You go Chris (4.00 / 5)

As a self-employed worker I see the Progressive Block as the only effective tactic to advance a strategy for affordable health care for all. Simply put: The economies of scale will only tilt toward us "little guys" until the government competes with for-profit health care corporations. Those who believe that co-ops, tighter regulations, and other means are a way to affordable health care for all are foisting shallow and easily refutable arguments.  

---

by: jeffbinnc @ Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 21:28:41 PM CDT

Exactly! United we stand, divided we fall. (4.00 / 3)

That's one of the main problems with most proposals: Single customers simply don't have the market power to force the big insurance companies to make better offers. The corporations simply exploit the fact that their customers have only the choice between differently awful plans, that all suffer from extremely high administrative costs and the profit greed of the business. That's simply a choice between Scylla and Charybdis.

And even non-profit co-ops where private insurers participate are no solution to this, because experience shows that the insurers will manipulate them into offering plans that won't be better than the rest of the competition. There's simply no incentive in such a system to force the supply side to offer more affordable products. And so, the public option is the only reasonable way to achieve improvements. Without it, the reform is headed to failure, regardless if its other regulations make sense at face value. And Baucus' plan unnecessarily puts the public option off the table, and can only make it harder to get it into reconcilation. That's a horrible strategy, and it begs the question if the Senator is a fool or a traitor.  

Let it be said by our children's children that when we were tested, we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back, nor did we falter

---

by: Gray @ Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 04:54:19 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

With friends like these.... (4.00 / 2)

Maybe somebody should whisper this in Ezra Klein's shell-like ear. He seems to think that just about anything labeled Health Care Reform will be hunky-dory, especially if it's labeled Paid-For Health Care Reform.

When a guy poses as an expert in the art of the possible, you'd expect him to be aware that the range of possibilities doesn't automatically narrow just because Max Baucus lacks imagination.

Hell, I'll tell him myself. You know what, Ezra? If we keep losing the argument the way you frame it, some of us might just start thinking seriously about changing the subject. Maybe not in this session of Congress, maybe not in President Obama's first term, but eventually there'll be pitchforks and torches -- and I'm not talking about crazed right-wingers, either. What we've got now -- the Inviolability of Corporate Profits, the Sanctity of Low Marginal Tax Rates for the Wealthy, Better Living Through Interminable Wars, and Screw Everybody Below the Rank of Plutocrat -- does not a stable system of government make, no matter what your experience in Washington has led you to believe.

---

by: William Timberman @ Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 21:42:39 PM CDT

Heh (4.00 / 2)

Have you followed BTD's daily evisceration of Klein at TalkLeft? He's also taken to calling Obama President Snowe.

When gentle persuasion and forceful arguments no longer cut it, only humiliation will do with these Dems.

The liberal soul shall be made fat. He who waters shall be watered also himself. (Proverbs 11:25)

---

by: kovie @ Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 22:46:25 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

No, I haven't, (0.00 / 0)

but now, thanks to you, I'm gonna. I need a lift, but somehow I don't think turning myself into a lush is the way to go.

---

by: William Timberman @ Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 23:01:35 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Are you aware of who BTD is? (4.00 / 3)

If not, he's Big Tent Democrat, aka Armando, who used to be a front-pager on DKos and the site's resident curmudgeon, until he got into a pie fight too many and was asked to leave--twice in fact, under both names. But his analysis of politics is, if enelegant and too concise, trenchant and spot on. Enjoy.

The liberal soul shall be made fat. He who waters shall be watered also himself. (Proverbs 11:25)

---

by: kovie @ Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 23:27:45 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Thanks for the history lesson (4.00 / 3)

All news to me. I've avoided DKos like the plague. Too much doctrinaire Democratting for my taste. I came to blogs late -- in the Spring of 05 -- and began by commenting on FDL, which I did for a few months until something I said pissed Jane off. She didn't actually ban me, but I figured that it was her place, and she could bloody well do what she wanted, except with me. Then, as you know, I did a spell at UT, until the libertarian lounge lizards got too thick on the ground. It was actually my respect for Paul's work which brought me here.

