gender naming)

and better than her quiet first debate appearance. I have sent her another chunka change. She showed a welcome feisty, fighting spirit going after the previously untouched Harris, and this attitude is what's needed going forward. Put the gentle Aloha spirit to the side for awhile until nominated and elected. On Harris' MedAdvantage for All plan, TG was essentially correct in calling out its basis in private health insurance (nitpicking inconsequential distinctions about company vs plan aside). And according to Michael Tracey, TG was correct in noting that Sebelius, working for MedAdvantage, helped craft Harris' plan, and didn't merely endorse it as Harris claimed. Biden, while he did somewhat better last night, even playing defense most of the time, still is showing his age. I see a lot of pinched, scrunched up squintiness in the eyes, as if he's struggling to take in what is happening, where exactly he is, what he's supposed to say. The halting voice rhythm. On the issues, he has far more to answer for, apologize for, attempt to explain away, than he has bold, positive messages. And his positioning in the compromised center is out of step with the current Dem progressive-leaning spirit of bold change. I see his support, currently a half-mile wide and half-inch deep, softening further. As for Booker, apparently the corndog-fed undecided CNN focus group from Iowa liked him (and Castro). I see a lot of slick, insincere pol in him, like Bootajudge and Beto, so he's unlikely to go far. Harris had her harsh, uncaring prosecutorial side exposed last night by TG, as well as her inability to directly answer challenges to her AG record, and her support is likely to stall and maybe fall, as it should. One can hope. Gillibrand did herself some good. She definitely nailed DeBlasio for not firing that murdering NYC cop. She has been badly performing in the polls, but this might be her chance to move up. I would prefer her over Harris and Booker easily, she has fewer negatives than them, and would put her approximately with Warren as my #3 pick. Need to review some of her positions, e.g. on M4A.

Submitted by irishking on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 10:01am

" I'm speaking the truth " - TG

her closing remarks were very strong.

If anybody here has got a spare buck to donate ....
130K donors needed.

the sun is shining a bit brighter this morning, seems to me.

Submitted by Big Al on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 11:20am

Ya, if Gabbard could be president,

she would certainly go after those Al Qaeda terrorists. What a crock of shit from her. She either doesn't know what she's talking about or she's in the pockets of the Zionist/neocons when it comes to the war OF terror. Probably both.

Submitted by Cant Stop the M... on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 4:19pm

I'm agnostic on Tulsi

@Big Al

as far as whether she's an establishment tool or sincerely what she purports to be. (And I really mean that: I have no opinion. I don't think I have enough evidence to draw a conclusion. These are really fucked-up times, and the spooks have a game they play where they send somebody out to say the right things and gain our faith, only to later protect the establishment for all they're worth by keeping things the same. So I have no idea.)

Regardless of that, I haven't noticed her lying about war. Most of what she says about war seems pretty accurate to me. She doesn't go far enough, of course. But that's a problem with what she doesn't say. What she does say seems, for the most part, true.

Her anti-BDS vote is troubling. I wouldn't put it past her to have gotten in bed, to some extent, with AIPAC (most politicians do, no matter what they think privately) but she sure isn't supporting the PNAC wars in the Middle East (Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Afghanistan, etc) and I'd have to think that would cause some trouble between her and those donors/sponsors/crooks/sociopaths/whateverthefucktheyare

—

"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver

Submitted by Big Al on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 6:23pm

Wow,

@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal well, I'd have to strongly disagree with that, but since Gabbard is the preferred candidate of many on here, I'll leave it at that. It's funny how people see two different things when it comes to imperialism.

Submitted by JtC on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 6:34pm

Yeah, damn people...

@Big Al
how dare they have differing opinions.

Submitted by Big Al on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 6:41pm

That's not exactly what I said,

@JtC but if you're going to challenge every comment I make from here on out then I guess I shouldn't comment.

Submitted by JtC on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 6:51pm

You challenge...

@Big Al
comments continuously, as you just did with CStMS, yet no one can challenge your comments?

Submitted by Big Al on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 6:52pm

OK, fair enough.

@JtC

Submitted by Cant Stop the M... on Fri, 08/02/2019 - 5:03am

Tulsi isn't my preferred candidate.

@Big Al

I don't have a preferred candidate. I have no interest in choosing a horse when I know the race is rigged.

If I did have a preferred Democratic candidate, it would be Mike Gravel, who they won't even let on the stage, no matter what he does.

—

"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver

Submitted by irishking on Fri, 08/02/2019 - 10:19am

Tulsi on war

@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal

I would be happier if she talked more about the terrible damage inflicted upon the people of the countries we have destroyed. Next to that the cost to us has been small.

