j_b

I probably wouldn't be too pleased to be on the same route with speedo man and have to rescue his ass. When you have lots of newby/joesixpack traffic on a mountain, there is probably a threshold when some regulations should come in.

White House as Helpless Victim on Health Care by Glenn Greenwald Of all the posts I wrote this year, the one that produced the most vociferious email backlash -- easily -- was this one from August, which examined substantial evidence showing that, contrary to Obama's occasional public statements in support of a public option, the White House clearly intended from the start that the final health care reform bill would contain no such provision and was actively and privately participating in efforts to shape a final bill without it. From the start, assuaging the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries was a central preoccupation of the White House -- hence the deal negotiated in strict secrecy with Pharma to ban bulk price negotiations and drug reimportation, a blatant violation of both Obama's campaign positions on those issues and his promise to conduct all negotiations out in the open (on C-SPAN). Indeed, Democrats led the way yesterday in killing drug re-importation, which they endlessly claimed to support back when they couldn't pass it. The administration wants not only to prevent industry money from funding an anti-health-care-reform campaign, but also wants to ensure that the Democratic Party -- rather than the GOP -- will continue to be the prime recipient of industry largesse. As was painfully predictable all along, the final bill will not have any form of public option, nor will it include the wildly popular expansion of Medicare coverage. Obama supporters are eager to depict the White House as nothing more than a helpless victim in all of this -- the President so deeply wanted a more progressive bill but was sadly thwarted in his noble efforts by those inhumane, corrupt Congressional "centrists." Right. The evidence was overwhelming from the start that the White House was not only indifferent, but opposed, to the provisions most important to progressives. The administration is getting the bill which they, more or less, wanted from the start -- the one that is a huge boon to the health insurance and pharmaceutical industry. more: http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2009/12/16/white_house/index.html

you are conflating your perception of the "corporate media" with the (supposed) views of an individual (PP). Nope. I am saying that PP is regurgitating what he reads in the corporate media because he too wants us to believe that Obama is too far left. He, too, wants us to believe that Obama hasn't been bi-partisan enough.

I wonder what that there really means? "systematically practices McCarthyism" Is he blacklisting again? Wiki says "Today the term is used more generally to describe demagogic, reckless, and unsubstantiated accusations, as well as public attacks on the character or patriotism of political opponents"...I don't see that from PP. America never recovered from McCarthyism. All public display of dissent is portrayed as un-American and likely the work of communists by the rightwing. The purpose is to instill fear in potential dissenters and therefore to suppress dissent like McCarthy did in his time. Rightwingers who use McCarthyist tactics are goons that act against liberty and freedom of speech. I don't believe I really need to point out how often PP claims/infers that his left wing opponent is some kind of un-American commie. The number of my posts calling him out for doing so, speaks for itself.

That is true because I believe that some (not all) of those in the middle are in fact...independents! spare me. The constant drumbeat in the corporate media since early summer has been: "loss of independent = loss of the middle", which is a total lie meant to imply that Obama is too far to the left whereas he is in fact losing the left wing because he is governing on the right. I have caught you several times making the very same false inference.

So, what should I be ashamed of? Standing up to your goonish finger pointing of commies and other "un-Americans" or KKK's neanderthalian verbal abuse?

Acting so pompous and being so demeaning and insulting to your intellectual inferiors! Educate and lift up the discourse! After all we certainly can't. Help us out of the basement. Says the goon who systematically practices McCarthyism. I have been the subject of constant verbal abuse and sandbox behavior by neanderthals like KKK over the last 7 years and I defend myself the only way I can. If they want to raise the level of their discourse nobody, least of all myself, is preventing them from doing so.

There little need to reprint all of your drivel. You assumed that a loss in approval rating among independents meant a loss of approval from the middle.

what about?

Oh dear, correcting a grammatical error is apparently all it takes to comfort you in your world view.

True enough, and people shouldn't be so naive considering the evidence provided but accountability is still an essential part of the relationship between politicians and their constituencies. Without it, democracy is impossible.

I must say it isn't a great surprise to see them not delivering on their promises considering their dismal record of giving to Bush almost everything he wanted for 8 years, including 2 yrs with a majority in congress. But all this blaming of Lieberman, doesn't really place the blame where it should: http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/72375-lieberman-expresses-regret-to-colleagues-over-healthcare-tension-

you can make jokes about it all you want but your refusal to address the point I made (independents aren't the middle) points to a lack of intellectual honesty.

If you don't understand that PP was basing his argument on conflating 'independent' with 'middle', which are in fact 2 very different concepts, you ought to just stop embarrass yourself with every post. As to that poll about Guantanamo, lemme guess: the corporate media has been fear-mongering relentlessly about moving the Guantanamo detainees to US soil. It's the only thing I can come up with given I don't understand how Republicans could be gaining any traction with such stupid argument.

As I showed earlier, Lieberman was campaigning for universal healthcare as recently as 2006. Lieberman is the prototypical corporate tool favored by the DNC to prevent anti-war Democrats from entering congress (thank you Rahm Emmanuel). Either progressives challenge corporate shills for control of the Democratic party, or the party will be destroyed in the coming socio-economic crisis.

Newsflash, tool: Obama doesn't run the Senate or hand out chairmanships. Sorry for interjecting some reality into your delusional rant about Lieberman but hairsplitting isn't going to be very helpful at this point. We all know you'd welcome Attila's obstruction to progress, there is no need to pretend the dude has integrity.

Quit lying. I have been all over Obama's betrayal in these pages as recently as today.

You were the one saying he had integrity, which is clearly a lie since he has been fighting tooth and nail against what he stood for during his campaign. For the record, Obama endorsed Lieberman for reelection against a strong progressive candidate in 2006 and left him with his committee chairmanships in the senate despite his support for McCain during the campaign (one among many back-stab).

Lieberman was for universal healthcare and/or a national healthcare program like congress for everyone as recently as 2006 when he campaigned for the senate. http://www.dailykos.com/tv/w/002298/ "Lieberman has long been one of the industry’s favorite players on the hill, accepting more than $1 million in campaign contributions from the insurance industry and more than $600,000 from pharmaceuticals and related healthcare-products companies. But his ties run deeper than that. His wife Hadassah previously worked for two lobbying firms, Hill & Knowlton and APCO, handling matters for their healthcare and pharmaceuticals clients." http://harpers.org/archive/2009/10/hbc-90005996

Arf! Sorry to be dense. I have been on DTail in conditions like that and didn't feel like mixed climbing for many moons after.

[video:youtube]sgOWTM5R2DA

Sorry to be contrary but it doesn't sound like it was in to me ...

that or he was the candidate with most financial support from commercial banks, hedge funds, investment funds, etc ...

Link to poll Darn logic still escaping you: disapproval of A doesn't imply approval of B (disapproving Democrats doesn't imply approval of Republicans). As shown by the same poll with approval rating for Republicans in congress worse than Bush at the end of his 8-yr reign of doom.

I am sure the press won't mind giving space to the families since there are so many other stories of far reaching importance to be covered these days.