As it turns out, OpenLeft, suits me very well. Chris, Matt and David are the salt of the earth as far as I'm concerned, and the range of issues and opinions here is just broad enough, and deep enough, to make me feel at home. Amazing commenters too; It's like hanging out with the faculty in a really good department. (No reflection on the other places I've been, mind you. In my view, both Glenn and Jane are absolutely top drawer -- real heroes, in fact -- it's just that I feel more at home here.)

---

by: William Timberman @ Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 23:54:05 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I am literally the only person I am aware of (4.00 / 2)

that regularly or semi-regularly blogs on here, DKos, Glenn and Digby--and I've occasionally blogged on FDL, but it's not one of my regulars. So I guess that I have some very minor claim to fame. I also used to blog on TalkLeft, but had a similar experience with BTD to what you had with Jane, and decided that it was best to leave and not belabor the matter. Its commenters skew towards the very cynical and self-congratulatory, which to me is as objectionable, if not more so, than extreme adulation.

DKos is clearly not for everyone. I mainly like its breadth, and occasionally depth, and am a known regular there. Of course, as with all "big tent" experiences, it's got more than its share of, oh, "stuff". But it's "home base" right now, with this site an increasingly close second. Plus, it prevents me from forgetting that not everyone on the left thinks alike--or thinks at all. They say "know your enemy", but I'd say that it's important to know your "friends", too.

Digby is also full of cynical leftie types, but they're funnier and more interesting than those on TL, so I keep going back. And Glenn's blog, well, no need to explain. Not sure why I keep posting there, except out of respect for Glenn, and to let him know that not everyone who reads his blog is a latter-day Patrick Henry wannabe (I had the most nasty pie with recently over the 10th amendment, of all things--the libbies over there reject implied powers and all that other neat stuff that SCOTUS has seen fit to approve these past 220 years--hell, some of them aren't quite keen on judicial review!).

But yeah, in terms of depth and quality of discussion, generally uninterrupted by angry botswarms and fainting Obamamaniacs, and the intelligence and maturity level of members, this site rocks. And the diaries are top-notch, too, of course.

The liberal soul shall be made fat. He who waters shall be watered also himself. (Proverbs 11:25)

---

by: kovie @ Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 00:38:28 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Thanks, kovie (4.00 / 2)

I didn't know who BTD was either.

Like William Timberman, I kind of followed Paul Rosenberg over here also but very sporadically. I used to comment very occasionally on UT (at Salon) and for some time was reading all the comments there-until most of the sane people like William Timberman and Paul left-and invariably liked yours.

I kept mostly to Glenn's blog, Steve Benen's blog, and a few others, so only recently,with this health care debate, have I begun to figure out the various fractures and fissures between all these blogs-or that there even are such things, at least on this issue. (I'm a little dense that way.) Your little conversation with WT makes me wish there were a meta-blog about these blogs, just to make sense of them all, but that might be a bit too John Malkovich.

---

by: jeffweinberg @ Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 01:53:28 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Nightmare! (4.00 / 1)

John Malkovich might be okay, especially on the weekends, which tend to be more meta than weekdays anyway. My fear is that we'd go all the way to Woody Allen, and have to make a run for it, with a hail of rotten fruit thrown by the other commenters raining down around us.

---

by: William Timberman @ Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 02:12:36 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Well, this may be not exactly it (0.00 / 0)

--no rotten fruit--but it still might have that loony manic quality you had in mind. :p I was thinking it'd be the other bloggers doing the chasing, actually.

---

by: jeffweinberg @ Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 03:03:33 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

:-) (0.00 / 0)

Thanks for that. It'd been lost in the mists of memory. I'm thinking Monty Python might also be appropriate, as they almost always are.

---

by: William Timberman @ Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 09:56:18 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yup, similar experience with FDL here. (4.00 / 1)

Got into a struggle with TRex, who not only is (or was) moderator there, but an extremely arrogant and vicious person. Shows that lefties aren't necessarily better people than right wingers. However, I noticed that FDL doesn't encourage real discussion, and that any deviation from the commonly accepted point of views there will be punished with extremely mean attacks from the crowd there. Not my cup of coffee.