But she is saying "stop the war."
that is a huge plus.

I do not believe she is another Obama and want to see her on stage for next round.

Submitted by snoopydawg on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 7:11pm

I don't think I implied that anywhere in this essay

@Big Al

that Tulsi would go after AQ. But she is telling people that our government is arming and funding them. What's wrong with that?

I thought her take down of Kambama (which is what the point of my essay is about) was most excellent because she got Kambama's history out there. Too many people are not aware of how horrible she was for California. She went after truant kid's parents, but people say that is good because kids belong in school. No thought at all to what that cost those parents.

Tulsi will never be allowed to win and I think most people know that. But so far she is the only person talking about foreign policy and people appreciate it. Most do ...

Submitted by Big Al on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 7:26pm

You provided a link to Gabbard's

@snoopydawg twitter thread or whatever that said, "But not only have we not gone after Al Qaeda, they are stronger than they were on 9/11", which combined with my prior knowledge of what she's said and done regarding the war OF terror indicated to me she's inferring she would go after Al Qaeda if elected prez.
So no, I don't think I was threadjacking, you provided that information.

I'm a long time antiwar/anti-imperialist and far from the only one that views Gabbard differently from those here.

Submitted by Big Al on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 7:36pm

And btw, what's Gabbard doing spreading the propaganda

@Big Al that Al Qaeda is "stronger today than after 9/11"? That's exactly the nonsense being spouted in the msm right now, almost like she's carrying the message. If Clinton had said that, which she will, and I pointed that out people would be all over her. But with Gabbard it's almost like people don't even read it.

Submitted by Big Al on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 9:39pm

And to add for the record,

@Big Al that propaganda is coming directly from the Council on Foreign Relations, recently, of which Gabbard is a member.

"Al-Qaeda has recruited an estimated 40,000 fighters since September 11, 2001, when the Osama bin Laden-led extremist group attacked the United States, according to the not-for-profit Council on Foreign Relations."

https://www.wionews.com/opinions/al-qaeda-is-stronger-today-than-it-was-...

Early July, same article has been shown on many websites/blogs and Gabbard comes right out with it. You can bet the rest of the candidates will also claim the same thing to support continuing the never ending war.

Submitted by Cant Stop the M... on Fri, 08/02/2019 - 6:45pm

It's poorly stated, but what I thought she meant

@Big Al

was that once the U.S. said it wanted to destroy AQ and used that as a justification for all manner of crap, including the Iraq War. Yet for some time now, the U.S. has been working with AQ in the Middle East, including in the Syrian war. Those are the "moderate rebels" we hear so much about. The same people whose blood we were screaming for fifteen years ago.

When she says AQ is now stronger, I assumed she meant because the U.S. is now supporting/funding/using them. I admit she could have been reciting a crap neocon talking point, but I thought it was all in the context of the govt talking out of both sides of its mouth re: AQ, a habit many people worldwide have paid for with their lives.

—

"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver

Submitted by snoopydawg on Fri, 08/02/2019 - 8:31pm

Bingo

@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal

When she says AQ is now stronger, I assumed she meant because the U.S. is now supporting/funding/using them.

She is saying that Trump is supporting AQ in Syria and by his support of Saudi Arabia who is giving AQ the weapons that we sell to them. I don't know if she said Obama also propped them up, but Flynn testified to congress that Obama created ISIS which is pretty much true. If nothing else Obama sat back and watched them get bigger because he wanted them to overthrow Assad. Plus he watched as miles long convoys of ISIS tankers went through Syria to Turkey to sell Israel Syria's oil. This was how they funded their war. Oh what a tangled web..

Submitted by Big Al on Fri, 08/02/2019 - 8:59pm

Well,

@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal who am I to slow the Tulsi Train. Seen it all before and time to check out of here.

Submitted by snoopydawg on Fri, 08/02/2019 - 10:39pm

For the record

@Big Al

I'm not supporting Tulsi. Nor anyone else. But if you can't enjoy what she did to Harris and go with that then I don't know what to tell you. Or maybe that was just a setup between Tulsi and Kambama for some reason? Whatever.. Oh yeah I'll say it again in case you haven't read this before. I don't vote. I don't think that anyone who gets to play president will be allowed to change the direction this country is on. The democrats are just as corrupt as the republicans and both parties serve their donors. The rest of the country is on its own.

Submitted by Big Al on Sat, 08/03/2019 - 11:08am

Vote for who you want man.

@snoopydawg I'm just trying to get some truth out about Gabbard. Many people lamented the fact that they didn't do their homework on Obama. Well, there's still time to do it with Gabbard.

And as far as "enjoying" what these democratic party politicians are saying to each other. Right. If you enjoy that, I don't know what to tell you.

