Jack & Jill Politics

A crooked bitch in a crooked wig!

Oh, my!!!

Y'all keeping it gutter up in here. LOL and SMH.

You guys do know that college football is on, right? Right? We all need to take a break and enjoy this three day weekend. Myself included. I'll see y'all on Tuesday.

Because she's a gutter bitch who was willing to endorse the Queen Bee
of centrist Democrats. A bitch who is consistently ranked as one of
the most corrupt congressman. A bitch who chases dollars for her
family like any two bit hi, but she wants to question the integrity of
my President. Fuck that crooked, crooked wig wearing bitch!

Tell it!! I ain't never forgot how her and John Lewis were clapping at the debate! Supporting HRC....but then WJC made her husband an ambassordor and he promised to do stuff for her grandson..so she was on the CLinton train..BIG time!!

Can't stand none of the CBC...they ALL chose NOT to endorse their own member...the ONLY Black Senator...GMAFB.

It was All about THEM!!

Enjoy the weekend, carolinagirl.

now that was funny. lol.

maxine waters is a phony hypocrite. she better hope enough chicano/as don't vote her ass out next time around.

LOL! But is she a consistent, phony, hypocrite?

I'm getting really disenchanted with our president. All Obama has to do is do what he said he was going to do... Or at least try. Could you imagine Bush trying to compromise with the Democrats about anything? Even things bad for the country? Obama has the house, the senate and the presidency and he still wants to bargain with these Republicans who really want his destruction. Why is he bargaining with these people? They wish somebody would put a bullet in his head, and they would say so if it wasn't illegal. I think Obama looks very weak right now and I'm really getting disappointed. It was nice to have a black president, but I'd rather have a good progressive white one if that would get more done.

"Obama has the house, the senate and the presidency "

This is sheer ignorance. The only thing Obama has is the Presidency. Didn't you take 8th grade civics? Obama does not own the Congress. We the people are suppose TO, but we have been pushed out by corporate interests.

Corporations own the Congress...not Obama.

Your wishful fantasy about a white progressive would have been WJC...how did that turn out?

Did we get health reform under him? Or did HRC make one big political mess? What she did to health reform is equivalent to GWB's incompetence and WMD propaganda..complete ineptitude. So...how'd your white progressive work out? How'd WJC do? O that's right

His corporate arm was the DLC, The same blue dog, corporate cabal that controlled Congress then, controlls it now.

You should learn more about national political history,how legislation is passed, political lobbyists and the power and money that controls Congress before you write commentary like yours that shows such blatant ignorance of the political facts.

Maybe you need to text kwame or write a letter to Chrysler cause you are striking out just like them.


geez

Rose,
Thanks for your post... Not only do I know civics, I TEACH civics at Strodes college outside of London. I also taught at Marygrove college in Detroit. So you can take that "You should learn more about national political history" $hit down the road somewhere. So of course I know he doesn't OWN congress... But I'm also not into hero worship either. He promised to get this done and that's what I expect. If he can't get it done, he needs to get out of the way and let someone who can. Bush pushed through an illegal war, tax cuts for the rich, illegal survellience, torture and no-bid contracts for Halliburton... and he didn't have the congressional backing that Obama does. So before you try to be condescending maybe you should brush up on your recent history of how a disciplined team with determination can get something done even WITHOUT the legislative advantages that Obama presently has. I gave Obama over $1900 last year and I hold that he should be accountable for what he promised to do. And when you try to bring up Kwame and Chrysler that just lets me know that you probably are every bit of the ignorant broad that you come off as. Read my previous posts and profile and then kick rocks...

"I TEACH civics at Strodes college outside of London. I also taught at Marygrove college in Detroit."

I knew you were a toolbag with this post. No one ever talks like that. Say what you feel but don't act like just because you teach a class that you have some license on knowledge and everyone should
worship you.

"I gave Obama over $1900 last year and I hold that he should be accountable for what he promised to do."

You were a dead giveaway with this statement. It's not about facts you are just bitter.

Poor Guns3000... I'm going to try to type this very slowly, in the hope that you read it very slowly... Please try to U-N-D-E-R-S-T-A-N-D. Let's deconstruct your post and the inferences made therein.

"I knew you were a toolbag with this post. No one ever talks like that." Oh, thanks. That I teach civics is just a fact. That doesn't make my opinion any more valid than the next persons, but it was in response to White Rose Buddy's comments to my first post. Those comments: "Didn't you take 8th grade civics?" and "You should learn more about national political history,how legislation is passed, political lobbyists and the power and money that controls Congress before you write commentary like yours that shows such blatant ignorance of the political facts."
So in response I was just letting WRB know that I wasn't just coming out of right field somewhere, not to brag. Then you wrote, " Say what you feel but don't act like just because you teach a class that you have some license on knowledge and everyone should worship you." I never said that anyone should worship me about anything. I'm sorry if that statement intimidated you, but that's your problem, not mine. I don't see how our disagreement about this position gives you license to hurl insults. We just disagree. I know PHD's who disagree about everything, but that doesn't mean one of them is 100% right and the other 100% wrong. I have a question for you. Is your faith in your position so weak that you can't bear to contemplate that it may be wrong? Is it so weak that you can't even bear to hear another point of view without name-calling? You sound like those teabaggers and birthers who only want to hear positions that they already agree with.
Then you posted, ""I gave Obama over $1900 last year and I hold that he should be accountable for what he promised to do." You were a dead giveaway with this statement. It's not about facts you are just bitter." The fact that I gave that amount to the campaign last year is just true. I'm not bragging, I just wanted others to know that I'm not a concern troll in here trying to stir up trouble. And bitter about what?!? I invested in this campaign for a reason. My main reason, besides electing the first AA President, was to further the progressive agenda... Particularly single payer healthcare. I know someone close who died for lack of healthcare. I also know that the single payer system works well because I use the NHS over here in the UK, and it's great. I believe that if Obama would put as much effort and energy into getting universal healthcare as he did in getting elected we would be further along than we are now. I'm more of a progressive than an Obama fan, and I don't know how progressive Obama really is. The end results of this Healthcare fight is going to tell me a lot about Obama. Yeah I know... The seanate, the senate... Whatever. So with that, I'm done with this conversation. It's taken up too much of my time, and space in my thoughts. So you run along back to your mutual admiration society where feel comfortable, but I warn you that if you step outside of your comfort zone you may find people who disagree with you... If you don't have a valid argument for them, I guess you can just call them names... that's the adult thing to do.

