Home | About | Donate

Longtime Advocate Has 'Never Seen More Energy' Behind Medicare-for-All


#1

Longtime Advocate Has 'Never Seen More Energy' Behind Medicare-for-All

Deirdre Fulton, staff writer

As lawmakers and the public awaited the Congressional Budget Office's score on the GOP's "horrific" Trumpcare bill, Congressional Democrats on Tuesday doubled-down on their call for a Medicare-for-All system to provide universal healthcare to all Americans.


Outrage Aimed at Democrat for Pulling Plug on California Single-Payer Bill
#2

We need a National Health Care party -- running right now --
and if Bernie Sanders would give up supporting the corrupt DP he would
be the one to do it.


#3

Note who's on the list: Nancy Pelosi, my "representative."

Unlike anywhere else in the US, to my knowledge, San Franciscans have VOTED FOR single payer: In 1994, the majority of San Franciscans, including the majority in Pelosi's district, voted in favor of Prop. 186, which would have established a single payer system in California. Yet she continues to fail to support it. It boggles my mind how my otherwise sane neighbors could continue to vote for her.

Meanwhile, here in California, the Democratic legislature twice passed single payer legislation, only to have it vetoed by Arnold Swvartzenneggger. But with a Democratic governor for the past 7 years, our heavily Democratic legislature can't quite seem to pass single payer legislation anymore. Wink, wink.

I've got $20 here saying that the "no can do" Democrats won't get a single payer system going in any state or the US by 2020, at least one that doesn't have fatal flaws, like not being universal, not being progressively paid, not portable (so you don't lose it if you want to quit your job), having huge deductibles, or not covering all necessary medical conditions. (A bet I'd love to lose.)


#4

From this "Dem-Green Berner: I say - Kick the dem-corporate bums back to the repubs, where they belong - where-the-sun-don't-shine" On Youtube, check out "Republican Gets Destroyed During Townhall Over Trumpcare" - May 10

As shown in the above clip from an hours-long, face-to-face, townhall meeting, late one evening in New Jersey (14 mins): We now stare down the "double-barrel shotgun" of a sinisterly, cruel mob of corporate welfare recipients posing as our government representatives.

"Trumpcare" deservedly got handed a delightful, slow-motion, "pie in the face" as a certain congress-critter repub Tom MacArthur of New Jersey gets takin' to the tool shed for a good tongue-lashin', "good ole whippin'"! He is solely responsible for resuscitating and pushing the d.o.a. AND immoral profits-over-people, private insurance, transfer of wealth from us-the-poor to us-the-already rich - and the meeting hall visitors stood up in applause.

Remember, its "IMPROVED Medicare for All". No outa pocket premiums or co-pays. Everyone in. No one out. Includes Eyes and Dental. Cradle to grave coverage. Those who can, pay into the healthcare-single-payer fund as they are judged to be able to pay - by their income (including stocks, rents, etc.). We cannot "fire" private insurers but we can sure vote out a government -run single-payer provider!

People over Profits. Tonight, down here in backwater southern Arizona, the repub congress-critter, Martha McSally, is allowing us a townhall "over the phone" - limited to one hour. She has declined many, if not all, face-to-face townhalls that we had to conduct with any empty seat.

WE DO NOT HAVE A DEMOCRACY in Arizona. I bet I'm not alone. These political animals of the corporate left and right are cruel, selfish and violent. See you on my street corner every weekend from now on. My sign says "STOP SHOPPING! HONK three times if IF YOU CAN! lol"

Ciao


#5

How about simply a progressive party? The US is alone among 1st world countries in having only 2 political parties in its congress/parliament. We've got a conservative, centrist party -- the Democrats. (What are their big issues -- preserving social security and Medicare, preserving the environment. These are conservative positions in the real meaning of the word.) And we have a nutty right-wing party -- the Republicans.

But the US is lacking a party where there's a socialist or labor party in other countries, a party that puts workers ahead of corporations, people ahead of profits, and that thinks that the "free market" doesn't represent the crowning achievement of the human species.