This is not to say that FDL doesn't advance progressive politics, or that it isn't a posiitve force of activism. It sure is, and they rightly deserve praise for that. It's only that tolerance towards other left wing stances, or differences in evaluation, isn't their strong point.

It's more like the People's Front of Judea against the Judean People's Front and those other outfits...

Let it be said by our children's children that when we were tested, we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back, nor did we falter

---

by: Gray @ Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 08:37:26 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sectarianism has always been the bane of the left (0.00 / 0)

Maybe it's because we're such passionate folks by nature, or more likely, because the smaller the pie, the bigger the fights over who gets what.

---

by: William Timberman @ Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 10:00:22 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Humiliate Democrats? (4.00 / 2)

I'm not certain that is even possible.


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."

---

by: SpitBall @ Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 08:19:03 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

"Accomodationist"? That's very carefully worded. (0.00 / 0)

I like Ezra, but sometimes he's a real appeasenick. Imho he's becoming more and more of a villager since he joined the WaPo posse.

Let it be said by our children's children that when we were tested, we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back, nor did we falter

---

by: Gray @ Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 08:43:15 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Wonk vs Hack (4.00 / 4)

Ezra is a wonk, not a hack.  In terms of details of health care policy he know far more and is much saner then most here.

That said, he is totally wrong about how to wield power and how to get the best possible bill.  Note that Ezra completely agrees that the bill Chris and everyone here wants is much, much better than anything Baucus would create.

I've heard it said that wonks from both parties get along with other wonks (and the same can be said for the hacks) then the wonks and hacks get along with each other.  This is just an example of this in action.

---

by: Mark Matson @ Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 23:10:02 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

The Augean Stables (4.00 / 2)

Yes, I've done actual politics in my day, so I'm equipped to grasp the truth of what you're saying. Then again, I watched the progress of Martin Luther King and the SCLC with my own eyes, and helped turned public opinion on the Viet Nam war around with my own hands. As you might imagine, such experiences have tempered my enthusiasm for wonks. It's a trees-and-forest appreciation of the limitations of wonkery which motivates me to speak ill of Ezra, not a lack of appreciation of his considerable talents as a wonk. We can do better -- must do better -- especially in times like these, when what we need above all is a flamethrower, followed in due course by a fire hose.

---

by: William Timberman @ Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 23:32:24 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Right, let's not forget the überwonk of the 60s: Robert McNamara (4.00 / 2)

Not necessarily a bad person, but an outstanding example of a wonkish brain unbound by ethical considerations being a very dangerous combination.

Let it be said by our children's children that when we were tested, we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back, nor did we falter

---

by: Gray @ Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 08:46:45 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Don't forget ... (4.00 / 2)

Ezra now works for the evil WaPo.  My guess is that he's had doors opened to him because of who he works for .. and so doesn't want to piss off Baucus .. or whomever else now talks to him given that he can say the WaPo is calling

---

by: Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle @ Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 23:39:38 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

A policy wonk, but a politics hack (4.00 / 3)

These are not the same thing. To speak intelligently about either in a public venue, you have to be able to speak intelligently about both, as they are inseparable.

And what you say makes sense. Even Doug Holtz-Eakin, the former CBO director and McCain's economics advisor during the campaign, who kept spouting some of the most asinine boiletplate free market crapola so long as he was hitched to that miserable wagon, is actually quite reasonable when he's not shilling for the GOP or gunning for another top job. As a policy analyst, he's pretty good (he was even honest about SS during Bush's privatization fiasco). As a political analyst, he's a hack. We've got similar types on our side, apparently.

