Amen n/t (4.00 / 11)

---

by: Paddy @ Mon Jun 08, 2009 at 18:17:17 PM CDT

have you cross posted this at daily kos? (4.00 / 13)

this message should be made there, since they have a much larger platform, and have been using it primarily to attack the right.

---

by: seabrook @ Mon Jun 08, 2009 at 18:20:10 PM CDT

Kill the Bill (4.00 / 9)

I think we should also threaten to run advertisements clarifying all the problems with the bill.  The American people have a right to know that the Democratic Party is going to screw them on healthcare.  Without the public option as a MINIMUM requirement this bill will be nothing but a gussied up Republican tax credit for the rich and more than likely a tax on middleclass health benefits.  Americans may very well be worse off if a Blue Dog "bipartisan" bill passes.

Campaign against the bill.  Take the argument to the public.  Let people know how little is in the bill that will help them compared to the risks they are taking with their employer paid benefits.  

Nothing makes me angrier than how the Democrats in Congress believe they can run a con game against the people by pretending they are delivering reform let alone healthcare itself which they seem to care nothing about at all.  

---

by: Aliceann @ Mon Jun 08, 2009 at 18:26:53 PM CDT

agreed, with one caveat: we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that (0.00 / 0)

tens of millions are without healthcare.  if we focus too much on the employer paid benefits, we risk looking out of touch to the millions who would much rather have health benefits that were taxed than what they have now: no health benefits at all (not that this bill will necessarily give them that...).  

---

by: seabrook @ Mon Jun 08, 2009 at 19:02:27 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Taxing middleclass (4.00 / 4)

I'm concerned that if we tax the health benefits of people who already have employer paid insurance without making a compelling case for truly universal healthcare that they'll just figure they're being screwed.  Frankly, I think they are.  Why aren't we proposing really progressive taxation to pay for this?  If all we do is add a tax on the middleclass to force them to fund healthcare for people a little less well off than they are, I don't see how we get either the revenue or the support for major change.  What are we actually getting with this?  It's woefully underfunded and isn't truly providing universal coverage.  

This is a big deal.  It needs a vision and a commitment equal to the task.  Instead we're likely to get a Blue Dog shell game that taxes the middleclass to shovel money to corporate lobbies.

---

by: Aliceann @ Mon Jun 08, 2009 at 19:51:51 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

i agree that we should oppose this taxation scheme... (0.00 / 0)

but i don't think it should be our primary focus.  we should focus above all on the exorbitant profits of the insurance companies, their horrific track record, and their massive donations to conservative dems and republicans.  any bill that the insurance companies like and that is being pushed by the conservadems and republicans would thus be made anathema to the majority of americans.  

---

by: seabrook @ Mon Jun 08, 2009 at 19:58:08 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

gosh (4.00 / 7)

why won't Democrats support a public option? It is just a mystery.

---

by: AliceDem @ Mon Jun 08, 2009 at 18:31:04 PM CDT

Not going to defend them (4.00 / 1)

But what scares some of them about the public option is the fear mongering that the insurance companies would exploit it to basically dump all the sickest, neediest, unprofitable people onto the public rolls and keep all the healthiest, high-margin customers for themselves.

I honestly think as long as there is a health insurance industry we will see NO change at all unless congress and Obama find their spine and shove strict price controls and regulations on the industry.

---

by: Jon Niola @ Mon Jun 08, 2009 at 19:04:50 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

No more Two Minutes Hate (4.00 / 4)

Until we get "The Change We Need" (tm)

I'm with you on that.

---

by: Paul Goodman @ Mon Jun 08, 2009 at 19:30:19 PM CDT

Furthermore, (4.00 / 5)

I've long admired Chris Bowers.

He genuinely undermines my Decade of Misanthropy.

---

by: Paul Goodman @ Mon Jun 08, 2009 at 19:34:32 PM CDT

Add Murray, Cantwell, and Wyden (4.00 / 9)

to your list.

Focusing on Murray for a moment, she voted against the Sanders amendment to cap usury at 15% (so did Cantwell). They did however vote for the milquetoast bill that requires banks to wait for sixth months before bumping usury rates.

Neither Murray nor Cantwell have signed the Sentate petition calling for a public option. Any public option.

Murray is up for re-election next year, and on Friday the WA State Democratic Party called me from Renton to ask me to donate money for her campaign. The title of your post is right on, because the first thing I was told was "Democrats won solid majorities last year, but Senator Murray is up for re-election, and you know the Republicans will do any thing to stop her".