#6

When doing an Internet search on - "Republican Gets Destroyed During Townhall Over Trumpcare" I found that the corporate "polywogs" have infiltrated the search protocol with "red herrings" of this 108,000 viewed masterpiece - I guess, they are running from this as fast as their fat wallets will permit. So, here 'tiz:


#7

Hmm - so where is Sanders bill in the Senate? Any day now, eh? All he has to do is take Conyers bill and slap a Sen number on it - so why doesn't he? I keep asking this question and never get an answer .... Could it be because if he did there would then be growing pressure on D Sen to support it? Shucks, can't have that, can we ... we have to concentrate on saving that POS the ACA - the one about which Sanders has said he "helped write it" - the one he said he doesn't want to toss, he wants to "fix", even though it is fundamentally opposed to the idea he says he supports - SP, and can't be "fixed"

C'mon folks - if you want Medicare for All, ya gotta vote Green - the Dems will string you along to get votes but never produce it .... and their excuse, "the Rs", when in fact they had Congress and the Pres at the start of O's reign and produced - that gift to the insurance co.s and big phrma - the ACA ...

Remember what happened in CA - when the Dems had the leg and passed it here knowing the Gov. would veto it - then when they had a D governor, they failed to pass it .... this is a charade - how long will it take for folks to figure this out ...


#8

Good post! Right on ,,,


#9

But replacing her with a Dem won't help any ,,,,,


#10

We have, and have had, one - the GP - all we gotta do is support it ...


#11

Update from "polywogville" - According to relayed information to those of us in the backwaters of repub-ville, Arizona-stan - Ms. McSally must cancel the so-called townhall, a la telephone, which was on healthcare. We wish her well. Sorry, too, about the just released C.B.O. report, too. 23-million loose healthcare due to proposed "Trumpcare" - and worse. Gee, "Who woulda thunk it?" (previous quote from Greg Brown musical lyrics)


#12

Hi fairley

IMO, we need a National Health Care Party -- the rest would follow.

Just concentrating on that one issue and moving it through Congress would substantially
change America for the better while moving the momentum of the nation from right to left.

1 -- Progressive is a strange word which seems to have been floated out there to divert from

the meaning of liberal ... which I'm proud to say I am.

2 -- From what I've seen of the Green Party being beaten down -- and actually where one representative

went to NJ legislature, they very quickly destroyed him and he was forced to quit.

There are other new parties rising and probably very worthwhile, but after taking a look at them can
barely remember their names -- though they were all dedicated to good causes and generally liberal.

3 -- Actually we don't have 2 political parties are both of them are owned by the same corporations.

Koch Bros/John Birch Society is heavily invested in both parties(along with other large corporations)
over the last decades having created the DLC in the DP and recruited Bill Clinton.
Representatives of Koch Bros and those other large corporations served on Executive Board of DLC.
From what I saw, the DLC pretty much ran the party and soliciting of representatives by Rahm Emmanuel
and others was generally for right-wing/Blue Dogs. And they pretty much stopped supporting liberals or
progressives.

Needless to say, the GOP has long been owned not only by right wing, but now radically and extreme
right wing.

(Btw, we don't have any true "conservatives" in government any longer where they would protect Nature
and our environment. We've had a $50 BILLION campaign by the oil industry which ensured that no
true conservatives existed in Congress any longer.)

4 -- National Health Care -- Medicare for All -- is in itself a democratic socialist ideal.

It would eliminate middle-men (insurance companies) from health care and be based in preventive health
care, not "cures."

Didn't plan on making this reply this loud but the bolding and large print were volunteered and I'm just
going with it. :slight_smile:


#13

Hi Aquifer --

Look I'm with you in your acknowledgment that the Dem Party is right wing, corrupt, criminal and finished.
IMO, so is Bernie Sanders.
I'm not talking about a Dem Party/National Health Care thing -- I'm talking about a new party.
If Sanders did that, I think the momentum from this Spring/Summer would work and certainly though
Obamacare existed at that time, Sanders was talking about need for Medicare 4 All in the primaries.

I voted Green -- and in fact it may have been my last vote because the system is so corrupt and rigged.
And the primaries couldn't have made that clearer.

Yes -- it's all corrupt.

Are you against the idea of a National Health Care for All Party/Medicare 4 All New Party.

If not, who would you suggest might head it up?

Who would either of us trust?


#14

Nothing to do with capitalism -- (corporations) is of the left.
It is all right wing. Despite any labels which might suggest otherwise.

Capitalism is suicidal -- and it's taking us all down with it.

Unregulated capitalism is merely organized crime.


#15

Just want to add a PS to this article on health care --

If you've been persuaded at all to believe that Big Pharma's vaccines deserve
absolute protection from questioning and challenge by parents and citizens ...

PLEASE at least take a look at the ingredients in vaccines and understand that,
unlike their drugs, vaccines do not have to pass safety standards.

Look into the "outbreaks" of childhood diseases which are meant to frighten you
and realize that these vaccines themselves are at fault when even "vaccinated"
children come down with the measles.