Submitted by JtC on Sat, 08/03/2019 - 11:35am

Truth...

@Big Al
is a relative concept is it not? Your truth may not be my truth and vice versa. Especially on the internet, there are facts and then there are opinions, both of which are sometimes pulled tight out of the ass by those with axes to grind.

The real problem is when one views their truth as the one and universal truth and close their mind to any alternative opinions.

Submitted by eyo on Sat, 08/03/2019 - 11:55am

Collapse Denial

@Big Al don't check out man, that would be a bummer.

Say where do go to get your dopamine clicks, what keeps you going? I guess you have nice family, and nice surroundings and stuff, HOPE. I am barely hanging on, there are no nice surroundings within my proximity. wah

This is what duopoly looks like:
Vineyard of Silicon Valley investor hit with $3.7 million in penalties after bulldozing Mendocino County wetland

The illegal and permanent loss of wetlands and streams caused by the vineyard construction was an egregious violation of state and federal law,” Josh Curtis, North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board assistant executive officer, said in a written statement.

Public Relations

The unpermitted vineyard “involved the improper construction of roads and stream crossings, causing irreparable harm to already fragile wetlands,” according to the North Coast water board’s release.

Irreparable Harm 2020
GOTV! Just go read the whole article. weep
Ya think a four million dollar fine is gonna bother this guy? NOPE:
Kevin Harvey (venture capitalist)

Benchmark

At Benchmark, Harvey has invested in a number of companies that have gone to complete successful IPOs, including Red Hat[12] and Proofpoint.[13] He also led the firm’s investments in such companies as BOKU, Broadbase Software, Bytemobile (now part of Citrix Systems), CollabNet, CloudPassage, Eucalyptus Systems (acquired by HP),[14] Highlight (acquired by Pinterest),[15] Ingenio (acquired by AT&T), Kana (KANA), Metaweb (acquired by Google), MySQL (acquired by Sun Microsystems), oDesk, oFoto (acquired by Kodak), RemarQ Communities (acquired by Critical Path, Inc.), Rightscale, Tellme Networks (acquired by Microsoft), Terracotta, When.com (acquired by America Online), Zimbra (acquired by Yahoo!), and Minerva University.

Harvey serves on the boards of Upwork,[16] Rightscale,[17] Proofpoint,[18] and Minerva.[19]

This is what duopoly looks like:
https://www.opensecrets.org/search?q=kevin+harvey&type=donors

Money to Candidates KEVIN, HARVEY
LONG BEACH, CA 90806 SENOVVA INC. 02-13-2018 $50.00 Hill, Katie (D)
Money to Candidates KEVIN, HARVEY
LONG BEACH, CA 90806 SENOVVA INC. 03-31-2018 $25.00 Hill, Katie (D)
Money to Candidates KEVIN, HARVEY
LONG BEACH, CA 90806 SenovvA Inc 01-31-2018 $25.00 Hill, Katie (D)
Money to Candidates KEVIN, HARVEY
LONG BEACH, CA 90806 SENOVVA, INC 10-23-2018 $50.00 Hill, Katie (D)
Money to Candidates HARVEY, KEVIN
LONG BEACH, CA 90806 SENOVVA INC. 04-27-2018 $25.00 Hill, Katie (D)
Money to Candidates HARVEY, KEVIN
LONG BEACH, CA 90806 SENOVVA INC. 04-30-2018 $25.00 Hill, Katie (D)
Money to Candidates HARVEY, KEVIN
GULFPORT, MS 39501 HARVO/KIRBY 12-06-1995 $1,000.00 Dollar, Dennis (R)
Money to Candidates HARVEY, KEVIN
GULFPORT, MS 39501 HARVCO INC 05-24-1996 $1,000.00 Dollar, Dennis (R)
Money to Candidates HARVEY, KEVIN
BOZEMAN, MT 59715 KC HARVEY ENVIRONMENTAL, LLC 05-16-2017 $250.00 Gianforte, Greg (R)
Unknown HARVEY, KEVIN
MENLO PARK, CA 94025 BENCHMARK CAPITAL 01-18-1997 $300.00 National Venture Capital Assn
Unknown KEVIN, HARVEY
LONG BEACH, CA 90806 SENOVVA, INC 10-08-2018 $3.00 ActBlue
Unknown HARVEY, KEVIN
NEWARK, NJ 07106 ATT 01-25-2017 $3.00 Justice Democrats
Money to Candidates KEVIN, HARVEY
LONG BEACH, CA 90806 SENOVVA, INC 11-01-2018 $50.00 Hill, Katie (D)
Money to Candidates KEVIN, HARVEY
LONG BEACH, CA 90806 SENOVVA, INC 11-05-2018 $55.00 Hill, Katie (D)
Money to Candidates HARVEY, KEVIN
LONG BEACH, CA 90806 SENOVVA INC. 08-28-2018 $100.00 Hill, Katie (D)
Money to Candidates HARVEY, KEVIN
LONG BEACH, CA 90806 SENOVVA INC. 05-22-2018 $25.00 Hill, Katie (D)
Money to Candidates HARVEY, KEVIN
SAN DIEGO, CA 92120 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 02-20-2016 $50.00 Sanders, Bernie (D)
Money to Candidates HARVEY, KEVIN
SAN DIEGO, CA 92120 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 04-19-2016 $100.00 Sanders, Bernie (D)
Money to Candidates HARVEY, KEVIN
SAN DIEGO, CA 92120 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 10-07-2015 $50.00 Sanders, Bernie (D)