What exactly would they be stopping? Except for finally passing the Wild Sky Wilderness Protection Act last year, her 17-year record as a Senator, with half that time as a member of the Senate's leadership team, reads more like the record of a city councilwoman in a midsize town. I once visited her Seattle office to urge her to bring in more funds for mass transit, and her staffer told me that Murray's record in that area was equivalent to Warren Magnuson. And I'm thinking "Really? You mean when he was alive, or since he's been dead? Because if you're talking about since he's been dead, well then she may have outspent him, but it's going to be damn close." Murray, who first ran for Senate in 1992 as a "mom in tennis shoes" whose grit and determination would ply the halls of Congress for education money, has done little more than act as a seat warmer.

Anyway, I told the woman on the phone that I appreciated her getting involved and volunteering, but not only will I not donate for Murray, I won't donate to the party, and I won't vote for Murray unless & until the party gets her in line. I recounted Murray's record, mentioned that I had donated to the state party and the DNC last year, but again, wasn't going to do so until there was a change of behavior...and her voice got real low and she said, "You know I kind of agree with you, I think there's a lot of Democrats who never do anything". She was very sweet, and we ended the phone call.

I'm sure she and I aren't the only ones; WA has a very progressive party base, with an impatient streak. But there's no one pushing the issue by running in the primary, etc....we need a vehicle for our grievance.

---

by: glacierpeaks @ Mon Jun 08, 2009 at 19:37:12 PM CDT

thank you thank you !! do you have a list of (4.00 / 1)

their crappy votes anywhere ??

I meant to start a Patty diary series on www.washblog.com

http://www.washblog.com/story/... - but apparantly haven't done anythign since xmas.

she and cantwell are pathetic. they're not LEADERS, they are people who are in charge, and that seems to be the raison d'etre of our washington democratic party 'leaders' - stay in charge of telling us why we have to keep accepting ronnie raygun grover norquist tim eyeman budgets.

just think - for 3 decades the mantra has been

the rich need more money to invest in more prosperity,
and they know where to invest cuz they're rich!

well, the rich took their extra money and did what the drunken fishermen of the alaskan king crab hey deys did - some of them invested it wisely, some invested it unluckily, but most of them BLEW it on gambling and on vices.

we cut community investment for a bunch of drunken sailors to get drunker.

oh, and on 'our' side are a bunch of people in charge who learned from 1984 and 88 and 94 etc etc how to NOT rock the boat, cower, snivel and whine.

ugh.

rmm
ballard

It is too full o' the milk of human kindness To catch the nearest way

---

by: seabos84 @ Tue Jun 09, 2009 at 07:25:06 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

we still need to attack Republicans (4.00 / 2)

at least ones like Grassley whose misleading talking points on health care are giving cover to the bad Democrats.

Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.

---

by: desmoinesdem @ Mon Jun 08, 2009 at 19:57:24 PM CDT

I have to disagree (4.00 / 6)

our problem isn't with Republicans, as we have the numbers.

Our problem is with Democrats who apparently don't believe in any part of the party's platform.

---

by: glacierpeaks @ Mon Jun 08, 2009 at 20:04:38 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

This may be the first time I have disagreed with a post of yours. (4.00 / 7)

I think Chris has it right. In fact I think we should vote, just like endorsing Obama. I think it should be very limited, in scope and time. If we win, well good its over. If we lose, and the CrappyDems shaft the chance of even minimal reform and the scope of a right to healthcare, then well we'd be in a different world, and our plans for 2010 would change a great deal.

And here's the kicker, if we lose this to the Blue dog Dems, then our job becomes electing "Single Payer Dems"

You lose us this, and we will work to take you out, and elect Dems who will give us wildly popular "single payer dems."

Im with Chris, lets put it to a vote.

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.

---

by: HousesofProgress @ Mon Jun 08, 2009 at 20:18:08 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Excellent Point, Chris (4.00 / 16)

A public option is a litmus test for Dems, as much as I hesitate to impose a litmus test on one policy.

If Democrats don't pass meaningful health care reform that includes a public option, it will be a very, very long time before I even consider donating one more dime or one more minute to any Democrat. They all need to push this through and pressure any reluctant Democrat.  

---

by: NCDemAmy @ Mon Jun 08, 2009 at 20:18:27 PM CDT

Maybe this message (0.00 / 0)

should also be sent to progressive members of Congress, or the media (Keith & Rachel), etc.  They too need to train their guns on the real obstacles here.

Who are the best keepers of the people's liberties? The people themselves. The sacred trust can be no where so safe as in the hands most interested in preserving it.
James Madison

---

by: David Kaib @ Mon Jun 08, 2009 at 20:37:41 PM CDT

Medicare Part D (4.00 / 4)

If there's no public component, the whole plan will be like Medicare Part D: fortunes to for-profit health insurance companies and doughnut holes for the insureds.

Which reminds me, when are we going to fix Medicare Part D?