Also keep in mind that in NJ right now 1 in every 4 of our children has Autism.
And that those looking at these vaccines see rising connections to deaths from
Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, to Colic and Projectile Spitting.
Understand that Dr. Wakefield actually found remnants of the MMR vaccine in
the guts of children who had Autism whom he was treating for bowel dysfunction.
GI tract problems.

Take a look at whistleblower, Dr. Wm. Thompson who was involved in a study ten
years ago which showed that African American males (between ages of 18 months
and 36 months) who are administered the MMR vaccine have a 340% greater risk of
being diagnosed in future with Autism. Documents connected to that study were
mainly destroyed ...

Except Dr. Thompson kept copies of the study and turned them over to Rep. Bill Posey,
R/Florida a few years ago. Posey and his team have been trying to have Congress
hear the testimony of Dr. Thompson, but so far that has been denied.

PLEASE, it's not very complicated to look into these issues on your own.

All of our children in the US and around the world are at risk of serious health problems
from these vaccines.


#16

A bit confused - do you mean that you think Sanders is corrupt like the DP or that he also thinks the DP is corrupt?

Here;s my question - what do you mean by a "new party? Do you mean a duly constituted political party, with a ballot line that has primaries and runs it's own candidates or one that just calls itself a party and simply cross endorses a duopoly candidate - in this case most probably a D who mouths support for SP - like Sanders ... we have a bunch of the latter - and they are essentially "pressure groups'" by another name.....they are rather easily co-opted by the DP or the RP still leaving you with only 2 duopoly choices .. If you mean the former, who would run against a D, Sanders is definitely not your man - he has made that perfectly clear - still leaving you with only 2 duopoly choices .. he will stick with the DP ... So would your new party vote against a D - Sander has discouraged that, to say the least, for ages now and he would support the D - a perfect example - he supported "never gonna have SP: Clinton over "Medicare for All" Stein ,,

A problem with single issue parties is that it is people, not issues, that are on the ballot - so, what if your person sounds great on SP but sucks on foreign policy (like Sanders) - does that matter? What the duopoly has mastered doing is appealing to a bunch of single issue constituencies who only really care about their own issue - so if the guy/gal sounds good to them on that issue, hey that's all that really counts - i think you can think of a number of such on "both sides" of the aisle ....

Indeed 3rd parties have come and gone - the GP has been around for awhile - with candidates on ballots - it indeed has some organizational issues, but what party doesn't - I don't know what happened in NJ - was the guy someone who shouldn't have been a GP candidate in the first place? I know it is hard to get good folks to run in a party that doesn't have a well oiled machine, little money and meager media .... They are few and far between - but when they do - those folks are dedicated indeed - I think Stein and Margaret Flowers are 2 examples - Dr, Flowers ran for Senate from MD as a Green and now is helping spearhead a campaign to push it - Health Over Profit, you could be damn sure she would introduce it lickety-split if she got in and Dr. Stein has had Medicare for All as a fundamental plank of her platform from the beginning ...

So frankly, I don't think we need a new party for this - i think we have one, good on this and a bunch of other issues as well ... we just need to support and get involved with it ... we need to put the splinters together, not make more ,,, :slight_smile:


#17

Hi Aquifer --

I don't think that Bernie Sanders is corrupt.
But I do very much believe that he thinks that much of the DP is corrupt, but not as
corrupt as the GOP.
I think he is reluctant to see the DP as being as fascist as the GOP, though he
obviously has to know that they have the same owners.

As Sanders is very well aware of the murderous nature of those who funded and
controlled Hitler/Nazis in the Holocaust, he must realistically know that this could
happen again. How that leads him to allegedly trust the DP is anyone's guess.

Also think that the report of Sanders being "pushed around" to support HRC are
likely true -- plus likely threats against his family.

But that still doesn't answer the WHY of Bernie Sanders continuing on with the DP.
I don't know the answer ... but we do know what Trump is doing which probably
proves to Sanders that ... HRC would have been better.
IMO, you can't be a little bit pregnant, just as you can't be a little bit fascist.
Both parties are criminally fascist. I don't mean each and every member, but I
do question why those members who I suspect of being honest continue on with
a party which is "almost totally fascist."
Why isn't Al Franken walking away, for one?

By new party, I mean just that -- a new party and certainly NOT one which endorses
duopoly candidates.