The liberal soul shall be made fat. He who waters shall be watered also himself. (Proverbs 11:25)

---

by: kovie @ Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 23:48:06 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Good point, but shouldn't you post that at his blog, William? :D (4.00 / 1)

I guess Ezra reads OpenLeft sometimes, or even often, but not necessarily our comment threads. And his blog at WaPo has a comment section of its own. Just avoid four letter words, or else the filter will kick in...
:D

Let it be said by our children's children that when we were tested, we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back, nor did we falter

---

by: Gray @ Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 04:58:14 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

It might make more sense, yes, to go to the source (0.00 / 0)

The truth is, though, that I was writing my comment in the heat of the moment. Ezra's running narrative is actually very useful, in that he really does seem to know what these incomprehensible folks -- in the Senate especially -- are actually worried about. So why attack him in his own house, is my thought. My quarrel is not with his analysis so much, as with the narrowness of vision which makes that analysis marketable as the only reasonable narrative of our common ills. When you think about it, he's not the only one responsible for that sad state of affairs anyway.

---

by: William Timberman @ Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 10:07:26 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Say what you will about Ezra, he doesn't shy away from disagreement (0.00 / 0)

And looking at the comment threads there recently, there seems to be more criticism from the right than from the left. So, your opinion would be helpful to provide a better balance. Pls don't shy away from posting there!

I would do it myself, I occasionally add my two eurocent there, but I'm somehow not in the right mood today...

Let it be said by our children's children that when we were tested, we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back, nor did we falter

---

by: Gray @ Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 10:12:23 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yes!!!! (4.00 / 5)

This burned out retread from the 60's can enjoy when young people will speak truth to power.  After 40 years as a self-employed pharmacist who watched his business slowly be stolen by a blood sucking insurance industry, I can tell you this, you'll never defeat that industry unless you put a stake through their heart.  Every inch of wiggle room you leave them, they and their servants at the Supreme Court will open to a mile.  

Chris is right.  This is war and the opposition will take any concession as a sign of weakness and an opportunity to defeat us.  Obama has made it clear he will only respect us if we force him to.  The causes that we fight for are larger than any politician.  And longer than any lifetime.

---

by: WorkingClassDemocrat @ Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 21:57:59 PM CDT

You're welcome! (4.00 / 1)

CSPAN originally scheduled it a few days ago, and I dutifully set my DVR to record it, only to have it replaced at the last minute by some stupid RW "Steamboat Institute" panel with some pro-insurance industry shills like Tony Blankley the Galen Institute. Thankfully, they finally showed it, and I caught it in time. Every progressive should watch this video. Unfortunately, CSPAN has not yet archived the entire panel, which is unusual for them.

The liberal soul shall be made fat. He who waters shall be watered also himself. (Proverbs 11:25)

---

by: kovie @ Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 22:40:20 PM CDT

Great Rant! (4.00 / 4)

Although, really, I don't consider this a rant at all.  This is clearly articulated reason.

Also, this is the reason I support the Progressive Block.  You are 100% right that this is the only thing keeping health care reform from spiraling away.

---

by: Mark Matson @ Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 23:29:19 PM CDT

I'm ready to leave the country (0.00 / 0)

I am just tired of fighting. You only get one life afterall. I am thinking of picking a nice northern European country and just getting the hell out.

---

by: rickroberts @ Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 23:35:40 PM CDT

Don't go to England (4.00 / 3)

Apparently they take you out and shoot you when you turn 65. In Scotland they feed you to Old Nessie and then toss a caber in your honor. In Sweden, well, let's just say that there's a reason those meatballs taste so "funny".

Ah, the modern GOP, such funny, funny people...

The liberal soul shall be made fat. He who waters shall be watered also himself. (Proverbs 11:25)

---

by: kovie @ Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 23:52:48 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Where are you going to go? (0.00 / 0)

No one will let us in.  Canada seems like an obvious choice, but they really hate it when Americans seek health care asylum up there and make it almost impossible.  All the European countries as well.  Eastern Europe has more open immigration, but they have decided to go with right wing governments as of late, so, there doesn't seem to be any escape!

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!

---

by: lord_mike @ Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 01:01:36 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

The US isn't really welcoming economic asylum seekers, either... (4.00 / 2)

...so this should come as no surprise...
It's everywhere the same: Either you have a rare qualification that makes you a sought-after professional, or you have tons of money. If neither of both is true, then you need a lot of luck.