blah blah blah, etc..

California is where the Environmental Movement comes to die, how is everything in Washington? I feel like doing a weekend project involving plumbing tools, but realize again... it's over. So why not just fight some twitter wars and feel entertained as the world burns. good luck

PEACE
LOVE
UNDERSTANDING
laughter

Submitted by UntimelyRippd on Sat, 08/03/2019 - 12:52pm

blech

@eyo

#7.2.1.1.2.2.1.1 don't check out man, that would be a bummer.

Say where do go to get your dopamine clicks, what keeps you going? I guess you have nice family, and nice surroundings and stuff, HOPE. I am barely hanging on, there are no nice surroundings within my proximity. wah

This is what duopoly looks like:
Vineyard of Silicon Valley investor hit with $3.7 million in penalties after bulldozing Mendocino County wetland

The illegal and permanent loss of wetlands and streams caused by the vineyard construction was an egregious violation of state and federal law,” Josh Curtis, North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board assistant executive officer, said in a written statement.

Public Relations

The unpermitted vineyard “involved the improper construction of roads and stream crossings, causing irreparable harm to already fragile wetlands,” according to the North Coast water board’s release.

Irreparable Harm 2020
GOTV! Just go read the whole article. weep
Ya think a four million dollar fine is gonna bother this guy? NOPE:
Kevin Harvey (venture capitalist)

Benchmark

At Benchmark, Harvey has invested in a number of companies that have gone to complete successful IPOs, including Red Hat[12] and Proofpoint.[13] He also led the firm’s investments in such companies as BOKU, Broadbase Software, Bytemobile (now part of Citrix Systems), CollabNet, CloudPassage, Eucalyptus Systems (acquired by HP),[14] Highlight (acquired by Pinterest),[15] Ingenio (acquired by AT&T), Kana (KANA), Metaweb (acquired by Google), MySQL (acquired by Sun Microsystems), oDesk, oFoto (acquired by Kodak), RemarQ Communities (acquired by Critical Path, Inc.), Rightscale, Tellme Networks (acquired by Microsoft), Terracotta, When.com (acquired by America Online), Zimbra (acquired by Yahoo!), and Minerva University.

Harvey serves on the boards of Upwork,[16] Rightscale,[17] Proofpoint,[18] and Minerva.[19]

This is what duopoly looks like:
https://www.opensecrets.org/search?q=kevin+harvey&type=donors