I assuming you paid attention to the campaign but what you gave the indication that Obama was going "to further the progressive agenda." When did Obama say he was going to initiate a single payer system? You said it yourself that you don't know how progressive Obama really is. It sounds like you progressives have set yourselves up for disappointment. I thought I was voting for a moderate Democrat and from the looks of things that's exactly what I got. And for you to say the "seanate, the senate.. Whatever" Just means you are dismissing the facts just so you can rant or the "seanate" part of the argument just went over head. I have hard to believing that a professor doesnt understand the power of the senators so I believe you are just irrationally ranting. As far as your "extended vacation" in the UK. I was born on that island and I refuse to lectured by a "visitor" about the NHS.

Blah, blah, blah... "I was born on that island and I refuse to lectured by a "visitor" about the NHS."
Well, I was born in the USA and I refuse to be lectured by an illegal immigrant about American politics... now beat it.

Excuse me, Mr. MotorCity
but, but, but...if you teach civics, then you know Obama is NOT the reason, so why you bytching at him? Are you thinking we have a parliament and monarchy now that you teach in London..or what?

"But I'm also not into hero worship either. He promised to get this done and that's what I expect. If he can't get it done, he needs to get out of the way and let someone who can"

Hero worship? WTF does hero worship have to do with the constitution and the THREE CO-EQUAL branches of government that you teach at MaryGrove...out there on 7mi/Lodge...surely you know this is not a monarchy and Obama is not KIng. He can't command Congress to do diddly! Mr. Civics...what the heck are you so misguided, bamboozled and flummoxed about that you think this is about HERO worship? GMAFB....you think you get to assert some manner of independent thought based on the President not 'passing legislation" or what? The President can only sign or veto legislation..was that question on your last Civics exam...you know the one of about how the President exercises checks/balance over Congressional legislative bills.

"Bush pushed through an illegal war, tax cuts for the rich, illegal survellience, torture and no-bid contracts for Halliburton."

And? What's the problem here, mr. civics..don't you know those were all GOOD for corporate America and the military/industrial complex...that is what the GOP does..they support corporate not the average unemployed citizen or bankrupt MotorCity. Did you actually believe a corporate controlled Congress was going to back any reform that slashed their profits? Bush had more corporate congressional backing then Obama has ever had! Seems to me, your nose is so deep in those Civics texts, you forgot how Congress works, and how powerful the lobbies are that support corporate interest. Surely, you know that the healthcare insurance lobbyists is THE most powerful and monied? It ain't got shyt to do with discipline and everything to do with Money...you know like the O'Jays say...money, money, monNAY..do funny things to some people yall, CASH Money..Dollar bills, yeah NOT discipline.

Name the legislative advantages Obama has. Name them, please. Please don't come back with no BS about 60 votes, cause I done told your civicminded self, those votes are controlled by corporate!

Let's be clear...I do not care how much money you gave Obama...lots of us gave and raised lots of cash as well. So, your piddly $1900 don't mean squat you didnt even max out.

I know all about Kwame, Chrysler and the rest of the MotorCity scandals. WestSidehere...GreenMachineinthehouse....and GoBlue4EVER!

Keep your exPat self in the UK....maybe you know more about their parliament and got it twisted with our DEMOCRACY.

Marygrove is a kiddie school for those who can't matriculate at WayneState or MichiganState and your profile has to be for toddlers too.
Grow up..you not even ready to run with the big dogs.

Mr. I taught Civics at MaryGrove....bwhahahahahahahahah!!

Silly... According to your warped and immature logic we should just not vote... since all you can rant about is "Corporate control" of congress. If they control everything, why should we even show up or volunteer or do any of that? That's why a lot of us sent small donations... "You didn't even max out?" LOL! WTF does that have to do with anything? I maxed out at church, dummy!) According to you, Obama can't do anything. He can't twist arms... can't threaten reconciliation (messy process) or anything? I beg to differ. And because you know a little about the D doesn't give your silly argument anymore merit. And I'm proud of my tenure at Marygrove which is an excellent city college... You know, your coming off with insults in your first post just reveals to me the shallowness of your arguments. And I fell into the trap, for which I apologize. So you go ahead and blame the Senate for everything that's wrong with this debacle, while I'll place it squarely at the feet of Mr. Obama who should have shown some leadership and put the heat on these senators when they went home for the recess. So, you keep blowin the big O and I'll call him on his Bull$hit when I smell it... and we'll just agree to disagree. Big dawgs... LMMFAO!!!

Hey BadBoy..you just keep comin... true MotorCity grit!