Let it be said by our children's children that when we were tested, we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back, nor did we falter

---

by: Gray @ Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 10:23:39 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Chris trying to explain the concept of (4.00 / 2)

leverage.

---

by: Tocque Deville @ Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 23:57:26 PM CDT

Good points (4.00 / 1)

Or, really, your only point--fear is ultimately the only reliable motivator, when it comes to bad faith players. Nothing doth concentrate the mind like the prospect of a hanging.

I happen to agree with it. I'm not talking about childish WTO-style bashing in of windows and stomping up and down. I mean going after the worst Dems (a long list, I know), via primary challenges, ad campaigns, HQ stakeouts and protests, rallies, publicizing who they get their donations from, etc. Basically, make them realize that if they don't move left, they move out.

The liberal soul shall be made fat. He who waters shall be watered also himself. (Proverbs 11:25)

---

by: kovie @ Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 01:39:10 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

An interesting idea (0.00 / 0)

I like it -- and it could easily be realized by providing a reasonable facsimile of Michael Moore for every Blue Dog in the House and Senate. We wouldn't have to stop there, either. We could deploy two each for Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, and an entire van load for the White House. Imagine the possibilities if everywhere that the President and Rahm Emanuel or David Axelrod went, there'd always be at least one Michael Moore there to hassle them.

All funded, of course, by the Fool Me Once Foundation, a non-profit enterprise supported by viewers like us.

---

by: William Timberman @ Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 02:01:13 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

It wouldn't have to be every bad Dem (0.00 / 0)

I think you start out with the most egregious and vulnerable ones. Knock a couple of them out, or embarrass them, and the rest get the message. Those that don't, you go after them next. And so on. It's almost a mob-like approach. It works. And they deserve it. It's not like we'd be losing anyone valuable.

Also, the person you're looking for is Mike Stark. He's kind of a lower-budget version of Michael Moore. He helped defeat George Allen a few years ago by getting his thugs to assault him when he was trying to ask him some embarrassing questions.

Guerrilla progressivism, responsibly done. One can't win merely with ideas and thoughtful persuasion.

The liberal soul shall be made fat. He who waters shall be watered also himself. (Proverbs 11:25)

---

by: kovie @ Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 03:14:23 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Just to be clear (0.00 / 0)

When I talk about letting them lose, I mean in a general election. Yes it would benefit Republicans, but only in the short term.

Primary challenges are a pipe dream.  

---

by: Tocque Deville @ Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 02:05:52 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Primary Challengers (4.00 / 1)

You don't have to win primary challenges for them to be affective, you just need them to spend money.  They hate it when the have to take primaries seriously.

---

by: Mark Matson @ Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 02:23:55 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

And sometimes they actually succeed (0.00 / 0)

E.g. Donna Edwards. But I think that even the threat of a serious primary challenge could shift many Dems ever so slightly to the left.

The liberal soul shall be made fat. He who waters shall be watered also himself. (Proverbs 11:25)

---

by: kovie @ Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 03:11:00 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Only in the primary campaign (0.00 / 0)

"But I think that even the threat of a serious primary challenge could shift many Dems ever so slightly to the left"

Come on. We've seen it over and over and over again. As soon as the threat/leverage is gone, so is the desirable behavior.

With Obama, he took a hard right the day he won the primary.

---

by: Tocque Deville @ Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 11:04:58 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Obama? (0.00 / 0)

Hell, if anything Obama is the first Democrat I've seen swing left after the primary.  His entire primary campaign was based on "bipartisanship", a subject he more or less dropped when he had to run against Mr. Bipartisanship himself (according to Washington insiders, at least.)

Perhaps the most progressive speech he every gave during the election was his acceptance speech, launching general campaign.

---

by: Mark Matson @ Wed Sep 09, 2009 at 13:13:10 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

You rocked with that rant Chris !!! (0.00 / 0)

Boy, keep that up and we are gonna make you run for elected office or something like that...

---

by: KC Bill 13 @ Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 09:35:54 AM CDT