Money to Candidates KEVIN, HARVEY
LONG BEACH, CA 90806 SENOVVA INC. 02-13-2018 $50.00 Hill, Katie (D)
Money to Candidates KEVIN, HARVEY
LONG BEACH, CA 90806 SENOVVA INC. 03-31-2018 $25.00 Hill, Katie (D)
Money to Candidates KEVIN, HARVEY
LONG BEACH, CA 90806 SenovvA Inc 01-31-2018 $25.00 Hill, Katie (D)
Money to Candidates KEVIN, HARVEY
LONG BEACH, CA 90806 SENOVVA, INC 10-23-2018 $50.00 Hill, Katie (D)
Money to Candidates HARVEY, KEVIN
LONG BEACH, CA 90806 SENOVVA INC. 04-27-2018 $25.00 Hill, Katie (D)
Money to Candidates HARVEY, KEVIN
LONG BEACH, CA 90806 SENOVVA INC. 04-30-2018 $25.00 Hill, Katie (D)
Money to Candidates HARVEY, KEVIN
GULFPORT, MS 39501 HARVO/KIRBY 12-06-1995 $1,000.00 Dollar, Dennis (R)
Money to Candidates HARVEY, KEVIN
GULFPORT, MS 39501 HARVCO INC 05-24-1996 $1,000.00 Dollar, Dennis (R)
Money to Candidates HARVEY, KEVIN
BOZEMAN, MT 59715 KC HARVEY ENVIRONMENTAL, LLC 05-16-2017 $250.00 Gianforte, Greg (R)
Unknown HARVEY, KEVIN
MENLO PARK, CA 94025 BENCHMARK CAPITAL 01-18-1997 $300.00 National Venture Capital Assn
Unknown KEVIN, HARVEY
LONG BEACH, CA 90806 SENOVVA, INC 10-08-2018 $3.00 ActBlue
Unknown HARVEY, KEVIN
NEWARK, NJ 07106 ATT 01-25-2017 $3.00 Justice Democrats
Money to Candidates KEVIN, HARVEY
LONG BEACH, CA 90806 SENOVVA, INC 11-01-2018 $50.00 Hill, Katie (D)
Money to Candidates KEVIN, HARVEY
LONG BEACH, CA 90806 SENOVVA, INC 11-05-2018 $55.00 Hill, Katie (D)
Money to Candidates HARVEY, KEVIN
LONG BEACH, CA 90806 SENOVVA INC. 08-28-2018 $100.00 Hill, Katie (D)
Money to Candidates HARVEY, KEVIN
LONG BEACH, CA 90806 SENOVVA INC. 05-22-2018 $25.00 Hill, Katie (D)
Money to Candidates HARVEY, KEVIN
SAN DIEGO, CA 92120 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 02-20-2016 $50.00 Sanders, Bernie (D)
Money to Candidates HARVEY, KEVIN
SAN DIEGO, CA 92120 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 04-19-2016 $100.00 Sanders, Bernie (D)
Money to Candidates HARVEY, KEVIN
SAN DIEGO, CA 92120 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 10-07-2015 $50.00 Sanders, Bernie (D)

blah blah blah, etc..

California is where the Environmental Movement comes to die, how is everything in Washington? I feel like doing a weekend project involving plumbing tools, but realize again... it's over. So why not just fight some twitter wars and feel entertained as the world burns. good luck

PEACE
LOVE
UNDERSTANDING
laughter

—

The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.

Submitted by snoopydawg on Sat, 08/03/2019 - 12:34pm

Did you read my comment

@Big Al

Oh yeah I'll say it again in case you haven't read this before. I don't vote.

I know I have told you this more than once so I don't know why you don't remember it. But to not see that I wrote it in the comment you are replying to?

And yes I enjoyed the hell out of Tulsi bringing up Harris' abhorrent history as AG because I think people should know how horrible she was. Especially since people are trying to protect her by removing her record during her tenure so that people can't fact check what Tulsi said. Harris is being run by Hillary's old campaign staff and has hired her lawyers which helped bring about the whole Russian saga that this country has been through for over two years. And that is obvious when Harris' response was tar Tulsi as being a Russian bot.

And as far as "enjoying" what these democratic party politicians are saying to each other. Right. If you enjoy that, I don't know what to tell you.

Seriously? Do you think that I am talking about all the other candidates here? No. I wonder why I have to keep explaining to you why I posted this essay? Especially since I am on record agreeing with you that voting is not going to change a damn thing? But if others still want to take part in the system that is their right.

Submitted by Mark from Queens on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 11:47am

Niko House,

replete with boxing sounds. Perfect.

Copmala is one of the absolute worst incarnations of Identity Politics Neoliberalism.

From Chapo:

She'll be burnt beyond recognition before the year's out.

Great piece about CNN's corporate entertainment programming during America's 2 year long Quadrennial Circus:

Everyone working for CNN should walk into network president Jeff Zucker’s office and resign en masse on Wednesday morning. A “debate” that spent its opening 25 minutes less efficiently than a Super Bowl pre-game show got dramatically worse as the actual questions got started. Jake Tapper then delivered instructions, warning the candidates not to go over time after CNN saw fit to run the national anthem and then a commercial break after the scheduled start time. The only ones wasting time on debate night would be CNN.

It would give Tapper and his other moderators too much credit to say that their relentless right-wing framing of the questions was animated by a desire to protect the insurance industry and the border patrol. But that’s not really it. CNN has no politics. CNN has no understanding of politics or policy. I doubt the combined firepower of the 20-person post-game panel could name a bill currently before Congress. The CNN debate was an inevitable by-product of turning news into an entertainment and cultural product....

But CNN provided the combatants the ammunition and the weapons. It was designed as a referendum on two candidates and the ideas that animate them. Next time the network will summon candidates into an Octagon two at a time. As Bernie Sanders’s campaign manager Faiz Shakir correctly predicted, the result made everyone dumber, particularly because the moderators were so preoccupied with time limits—maybe not meandering around for a half-hour to start would have freed up some room—they constantly cut off the candidates just as they were getting around to answering a question. At one point Warren was interrupted during a question about healthcare so moderator Dana Bash could ask another question on healthcare. This was just Crossfire-style provocation.