"According to your warped and immature logic we should just not vote... since all you can rant about is "Corporate control" of congress."

Wrong. You conflate dissent with lack of hero worship and now corporate controlled congress with defeatism. NO, No, NO!! We not only must vote, we must organize, we must galvanize, we have to wake up the citizenry. What you teach is the most valuable tool CIVICS ...for citizens to understand HOW this democracy works they must be EDUCATED, CIVICALLY educated.

We can defeat the corporate interests IF we are AWARE that it is THEY who are the enemy. That is why I get so upset about commentary like yours. You just were bytching at the President as if HE is the reason, this legislation is not being written to benefit the public instead of the corporations, HE is NOT. You make me furious when you claimed to be civically educated yet you focus on the President...why? Why was your ire not at Congress and their obvious sell out to the monied interest? How can you teach Civics, and tell your students it is the President.

The President needs their Help!! He needs them to get out and vote those corporate shills out of the Congress. So, no NO, NO!! We must VOTE!

"You know, your coming off with insults in your first post just reveals to me the shallowness of your arguments"

I apologize. That was wrong on my part. I just have been so embattled at this site, with nonsense commentary similiar to yours, and when you 'new' name popped up...I was not considerate..just fed up. I do apologize. You are right. It was unwarranted to blast you with superior arguments so condescendingly; having been goaded by the gross misinformation in your post.


"According to you, Obama can't do anything. He can't twist arms... can't threaten reconciliation (messy process) or anything?"

NO. While he can't twist arms, cause he does not know enough skull/bones history...he can use the reconciliation process. Which has been on the table from jump. From the very first time he addressed the joint session of Congress. He told them he was going to use reconciliation to pass Health reform..that he can and will do..no matter how messy

"So you go ahead and blame the Senate for everything that's wrong with this debacle, while I'll place it squarely at the feet of Mr. Obama who should have shown some leadership and put the heat on these senators when they went home for the recess."

See, it is these type of glittering ignorant generalities that make me write such supercilious commentary. See, it just makes me livid...but let me ask you, this....tell me..what heat is there that you believe the President can put on Senators who have more seniority in Congress than him, Senators who were there before he was born, like his VP? Tell me, just what power do you think he wields with those Senators?




And I am going to refrain from making another wiseass crack about big dawgs...other than to say as Coleman did

We own the water and will charge you a fortune for it...so

Hit 8 mile if you can't run with the big dawgs.
.

go ahead white rose. The patience of Job I tell ya! Go girl.

Naw, I am just an empty nester : ) with the luxury of time. Guurl, this site had me so fired up b4 I left for ATL, I went to the spa twice, for 90 min. massages on Weds and Fri!

Unlike cable, I can't turn off JJP when MY President is embattled.

I am just infuriated by all these posts attacking him! Worst of all, these folks claim to be politically aware and yet they black? They don't seem to get what it means to be black and leader. Like MCbadboy coming up in here and claiming to teach Civics at the college level. Know this, he doesn't have tenure at MaryGrove nor Stroud's.. he had to answer to both those administrations. Perhaps, he is working on his masters in PolSci or something while he is over there in London...but for darn sho, he will need a PhD...b4 he learns the political history he needs in order not to come up in here posting that ignorance and attacking the President, when he doesn't know political dynamics/history in this own country!

Val, just you wait..when you are an empty nester...you will find a way to funnel that energy differently too!! lol

Cheerleaders... so 1970's

Political Ignorance...so new millenium.

So you can get some too...
"Rose,
Thanks for your post... Not only do I know civics, I TEACH civics at Strodes college outside of London. I also taught at Marygrove college in Detroit. So you can take that "You should learn more about national political history" $hit down the road somewhere. So of course I know he doesn't OWN congress... But I'm also not into hero worship either. He promised to get this done and that's what I expect. If he can't get it done, he needs to get out of the way and let someone who can. Bush pushed through an illegal war, tax cuts for the rich, illegal survellience, torture and no-bid contracts for Halliburton... and he didn't have the congressional backing that Obama does. So before you try to be condescending maybe you should brush up on your recent history of how a disciplined team with determination can get something done even WITHOUT the legislative advantages that Obama presently has. I gave Obama over $1900 last year and I hold that he should be accountable for what he promised to do. And when you try to bring up Kwame and Chrysler that just lets me know that you probably are every bit of the ignorant broad that you come off as. Read my previous posts and profile and then kick rocks..."

Thanks for sharing, MotorCityBadBoy; I hope you get can get a refund.

LMAO!!

Gurrrlll, please, like the president comes with a fucking warranty. Hundreds of thousands of folks donated to that campaign. I wonder how many of them want their money back now?

hahahahah...plus he said:
"I maxed out at church, dummy!"

lord have mercy...think he can boot the minister...or does he just scoop up the collection plate and stuff his pockets, nowadays!

I am like Ni@#a PLEASE!

whoEVEr heard of blessing refunds!?

Bwhahahahahaah!!

LMBAO

Please read/share KAREN'S STORY.

" My Sister Died Today WITH Health Coverage
Could NOT Afford Life-Saving Medicine "

KAREN'S STORY: (Sept.1,2009)

By Greg Jones
Blacks4Barack
National Director

Those in opposition of health reform claim that the 47 million uninsured have access to medical care via emergency at hospitals. My sister HAD health coverage and WAS at emergency 3 days before she died.

While politicians including President Obama debate over dollars, protecting insurance companies and politics this puts a human face on the true need for strong health care reform in America.

Please read/share KAREN'S STORY.

http://blacks4barack.blogspot.com/2009/09/my-si...