---

by: Joyful Alternative @ Mon Jun 08, 2009 at 21:00:41 PM CDT

I agree (4.00 / 3)

The whole bipartisan/compromise argument is BS. Democrats have the opportunity to make history now and must seize it. It will be a catastrophic failure if they don't.

---

by: jeffbinnc @ Mon Jun 08, 2009 at 21:11:18 PM CDT

Here, here... (4.00 / 2)

Who needs Fox, Newsmax or Townhall when we have Kieth, Huffpost and Rachel rolling around in Rush, Newt, Sarah, etc. EVERY day.

---

by: jumperpin @ Mon Jun 08, 2009 at 22:18:28 PM CDT

Yes, I'm also tired of waiting... (4.00 / 2)

Either pass a health care bill WITH a public option or stop whining about the Limbaugh attacks.

Want to save marriage equality in Maine? Ask me how! ;-)

---

by: Andrew Davey @ Mon Jun 08, 2009 at 22:26:17 PM CDT

I applaud this call fir a line drawn in the sand (4.00 / 2)

I think there needs to be more specificity in the line called "public plan" it simply means nothing or far to many things to different people now.

And whatever the line is called... draw it as far to the left of your real line as you possibly dare. I don't mean dreamy far left, but definitely more than what you intend to settle.

If you stick with public plan meme.. some specific line in the sand has to be defined in re the trigger.  F the trigger! The last good Trigger died with Roy Rogers. /s

A trigger is a way to divide and conquer on several levels. If everyone pays through taxation.. they should be welcome, but have the right to buy and utilize private if they can afford it and choose to do so.

We cannot exclude anyone. F the trigger!

imo, it's not public unless all of the public has the option to utilize it. No law or pay rate or failure of insurance companies to keep their part of the bargain should be able to keep a citizen out of a public option.

Otherwise it's not public and it's not health CARE.

---

by: Eureka Springs AR @ Mon Jun 08, 2009 at 23:26:22 PM CDT

Amen... (0.00 / 0)

I think conservatives are successfully using Limbaugh, et al to create a noisy distraction, with the help of the media of course. The media love a fight and sensationalism. The result has been that any progressive input or criticism of the administration or of congress gets lost in the noise created by the crazies, and our own energy is wasted in beating them back (among ourselves). In the mainstream media, then, everything gets framed in terms of the far right versus Obama, with the Left being invisible and the far right given equal status to the President,  as if they were serious participants with a large public following and real policy proposals. And as if we hadn't had an election. The Right is very happy to have everyone talking about race, terrorists, and abortion hysteria - it's their comfort zone and where they choose to fight their public battle while behind the scenes they stone-wall and keep us stuck in the Bush era.  

---

by: DeanOR @ Tue Jun 09, 2009 at 00:37:26 AM CDT

That sounds like a good idea, Chris (0.00 / 0)

however I doubt whether it will be of any help regarding these Democrats!  Personally, I'm totally discusted with the majority of them and have absolutely NO confidence that they will do the right thing - and by the way the same goes for Obama.  Its a shame really....many people worked their asses off to get this guy elected and what do we get in return? - George W. Bush's third term!!

---

by: Gloughlin42 @ Tue Jun 09, 2009 at 00:53:10 AM CDT

um...our 'attacks' are laundry YAWN (0.00 / 0)

lists, they ain't attacks.

while it is critical that THE TRUTH be out there against the fascist lies, and the faster the truth comes out the better, an EFFECTIVE ATTACK shuts down or completely marginalizes / trivializes their fucking lies.

I am NOT seeing EFFECTIVE ATTACKS. IF they were effective attacks, we'd NOT be enduring weeks upon weeks of the lies against the new SCOTUS appointment, the sly support of pro-life murdering terrorists, the latest right wing variants on harry and louise ...

HOWEVER, a few things where THE TRUTH is killing us:

1. summers and geithner & rubin bailing out their theiving scum friends on wall street,

2. the fucking sell outs and cowards on "OUR" side who are doing the bidding of the AHIP crooks.

no body cares if we stop 'attacking' rush cuz the 'attacks' ain't effective - there just laundry lists.

rmm.  

It is too full o' the milk of human kindness To catch the nearest way

---

by: seabos84 @ Tue Jun 09, 2009 at 06:44:35 AM CDT

I am for the public option (0.00 / 0)

but my test is different: will the bill cover everyone?

If a bill is passed that means people don't have to worry about their health insurance when they lose a job, that bill addresses a fundamental immorality in America.  I think a public option is needed, but that is secondary to addressing the enormous inequity in health care access, an inequity which is costing lives.  

---

by: fladem @ Tue Jun 09, 2009 at 07:18:53 AM CDT