Though ideology wasn’t necessarily the point, the fact that Warren and Sanders stood pre-eminent above everyone led to persistent right-wing assumptions in every question. Tapper led off by asking whether taxes would have to go up to pay for Medicare for All, and whether 180 million people should have their insurance coverage taken away from them—a nice, objective, down-the-center series of questions. Tapper, of course, is the same guy who took the Mercatus Center’s side by enabling the Koch Brothers-funded think tank to lie about their own report, which clearly showed that overall national health expenditures would go down under a single-payer system.

Tapper then tried to cleave unions from the Democratic Party by saying that national health care would take away hard-earned benefits, as if unions would not then seek to renegotiate contracts with higher wages. His next muddled question: how candidates could support decriminalizing border crossings, a policy so etched in stone that it’s been in place since way back in 2006. Then there was a long section that asked candidates to play pundits and explain why liberal ideas are bad and wrong.

It was not lost on Sanders, or anyone watching at home, that the commercial breaks featured ads from the pharmaceutical lobby, the anti-single payer group Partnership for America’s Health Care Future, funded by hospitals and drug companies, and an Alzheimer's disease patient advocacy group that takes major funding from drug companies. The unfiltered 90 seconds of three of these commercials in succession comprised more screen time than anything in the debate about money in politics.

"CNN's Debate Fail" by David Dayen

—

"If I should ever die, God forbid, let this be my epitaph:

THE ONLY PROOF HE NEEDED
FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD
WAS MUSIC"

- Kurt Vonnegut

Submitted by tle on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 11:54am

“I GOT THE BLACK VOTE LOCKED UP”

@Mark from Queens That. Is. Priceless!

replete with boxing sounds. Perfect. Copmala is one of the absolute worst incarnations of Identity Politics Neoliberalism. From Chapo: She'll be burnt beyond recognition before the year's out. Great piece about CNN's corporate entertainment programming during America's 2 year long Quadrennial Circus: Everyone working for CNN should walk into network president Jeff Zucker’s office and resign en masse on Wednesday morning. A “debate” that spent its opening 25 minutes less efficiently than a Super Bowl pre-game show got dramatically worse as the actual questions got started. Jake Tapper then delivered instructions, warning the candidates not to go over time after CNN saw fit to run the national anthem and then a commercial break after the scheduled start time. The only ones wasting time on debate night would be CNN. It would give Tapper and his other moderators too much credit to say that their relentless right-wing framing of the questions was animated by a desire to protect the insurance industry and the border patrol. But that’s not really it. CNN has no politics. CNN has no understanding of politics or policy. I doubt the combined firepower of the 20-person post-game panel could name a bill currently before Congress. The CNN debate was an inevitable by-product of turning news into an entertainment and cultural product.... But CNN provided the combatants the ammunition and the weapons. It was designed as a referendum on two candidates and the ideas that animate them. Next time the network will summon candidates into an Octagon two at a time. As Bernie Sanders’s campaign manager Faiz Shakir correctly predicted, the result made everyone dumber, particularly because the moderators were so preoccupied with time limits—maybe not meandering around for a half-hour to start would have freed up some room—they constantly cut off the candidates just as they were getting around to answering a question. At one point Warren was interrupted during a question about healthcare so moderator Dana Bash could ask another question on healthcare. This was just Crossfire-style provocation. Though ideology wasn’t necessarily the point, the fact that Warren and Sanders stood pre-eminent above everyone led to persistent right-wing assumptions in every question. Tapper led off by asking whether taxes would have to go up to pay for Medicare for All, and whether 180 million people should have their insurance coverage taken away from them—a nice, objective, down-the-center series of questions. Tapper, of course, is the same guy who took the Mercatus Center’s side by enabling the Koch Brothers-funded think tank to lie about their own report, which clearly showed that overall national health expenditures would go down under a single-payer system. Tapper then tried to cleave unions from the Democratic Party by saying that national health care would take away hard-earned benefits, as if unions would not then seek to renegotiate contracts with higher wages. His next muddled question: how candidates could support decriminalizing border crossings, a policy so etched in stone that it’s been in place since way back in 2006. Then there was a long section that asked candidates to play pundits and explain why liberal ideas are bad and wrong. It was not lost on Sanders, or anyone watching at home, that the commercial breaks featured ads from the pharmaceutical lobby, the anti-single payer group Partnership for America’s Health Care Future, funded by hospitals and drug companies, and an Alzheimer's disease patient advocacy group that takes major funding from drug companies. The unfiltered 90 seconds of three of these commercials in succession comprised more screen time than anything in the debate about money in politics. "CNN's Debate Fail" by David Dayen

Submitted by Cant Stop the M... on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 4:21pm

Wow, Mark.