This reads like a malpractice case. If she was that sick, she should have been admitted to the hospital and received intravenous antibiotics, albuterol ippb, possibly iv steroids.

I wonder how many previous times she had visited that particular ER, and how many times they did not receive payment for her care? Was she as far as the hospital was concerned, underinsured for the costs to them? Sounds like it.

Cause I certainly agree, the severity of her pneumonia coupled with her disability, screams she should have been admitted.

So sad, she died

The Obama administration has failed to move the discourse on American healthcare forward in a positive and progressive manner. If he placates to Big Pharm and HMOs, he will have difficulty selling any other meaningful legislation to the electorate.

During last year’s elections, then Senator Obama presented himself to the American people as being moral and ethical. He should be consistent and do what is moral and ethical: aggressively back and sell an affordable, accessible national healthcare plan.

Hey soulsistah,

Good to see you. I haven't seen you in a while!

It's great to be back! I've been working like a galley slave. LOL!

AMEN. If Obama kicks the public option to the curb and buy into this bullshit trigger crap, he will have a very hard time in 2010 and 2012.

Remember he said, "Words matter", well Mr. President your words do matter in what you said during the campaign. You had us believing that we could pool together our resources and create a public option, you said have "insurance just like congress". Well, all the steps you are taking is not for the basic interest of this country, but to help insurance companies. The very ones who have taken our premiums and continued to deny coverage. 39.6% claims of Pacific Care (one of the 5 largest in California) is denied. People that is almost 50%. And remember these are folks with HEALTH CARE COVERAGE. If we don't have a public option, who will keep the insurance companies honest? Because over the years they have been DISHONEST and DEATH BY SPREADSHEET is their mantra.

Wake up. Obama's eyebrows are on fire and rightly so. If he punks out and caves in for no public option, bad news down the road for him.

'Words matter", I agree IBS...and your commentary should be address to Mr. Senator! They are the ones refusing to vote for insurance reform, not MY President!!

Why do you continue to bash the President for what is clearly a SENATE issue? The President can talk, cajole and demand...but he canNOT make Senators vote for insurance reform!

Your frustration is misdirected...focus on those unWILLINGLY to VOTE for change rather than the President, who can only bring change with CONGRESS!!

Obama is not a czar or emperor, he can do NOTHING withOUT the Congress when it comes legislation, other than sign or veto.

The only eyebrows on fire are yours and your crazy irrationale rants making demands of the President...he does not control Congress he is not the target.



GEEZ!!

You know why?

Because the drive by voter don't understand congress. PERIOD. These are the 30 sec voter on the sound bite. We know this.

NEXT.

When shit is nasty, who gets blamed? The top of the party ticket. Hell, we gave GWB a bunch of grief that finally caught up with him. Obama KNOWS that this dissatisfication out here, will result and look to him. You saying, "don't blame the president" is all well and good. And I don't blame him wholly but 50%, the reality is that the average voter will BLAME HIM.

So, let us help him clean it up and salvage it while he can.

Again, no public option, hard losses in 2010. Does Obama need that to break outside the bubble and smell the air of "real Americans"?

"Because the drive by voter don't understand congress. PERIOD. These are the 30 sec voter on the sound bite. We know this."

O, but YOU Dooo? Cause your commentary sounds just like the drive by voter. You DO understand, yet you spew all this crazy wrongheaded drivel directed at the president anyway?

"When shit is nasty, who gets blamed? The top of the party ticket..Hell, we gave GWB a bunch of grief that finally caught up with him."

No. the way I learned it is that shyt rolls DOWN hill! The voters understood, it was not the President, when Newt and them held the budget hostage!

Further, as pertains to Bush, ...What I recall is No one was blaming Bush on Fox, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CNN...they all said his lies were true! The talking heads and GOP pundits all DEFENDED his ignorance and wrongheaded "I'm the decider" "Good job, Brownie", my Pet Goat, moments!

NEXT!

WRB,

What I would like the President to do is draw a line in the sand. I want him to state that he wants a public option or at the very least price controls on how much the insurance industry can charge. As it stands now, all the current bills make it mandatory for all of us to have health insurance, but I have not heard any discussion on how people will be able to afford it. Even if they can't refuse people with pre-existing conditions, it won't matter if it costs $1500/month or more. I want the President to take the stand that its my way or no way. If I can't get it this year, I'll bring it next year and every year I am in office. I don't want a bill passed that does not achieve the purposes of making health care accessible and affordable to everyone.

If you know that Congress writes the legislation, and that they write up bills that will be voted up...then how can Obama demand anything? Even a line in the sand. Moreover, Obama has repeatedly stated numerous times that he wants a public option..that has been done. Pelosi has said the House will not vote for a bill withOUT a public option. Most importantly, every single bill write now..other than the one coming from the SenateFinance Cmte..has a public option.

So, it seems to me Obama has drawn a line in the sand, and that all parties know what his preferences/demands are.

Having the President make demands in no way means that it is fait accompli...the Congress is completely independent of the Presidency..they are CO-EQUAL branches of government.

I just have one question for you...why do you think this is a Presidency problem vs. a Congressional one. Are you listening to the media spin. Have they convinced you that it is the President that is the problem instead of the House Blue Dogs, and GOP in the Senate? If so, why is that? Is it because you are unclear on the legislative process? Is it because you are unaware that Congress writes the bills, not the President. Is it because you have bought the right wing meme's?

Is it because you failed to listen to Obama during the campaign when he told you that he was only one person, and that we had to send him a Congress AS WELL in order for him to bring the change we want?