If I'm right that Sanders was intimidated -- and if you see him sitting there it is very
clear that he is very unhappy with having had to nominate HRC -- the threats may
be continuing. They need time to let all Sanders said to the American public fade
from memory. I think this party would have to happen from the bottom up.
I doubt that I will be voting again -- even for Green party -- because of the corruption
of the system of elections along with obvious rigging. And, it seems clear that many
liberal/DP voters didn't vote. And I only expect that to continue to accelerate.
Let's face it, Obama made clear that the DP was corporate-fascist - that he was
playing games with their GOP allies and he pretty much finished off the party.

The advantage is I think Sanders would like to be on the level -- the disadvantage is
he can be threatened and could be forced to betray a new party he was leading.
So likely may Corbyn be threatened because this is the only way the right wing can rise.
Clearly many of us can see that he exists in a very threatened atmosphere.
We've seen this before.

But, OK -- if Sanders wouldn't be the one to lead this Mediare4All party, who would be?

Next up, Roseanne Barr?

But aren't the DP and GOP single issue parties, as well based in corporate/fascism?
It may look like a lot of issues, but when you come down to it the only thing on the table
is corruption and betrayal. Right????

The idea of the party would be this simple thrust for National Health Care --
This would have to be a step in the direction of revolution, actually.
Because ... as you're pointing out everyone is corruptible under threat --
which means we not only need a change from our financial system of capitalism to
democratic socialism, but a complete change in government and elections.

There is no reason why the party would not also be anti-War -- 84% of the nation is
against these wars and want them stopped. Even higher internationally.

Naturally, the party would support LABOR and human rights . .
On and on -- New Deal, whatever is healthy and good for the nation and the planet.
We know what all of those things are.
Ending the MIC - Ending Monopoly by Elites/wealthy.

The GOP was finished in 2008 with Obama's landslide -- until Obama resurrected
them from the ashes.

Disagree -- Those who remain with DP right now usually do so out of "lesser evil"
fear and a confidence in US which is naive, especially in regard to corporate/fascism.
What the DP has done is sell itself to corporate-fascists that they serve in criminal ways.
There is still something of a curtain pulled over a good deal of this as yet, but it is
being pulled down. Not by our press, of course, but by an awakening public.
The ball has been moved out of the control of MSM.

And there are many ways still at this time to wrest control from Elites, but
those actions require a public united as labor and a firm understanding of the
inevitability of Global Warming's threat to the planet and humanity.

I have had experience with the Green party and have served as a candidate for them.

But we have to recognize that part of the revolution we need actually happened with
the financing of Sanders and then Green Party directly from the public.
It's a new pathway and the public has caught on to it -- very clearly so!!

(Actually the guy served as a Dem in the NJ legislature as I recall. But he switched to
Green Party which pretty much ended his political career. He was constantly harassed
and finally left.)

One of the most important things to do is to have a party out there pushing a universal
ideal -- health care for all.

I admire Stein and I voted for her.

Global Warming is the Wild Card that they have to keep hidden --
but the need for National Health Care is on every Americans mind all of the time.
Not only what we need but what can be taken away from us -- as Trump is making so clear.
But I don't think the imagine of Obama and his betrayals will disappear either.
The public knows both parties are criminally corrupt, imo.

Leaders are immensely important -- that's why Sanders was so important -- that's why Nader was important and was
so brutally attacked by the DP -- that's why they are murdering liberal/progressive leaders all the time ...

And, actually notice that Nader removed himself somewhat from the Green Party -- HE became the campaign/the party.

So frankly, I don't think we need a new party for this - i think we have one, good on this and a bunch of other issues as well ... we just need to support and get involved with it ... we need to put the splinters together, not make more ,,, :slight_smile:

:slight_smile:


#18

Hi Aquifer --

I don't think that Bernie Sanders is corrupt.
But I do very much believe that he thinks that much of the DP is corrupt, but not as
corrupt as the GOP.
I think he is reluctant to see the DP as being as fascist as the GOP, though he
obviously has to know that they have the same owners.

As Sanders is very well aware of the murderous nature of those who funded and
controlled Hitler/Nazis in the Holocaust, he must realistically know that this could
happen again. How that leads him to allegedly trust the DP is anyone's guess.

Also think that the report of Sanders being "pushed around" to support HRC are
likely true -- plus likely threats against his family.

But that still doesn't answer the WHY of Bernie Sanders continuing on with the DP.
I don't know the answer ... but we do know what Trump is doing which probably
proves to Sanders that ... HRC would have been better.
IMO, you can't be a little bit pregnant, just as you can't be a little bit fascist.
Both parties are criminally fascist. I don't mean each and every member, but I
do question why those members who I suspect of being honest continue on with
a party which is "almost totally fascist."
Why isn't Al Franken walking away, for one?