@Mark from Queens

That's gold.

replete with boxing sounds. Perfect. Copmala is one of the absolute worst incarnations of Identity Politics Neoliberalism. From Chapo: She'll be burnt beyond recognition before the year's out. Great piece about CNN's corporate entertainment programming during America's 2 year long Quadrennial Circus: Everyone working for CNN should walk into network president Jeff Zucker’s office and resign en masse on Wednesday morning. A “debate” that spent its opening 25 minutes less efficiently than a Super Bowl pre-game show got dramatically worse as the actual questions got started. Jake Tapper then delivered instructions, warning the candidates not to go over time after CNN saw fit to run the national anthem and then a commercial break after the scheduled start time. The only ones wasting time on debate night would be CNN. It would give Tapper and his other moderators too much credit to say that their relentless right-wing framing of the questions was animated by a desire to protect the insurance industry and the border patrol. But that’s not really it. CNN has no politics. CNN has no understanding of politics or policy. I doubt the combined firepower of the 20-person post-game panel could name a bill currently before Congress. The CNN debate was an inevitable by-product of turning news into an entertainment and cultural product.... But CNN provided the combatants the ammunition and the weapons. It was designed as a referendum on two candidates and the ideas that animate them. Next time the network will summon candidates into an Octagon two at a time. As Bernie Sanders’s campaign manager Faiz Shakir correctly predicted, the result made everyone dumber, particularly because the moderators were so preoccupied with time limits—maybe not meandering around for a half-hour to start would have freed up some room—they constantly cut off the candidates just as they were getting around to answering a question. At one point Warren was interrupted during a question about healthcare so moderator Dana Bash could ask another question on healthcare. This was just Crossfire-style provocation. Though ideology wasn’t necessarily the point, the fact that Warren and Sanders stood pre-eminent above everyone led to persistent right-wing assumptions in every question. Tapper led off by asking whether taxes would have to go up to pay for Medicare for All, and whether 180 million people should have their insurance coverage taken away from them—a nice, objective, down-the-center series of questions. Tapper, of course, is the same guy who took the Mercatus Center’s side by enabling the Koch Brothers-funded think tank to lie about their own report, which clearly showed that overall national health expenditures would go down under a single-payer system. Tapper then tried to cleave unions from the Democratic Party by saying that national health care would take away hard-earned benefits, as if unions would not then seek to renegotiate contracts with higher wages. His next muddled question: how candidates could support decriminalizing border crossings, a policy so etched in stone that it’s been in place since way back in 2006. Then there was a long section that asked candidates to play pundits and explain why liberal ideas are bad and wrong. It was not lost on Sanders, or anyone watching at home, that the commercial breaks featured ads from the pharmaceutical lobby, the anti-single payer group Partnership for America’s Health Care Future, funded by hospitals and drug companies, and an Alzheimer's disease patient advocacy group that takes major funding from drug companies. The unfiltered 90 seconds of three of these commercials in succession comprised more screen time than anything in the debate about money in politics. "CNN's Debate Fail" by David Dayen

—

"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver

Submitted by irishking on Fri, 08/02/2019 - 10:04am

(+++)