Just what is it?

"I just have one question for you...why do you think this is a Presidency problem vs. a Congressional one. Are you listening to the media spin."

(clapping)

Chill, WB they can't handle the truth like that be easy on them.

The President is the leader, and what I want first and foremost is for him to articulate and stand firmly on the principles that he campaigned for during the election. Remember, he adamantly disagreed with Clinton that health insurance should be mandatory. He agrees with it now!

In our system of government, there are checks and balances on each branch. You are right that it is Congress' job to pass the legislation, but if the President doesn't agree with it, he has the power to veto it. And, yes, I want President Obama to veto any health care bill that does not make health care afforable for everyone. There is a time to compromise, and there is a time to stand and fight! If you dont' stand for something, you will fall for anything. Tell Congress, particularly these Blue Dog Democrats, that if you don't vote for it this year, maybe your opponent will campaign on it in 2010 and take your seat (with his help). That's what I want. I don't want a watered down bill that won't make health care accessible and affordable.

"In our system of government, there are checks and balances on each branch"

And the only check/balance a President has when it comes to legislation is to sign or veto the bill.

End of story.

Why are you under the assumption that there is greater power in the Presidency when it comes to legislation. Where does that notion come from? What historical model are you referencing? Do you just accept that political skewed analysis from so called leading analyst/talking heads?

What are the facts facts that support your belief that the President can demand or command Congress to do anything when it comes to legislation, other than sign or veto it?

There are no irrational rants being made by IBS; he's laying the buck where it needs to stop. The President has constantly insisted on building bipartisan legislation, and it is getting him, as the kids say, "punked". It is time for him and whoever on his team, who is ready to stand 100% behind him to keep his pledge to the American people, to argue for the public option and every other major piece of reform they are looking for in this bill. He has the "bully pulpit" to say what is needed and to demand what he wants. It is no time to want to emulate Abraham Lincoln and continue to build a "Team of Rivals". These people do not engage with each other in that manner anymore, so it's time for him to lead the Democrats down the path alone. This is how Medicare, Social Security, and a whole host of bills have been enacted in the past.

We took him at his word, as IBS pointed out, and now it is time for him to stand behind that word. If not, he won't have any more credibility than those that have come before him. The Blue Dogs are going to get theirs in 2010 and 2012; Republicans are lining up to challenge them anyways, regardless of their so-called moderation on health care reform. Blanche Lincoln will see what not standing for something will do for her in Arkansas, as will several others.

Progressives have shown a lot of character by standing up to the Administration and Congressional leadership. They are willing to fight for the public option; why is the President so undecided? The compromise in this situation was that "single payer" wasn't even discussed, so the left has done its job. Now, it's time for President Obama to channel his inner Harry Truman and take ownership of the "buck", because it truly does stop dead at his doorstep.

"There are no irrational rants being made by IBS; he's laying the buck where it needs to stop."

O yes SHE is! The President is not an emperor. He does not control Congress. He does not write legislation.

"The President has constantly insisted on building bipartisan legislation, and it is getting him, as the kids say, "punked".

O please. I guess you must be one of those who thinks Obama can govern by fiat? That his wishes are Congresses command. Bipartisianship is just a tool. It is a tactic. It is a way to get folks to the table. If you think Obama, a Chicago politician, is getting 'punked' then you have no clue about how politics work. Besides, Obama is not being 'punked' the American public is! We are being punked by the health insurance industry because they control the Senate and the House! The Senators who are bought by the lobbyists are doing the bidding of their masters. If you want to place blame...call your Senators!

"This is how Medicare, Social Security, and a whole host of bills have been enacted in the past."

Really? It took 40 years and the assasination of a President to get Medicare! In the past, the corporations did not have as great of a stranglehold on Congress. But Reagan changed all that. He sold us out and the Bushes and their Caryle Group sold us out further. You do not know the history of this country and how things are done. Once your Presidents started being primarily Governors, they had no power to wield in Congress, becasue they did not know where the bodies were buried. LBJ & Nixon were the last Presidents to have tenure in Congress!

"Blanche Lincoln will see what not standing for something will do for her in Arkansas, as will several others. "

Sure. Lincoln is owed by Tyson and the insurers of her state, she has nothing to worry about.The Justice Department considers an industry to be “highly concentrated” if one company has 42 percent of the market. In Arkansas — Arkansas where Senator Lincoln hails from — Blue Cross Blue Shield has 75 percent of the market. If you take government self-insurance plans out of the equation, it's higher. The state ranks as the ninth most concentrated in the country.

Lincoln is not worried about the public, but she is worried about the public option costing her that Senate seat.

"Progressives have shown a lot of character by standing up to the Administration and Congressional leadership. They are willing to fight for the public option; why is the President so undecided?"

The Progressives have not shown a lot of character, they have demonstrated they do not undeerstand the art of negotiation...the stupidest thing to do is draw a line in the sand...once you do so, you negotiate from a position of weakness NOT strength!

The President is NOT undecided! There are no facts to support that assertion at all. There are rumors, innuendos, suggestions, conjecture and speculation but no facts. The President has said repeatedly he is FOR the public option. Can the SENATE get the votes for that? If not, it is not the President who wavered or was indecisive, rather it is the Senator. Call Baccus, Call Conrad...but whatEVER you do...don't blame the President.

Obama will SIGN the bill WITH a Public OPTION if they send him one!!

The buck stops in the Senate...dead in the Senate.

Let's KEEP REPEATING:

Obama will SIGN the bill WITH a Public OPTION if they send him one!!

Dang it, I'm taking a nice LONG walk. Carry on WRB!

What we are talking about is that it appears he will also sign one without a public option? The question that you and WRB have not answered is will you accept a health care bill without a public option?

My answer is the bill hasn't been signed with or without a public option.

The question is: Do I want to see a public option in the bill? Yes. I want to go to Paris next spring too. Will I go? Depends on if I plan and save, forego some things. It's more than likely I'll go, because I have control over my planning, spending, and saving. If something comes up where I'll need to adjust, I'll make the adjustments.

I've fought for the public option for jump. I've written to my congressman, the POTUS, canvased, called, attended town halls, and donated.

I EXPECT a public option. I accept what I expect.

So if and when the healthcare reform bill is signed, and it may or may not have some form of public option, the world's not coming to an end.

Folks will be disappointed, angry, hysterical, some even happy.... then what ? Throw in the towel and call it day? condemn the POTUS and threaten to primary his black ass?

No, I will do what he told me to do. Don't let him forget what he promised. Hold him to his promises. Make sure our voices are heard. Let him understand that we will not be "good soldiers" on this issue. This was one of the principle issues in his platform. Our pastor just gave a sermon on "Refusing to Compromise." Bush didn't compromise. His problem was that he stood for the wrong principles. I want President Obama to stand for what's right and not compromise on this issue.

So, let's see jdickenslaw...you want Obama to VETO ..ANY reform bill withOUT the public option?

And what will that accomplish?

"The question that you and WRB have not answered is will you accept a health care bill without a public option?"

Yes, I will...it is not my preference, but I believe a halve of a loaf is better than no loaf even if I want a whole loaf. I will fight, march, and donate for the public option and fight for the most concessions possible. It is the best way to go.

In the end though, it is better to get your foot in the door with something than to just stand on the outside...after I get the foot in..next comes the shoulder, then comes an entire leg...and finally we are in the room.

This nation is fooling itself, if it beleives with the corporate interests we are going to be able to get reform as we want it and if they believed that only electing a President was all that was necessary for reform. Obama told everyone he needed a Congress too, that it wasn't enough to just elect him.

Even Medicare was a huge compromise....and most folks are happy with it.

There are politics...and then there is reality.

Well, I guess we'll just have to disagree on this issue. Without cost controls on the insurance companies, any reform bill will be meaningless, because the people who already can't afford health insurance still won't be able to afford it. If it passes, not only will they not be able to afford it, it will be mandatory that they buy it. I have been in the situation where I simply couldn't afford to buy it, and I am sensitive to the issue of mandates without similar guarantees of affordability.

GAWD! You mean that healthcare bill with public option aint signed yet?

You know I screamed about that public option for about a week, remember.

"I WANT MY MUTHAFUCKING PUBLIC OPTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And I meant it then and I mean it now. Just not screaming as loudly. I took all the necessary actions I had the power to control, and now it is up to congress to lay it out and the POTUS to sign what he's given.

LMAO!!

I was screaming right with you!!


What's a po, lil ol black activist woman suppose to do?

I marched, I called, I fought, I wrote, I donated, I rallied.

Obama will SIGN the bill WITH a Public OPTION if they send him one!!

Guess, I will accept what Congress sends...cause even Klobuchar..ain't4 the public option..UnitedHealth owns her.

klobuchar? wow, sorry to hear that.

Oh yeah. See the thing is, caligirl. Amy's WRB and my homegirl. Minnesota born and raised. She's sold out to the insurance co.

I aint mad at her, she's doing what she gotta do, and come election time, I'm gonna make it do what it do.

All of these politicians are playing games, when it comes to healthcare, they're literally playing with folk's lives. They don't serve the greter needs of the people, I don't vote for any of them come election, and that included President Obama.

None of them gets a free pass. Four years... I'm watching.

Yep...we got to throw her under the bus.

UnitedHealth rules MN.

Franken ain't buying it though.

LMAO! Yep, the Kloubmiester is owned.

And that my dear is the harsh REALITY.

"The Progressives have not shown a lot of character, they have demonstrated they do not undeerstand the art of negotiation...the stupidest thing to do is draw a line in the sand...once you do so, you negotiate from a position of weakness NOT strength!"

That's not necessarily true. Drawing a line in the sand lets the opposition know exactly what you will fight for and what is non-negotiable. What I am saying is that the public option should be non-negotiable. We can negotiate on some other issues, such as cost, etc. When I negotiate, I let the other side know if an issue is so important that we will take our chances in Court rather than give it up in mediation or settlement. The question becomes are you prepared to do everything legally and ethically possible to achieve the result?

"Obama will SIGN the bill WITH a Public OPTION if they send him one!!"

EXACTAMUNDO

I don't want single payer and a lot other people don't want it either. There isn't or wasn't a possibility of single payer ever passing so when I keep hearing progressives talk about "compromising" on single payer I have to laugh. That was never on table. Obama never promised it because the progressives would be RANTING even more than they are now. Personally, I think the WH knew the public option was a long shot anyway. They will get a deal done. That's what you do when you negotiate. If I want to pay 80 my initial offer is 100.(Read that again for the slow ones). So when I start with HC Reform I say I want a package with a public option thinking that it may get dropped in the end because the blue dawgs may not go for it. See where I'm going with this.

It would have been more logical to say you want a package with single payer, thinking that it may get dropped in the end in favor of the public option. The only reason you give for not doing that is that "the progressives would be ranting even more than they are now". That doesn't make any sense.

By the way, are YOU in favor of the public option?