@Mark from Queens

replete with boxing sounds. Perfect. Copmala is one of the absolute worst incarnations of Identity Politics Neoliberalism. From Chapo: She'll be burnt beyond recognition before the year's out. Great piece about CNN's corporate entertainment programming during America's 2 year long Quadrennial Circus: Everyone working for CNN should walk into network president Jeff Zucker’s office and resign en masse on Wednesday morning. A “debate” that spent its opening 25 minutes less efficiently than a Super Bowl pre-game show got dramatically worse as the actual questions got started. Jake Tapper then delivered instructions, warning the candidates not to go over time after CNN saw fit to run the national anthem and then a commercial break after the scheduled start time. The only ones wasting time on debate night would be CNN. It would give Tapper and his other moderators too much credit to say that their relentless right-wing framing of the questions was animated by a desire to protect the insurance industry and the border patrol. But that’s not really it. CNN has no politics. CNN has no understanding of politics or policy. I doubt the combined firepower of the 20-person post-game panel could name a bill currently before Congress. The CNN debate was an inevitable by-product of turning news into an entertainment and cultural product.... But CNN provided the combatants the ammunition and the weapons. It was designed as a referendum on two candidates and the ideas that animate them. Next time the network will summon candidates into an Octagon two at a time. As Bernie Sanders’s campaign manager Faiz Shakir correctly predicted, the result made everyone dumber, particularly because the moderators were so preoccupied with time limits—maybe not meandering around for a half-hour to start would have freed up some room—they constantly cut off the candidates just as they were getting around to answering a question. At one point Warren was interrupted during a question about healthcare so moderator Dana Bash could ask another question on healthcare. This was just Crossfire-style provocation. Though ideology wasn’t necessarily the point, the fact that Warren and Sanders stood pre-eminent above everyone led to persistent right-wing assumptions in every question. Tapper led off by asking whether taxes would have to go up to pay for Medicare for All, and whether 180 million people should have their insurance coverage taken away from them—a nice, objective, down-the-center series of questions. Tapper, of course, is the same guy who took the Mercatus Center’s side by enabling the Koch Brothers-funded think tank to lie about their own report, which clearly showed that overall national health expenditures would go down under a single-payer system. Tapper then tried to cleave unions from the Democratic Party by saying that national health care would take away hard-earned benefits, as if unions would not then seek to renegotiate contracts with higher wages. His next muddled question: how candidates could support decriminalizing border crossings, a policy so etched in stone that it’s been in place since way back in 2006. Then there was a long section that asked candidates to play pundits and explain why liberal ideas are bad and wrong. It was not lost on Sanders, or anyone watching at home, that the commercial breaks featured ads from the pharmaceutical lobby, the anti-single payer group Partnership for America’s Health Care Future, funded by hospitals and drug companies, and an Alzheimer's disease patient advocacy group that takes major funding from drug companies. The unfiltered 90 seconds of three of these commercials in succession comprised more screen time than anything in the debate about money in politics. "CNN's Debate Fail" by David Dayen

Submitted by HenryAWallace on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 1:34pm

I hope someone takes Biden out, even if it's Kamala.

She will not win. However, as long as Biden is polling well (or reported as polling well), I cannot be sanguine.

Democrats supposedly poll saying that electability in the general is more important to them, even than someone who agrees with them on issues! And they also poll saying that Biden is highly electable. I can do the math, but I don't want to.

Submitted by Bisbonian on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 4:05pm

Biden 3030!

@HenryAWallace

—

"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X

Submitted by Alligator Ed on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 5:08pm

Prediction: the Camel shall not win

@HenryAWallace Tulsi knifed her phony ass and other body parts fatally--but like Biden, the blood loss is so gradual, albeit inevitable, that the Camel doesn't even know she's done for.

My view of the Camel, aka Kambama:

Submitted by HenryAWallace on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 1:35pm

I hope someone takes Biden out, even if it's Kamala.

She will not win. However, as long as Biden is polling well (or reported as polling well), I cannot be sanguine.

Kamala is not going to win this primary anyway.

Submitted by Linda Wood on Thu, 08/01/2019 - 11:16pm

snoopydawg,

thanks for focusing on Tulsi's challenges to Harris.

Here's part of an article from last February about Harris's words vs her deeds:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/feb/10/how-convincing-is-...

How convincing is Kamala Harris' leftward shift?
Briahna Joy Gray
10 Feb 2019

… In 2016, Harris didn’t feel “strongly” enough about Medicare for All to support the only candidate on the Democratic ticket who backed it, Bernie Sanders. Moreover, her policy adviser and sister, Maya Harris, also advised Hillary Clinton in 2016, when the former Senator and first lady famously insisted that single payer would “never, ever come to pass”.

Certainly people can and should evolve. Social mores shift. New information comes to light. Politicians such as Sanders expand the limits of political possibility. But without a more substantive articulation of why and how Harris and her team came to a new ideology, it feels like Harris’s politics are driven less by a normative vision of the world than by the wind of popular opinion.

The gap between her professed ideals and her actions is most apparent when the focus is trained on Harris’s career as a prosecutor, about which there’s been significant reporting and criticism. Somewhat hubristically, she’s still chosen to pluck her campaign slogan from the prosecutor’s oath: “For The People”.

In light of her record, which includes failing to prosecute “foreclosure King” turned Treasury secretary Steve Mnuchin, while supporting an anti-truancy initiative that criminalized noncompliant parents and threatened them with jail time, the slogan raises the question: for which people?

Submitted by snoopydawg on Fri, 08/02/2019 - 1:40am

Thanks for posting this, Linda

@Linda Wood

The more exposure of Kambama's tenure the less chance she has to win and become the next Obama. She has hired Hillary's lawyers and we know what they did to get Russia Gate started.

I hope that people who are interested in Kambama's career will read the article I posted in my comment on Kambama's a cop. This is an excellent take down on her time as attorney general.