No it wouldn't. In negotiations your initial demand is something that you think is possible but not probable. I'll say it. A single payer HAS NEVER HAD THE CHANCE OF PASSING IN THE US CONGRESS. It wouldn't pass under this Congress. There isn't enough progressive Dems and even the Moderate Dems wouldn't entertain it. And obviously the Blue Dawgs and the Pachyderms would laugh at you for even trying. My stance on the public option has remained the same. Yes, I support a public option but I won't sacrifice meaningful Health care reform for it. I'll support a public option with two conditions. There has to be language in the bill to ensure that it is NOT "a road to single payer" AND it doesn't cover ELECTIVE abortions that don't NEED to be done for the woman's health. I'm cautiously Pro-Choice but pay for it out of your own pocket and not mine

Yes, that's right. The single-payer plan never had a chance of passing the Congress. That wasn't my point. The point is, the public option should have been the fallback position that you know from the beginning you'll have to take. Single-payer should have been the bargaining chip. And..it makes no sense to say that "the progressives would have been ranting even more" when most of them knew single-payer didn't have a chance. Most were and are willing to settle for the public option...you know, the middle-of-the-road position that has been recast as the far-left radical position, even though most people polled favor it.

"AND it doesn't cover ELECTIVE abortions that don't NEED to be done for the woman's health. I'm cautiously Pro-Choice but pay for it out of your own pocket and not mine"

If we end up with what Obama and the Blue Dogs actually want- a plan that hands insurers a whole new customer base on a silver platter, and</> gives those insurers taxpayer money to subsize them- then you'd be paying for abortions out of your pocket.

Well, see that is where you and I differ. I don't want to assume but it seems like you believe HC reform is about getting everyone covered with health insurance. I disagree. Health care reform to me is to lower the costs and removing discrimination for pre-existing conditions. Those are my two main issues. I'm assuming you want single payer but are settling for a public option. And that's why you are mad because YOU MAY not get that.

Did I say that I believe that? I don't think I said anything that would make me seem as if I'm dead set for having abortions covered in a public, or even an insurance company giveaway plan. It would bother me at all to see them disallowed.

"I'm assuming you want single payer but are settling for a public option. And that's why you are mad because YOU MAY not get that."

Yes, you are assuming. I'm actually against a single-payer plan. That's why I said I think it should have been used as a bargaining chip that you know would have to be bargained away. The public option should have been the compromise postion.

And...you still haven't addressed abortions being funded by taxpayer dollars in a government-subsidized, insurance company giveaway plan.

No, I got your point clearly and I understand your logic. The only thing is starting with single-payer as starting negotiation point was/is not realistic. That's what I'm saying. You have to start with something that is probable not a damn near an impossibility.

Right!

You not negotiating, when folks are like thinking..your request is out the phucking window. Negotiation starts from what folks believe is feasible. You say single payer, they just get up from the table and go...you's a crazy mofo...see ya...call us when you ready to talk real!

Like you said in the other example you ask for a hundred.well that is close enough to eighty dollars for folks to start dickering...but if you say $500...ain't no one gonna even barter...they just say O, and walk, .if they were thinking 80

some folks just do not get the art of negotiating...every body gotta feel they at least IN the game!

I hear you Wb. You can look through these posts and it's the same people whining about the President with their lack of understanding of how Congress works. I'm tired of telling people how bills get created. It's like they think that Obama can put Guns(no pun intended) to the Blue Dawgs' head and make them vote for the public option. The only people Senators have to answer to are their constituents. Why do you think people like Kennedy with all his missteps and grandstanding stayed in office so long? Sometimes I think people don't want to hear logic they just want to rant. They are frustrated. So they take the easiest target. OBAMA. If the President could create bills on his own why did the founders create the legislative branch in the first place? LOL

ICAM!!

"Guns",

You must have a simplistic view of how bills are created and should stop passing erroneous information to others. A course in the history of the Civil Rights Bill of 1964 will tell you that a President has more to do with major legislation getting written and passed than how you and WB seem to think. Go back and look at some of the conversations President Johnson had with then Senator Harry Byrd of Virginia about the Newport News Shipyard and how its building pertained to his support of the Civil Rights bill, as an overt racist, and then tell me that the President has nothing to do with the enactment of legislation in Congress. And to bring the late Senator Kennedy into the conversation in a negative light says a lot about ones character.

"A course in the history of the Civil Rights Bill of 1964 will tell you that a President has more to do with major legislation getting written and passed than how you and WB seem to think."

Thaddeus, perhaps it is you that needs a course in history. The Civil Rights bill as you may recall was the LAST major reform bill along with Medicare passed in this country. Why is that? Let's review.

LBJ was in the Congress for YEARS, almost 20 years...six in the House, six as Senate majority leader 2 as Senate minority leader and 2 as Senate majority whip..( note all when the south dominate the Democratic party) you get to know a lot when you are there that long! He knew where the bodies were buried and he was OWED. The Senator, who most wanted health reform that had the same clout as LBJ, just died. EMK..EMK was the one who could have sheparded this bill through and made those demands. Hmmm, now what did they have in common?

O that's right,,,Teddy had FOURTY years in the Senator...he knew a lot of shyt too, and was OWED too. In fact, he already had Baccus on board, and had him kowtowing, until he became ill. Baccus had to prove to Ted that he could champion the bill or Ted would have chopped him off and he would not have been Chair of Finance....seee how that works. Now, Obama has no tenure in the Senate, neither did Reagan, BushI or Bush II nor Carter or Clinton...ergo...no MAJOR REFORM legislation!!

Let's continue with the history lesson. After LBJ succeed in passing that legislation, he lost the South to the GOP for every generation after, they have been red ever since! Further, those Dixiecrats remaining in the Dem party DEFECTED to the GOP...despite it being the party of Lincoln! Fourty plus years the South has been the party of Lincoln now despite Lincoln being An anathema to Southern Confederacy. Now, no DEMOCRATIC President since the passage of the Civil Rights Act has ever received a MAJORITY white vote...got that? Not Carter, nor Clinton! And they were both stuck with Congresses who opposed them! Clinton tried to triangulate with his DLC corporate cabal, and STILL could not get any REFORMS that were against corporate interests. Matter of fact, he sold us out to the finance/banking industry by repealing the GlassStengall Act..that FDR put in to protect us...and GWB promptly took advantage of that! Our present economic banking crisis,? Courtesy of Clinton....Corporations OWN congress.

BTW, we got reform with Nixon too...he gave us affirmative action GOALS.

So, perhaps it is you who needs the review course to understand the history of legislative reform in this country, and how and why, the two party system is now one CORPORATE controlled party with different names. And more importantly, how Governors as Presidents work best for corporate interest, not the publics, we should be electing tenured Senators/congress people, who have the clout to get REFORM legislation passed ( if we want to use your LBJ model) cause they are OWED. But that would not be in corporations interest so we get Governors instead..who know nothing to squeeze the congress with...corporations are smart like that! After Nixon, no more Congress folks with tenure have won the Presidency...think about that!!

IOW's reform legislation since Nixon's Presidency don't have shyt to do with the Presidents, they are nothing but sitting ducks at the whim of the Congress and their corporate masters.




your turn : )

But you don't take into account the changing demographics that are currently turning the GOP into a regional, homogeneous, shrinking, elderly party. The comparison of the current situation to the defection of the dixiecrats in the 60's to the Republican party doesn't hold water.

"You don't take into account the changing demographics that are currently turning the GOP into a regional, homogeneous, shrinking, elderly party"

What does that have to do with the dynamics of passing MAJOR legislative reform? And the powers that are behind the lack of reform in the past 40 years?

Corporations are not regional, in terms of political influence.

"The comparison of the current situation to the defection of the dixiecrats in the 60's to the Republican party doesn't hold water."

What you really mean is that you did not comprehend how the defection of dixicrats impacted the corporate control of Congress and the GOP?

Gotcha...sorry...go look it up..I am done with political history review for the day.

Ouch, don't hurt'em WRB. LOL!

I swear WB i was trying to figure out the same thing. I didn't know how answer this guy. I read your post twice. I'm like WTF is Motor City talking about?

You were addressing the political process not voter demographics which has nothing to do with the price of rice in China.

Yes, Guns...I think MCBadBoy too busy 'teaching' civics to comprehend political history.

"Let's continue with the history lesson. After LBJ succeed in passing that legislation, he lost the South to the GOP for every generation after, they have been red ever since! Further, those Dixiecrats remaining in the Dem party DEFECTED to the GOP...despite it being the party of Lincoln! Fourty plus years the South has been the party of Lincoln now despite Lincoln being An anathema to Southern Confederacy. Now, no DEMOCRATIC President since the passage of the Civil Rights Act has ever received a MAJORITY white vote...got that?"

Motor the point you are missing you are reading wb's post in a vacuum. You have to read the post(s) she was addressing to understand what she was saying. What you initially said had absolutely nothing to do with her post.

Thanks Thaddeus, you just proved my point for me. Why would Johnson be having conversations with Byrd in first place if he didn't need him? Get it. Whether you get someone to vote for your legislation by hook or by crook you still NEED THEM. Why do you think so many politicians have been arrested on corruption charges? They are using nefarious means because they think it justifies the end. You can't make a baby by yourself. (Some of the feminists may disagree with that) LOL I never said the President has nothing to do with passing legislation. As far as Kennedy is concerned he did some great things but if you can call Byrd an "overt racist" which is true. I don't see why you get your feelings hurt if I say Kennedy had missteps. That is also true. Simplicity, is you coming on here with a "intellectual sounding" name not saying a damn thing. That's simplistic.

Guns even I had to duck on that one. lol

LOL! GAWD, I love this blog and its bloggers!

ouch!

Precisely!

Yes not triggers as a subsitute for the public option.

Quick aside
As much as I hate talking about how someone looks, whomever did Ms Waters makeover did a great job.

Yes, Waters did look particularly well done.

I noticed that too. Also, maybe it was just my TV, but the picture quality on Ms. Waters was very different from that on KO. She looked almost like she'd been filtered like in photoshop. Probably it is just b/c they have different technologies like hi def v. not hi def, but it was interesting. But she looks great. More to the point, she makes sense. I LOVE her!

Yeah, she is 70 and looks 50. They did a fabulous job. I noticed that last night.

TELL IT, Maxine! She made an excellent case for not accepting the "triggers."

My sense is this is a build up to next weeks' address by President Obama.

Apparently, you're one of our our reps who isn't owned by the insurance companies.

I agree Spirit.

KO said it best...they have already proved, by their record, that they will ignore triggers!

Waters is one of those people whose constituents will stand by her, and not be kowed by insurers..her district is mostly poor and majority black. They will not listen to the corporate cabal. IOW's her seat is safe.

WRB, did you read the letter to POTUS from the CBC? Morphus posted it on the Saturday open thread, I believe.

yes, it was...as you noted...well written and cogent.