By new party, I mean just that -- a new party and certainly NOT one which endorses
duopoly candidates.

If I'm right that Sanders was intimidated -- and if you see him sitting there it is very
clear that he is very unhappy with having had to nominate HRC -- the threats may
be continuing. They need time to let all Sanders said to the American public fade
from memory ... to forget the tremendous response to Sanders' campaign/agenda.
I doubt that I will be voting again -- even for Green party -- because of the corruption
of the system of elections along with obvious rigging. I think it's time to walk away.
And, it seems clear that many liberal/DP voters didn't vote. And I only expect that to
continue to accelerate.
Let's face it, Obama made clear that the DP was corporate-fascist from day #1;
that he was game-playing with GOP allies and he pretty much finished off the party.

The advantage is I think Sanders would like to be on the level -- the disadvantage is
he can be threatened and could be forced to betray a new party he was leading.
So likely may Corbyn be threatened because this is the only way the right wing can rise.
Clearly many of us can see that he exists in a very threatened atmosphere.
We've seen this before.

But, OK -- if Sanders wouldn't be the one to lead this Mediare4All party, who would be?

Next up, Roseanne Barr?

But aren't the DP and GOP single issue parties, as well, based in corporate/fascism?
It may look like a lot of issues, but when you come down to it the only thing on the table
is corruption and betrayal. Right????

The idea of the party would be this simple thrust for National Health Care --
This would have to be a step in the direction of revolution, actually.
Because ... as you're pointing out everyone is corruptible under threat --
which means we not only need a change from our financial system of capitalism to
democratic socialism, but a complete change in government and elections.

There is no reason why the party would not also be anti-War -- 84% of the nation is
against these wars and want them stopped. Even higher internationally.

Naturally, the party would support LABOR and human rights . .
On and on -- New Deal, whatever is healthy and good for the nation and the planet.
We know what all of those things are.
Ending the MIC - Ending Monopoly by Elites/wealthy.

The GOP was finished in 2008 with Obama's landslide -- until Obama resurrected
them from the ashes.

Disagree -- Those who remain with DP right now usually do so out of "lesser evil"
fear and a confidence in US which is naive, especially in regard to corporate/fascism.
What the DP has done is sell itself to corporate-fascists that they serve in criminal ways.
There is still something of a curtain pulled over a good deal of this as yet, but it is
being pulled down. Not by our press, of course, but by an awakening public.
The ball has been moved out of the control of MSM.

And there are many ways still at this time to wrest control from Elites, but
those actions require a public united as labor and a firm understanding of the
inevitability and urgency of Global Warming's threat to the planet and humanity.

I have had experience with the Green party and have served as a candidate for them.

But we have to recognize that part of the revolution we need actually happened with
the financing of Sanders and then Green Party directly from the public.
It's a new pathway and the public has caught on to it -- very clearly so!!

(Actually the guy served as a Dem in the NJ legislature as I recall. But he switched to
Green Party which pretty much ended his political career. He was constantly harassed
and finally left.)

One of the most important things to do is to have a party out there pushing a universal
ideal -- health care for all.

I admire Stein and I voted for her.

Global Warming is the Wild Card that they have to keep hidden --
but the need for National Health Care is on every Americans mind all of the time.
Not only what we need but what can be taken away from us -- as Trump is making so clear.
But I don't think the imagine of Obama and his betrayals will disappear either.
The public knows both parties are criminally corrupt, imo.

Leaders are immensely important -- that's why Sanders was so important -- that's why Nader was important
and was so brutally attacked by the DP -- that's why they are murdering liberal/progressive leaders all the time ...
In fact, a long time ago they began to murder them even before they were able to rise to any prominence.

And, actually notice that Nader removed himself somewhat from the Green Party -- HE became the campaign/the party.

So frankly, I don't think we need a new party for this - i think we have one, good on this and a bunch of other issues as well ... we just need to support and get involved with it ... we need to put the splinters together, not make more ,,, :slight_smile:

:slight_smile:


#19

Thanks for this -- !!

Both corporate-fascist parties are a threat to humanity at this point --
and this is fervor and fear on the part of the public which we should
embrace and support with a National Health Care Party . . . . imo.

:slight_smile:


#20

I don't think Sanders is corrupt either - what I have said, consistently, is that he is a "true believer", as apparently many (too many, IMO) are - he believes TINA to the D/Rs and he has plighted his troth to the Ds - so he will do what he believes is best for the party, even when it means putting his purported principles on the back burner. And he will oppose any 3rd party from the left, aka "spoiler" that threatens its hold on its traditional base - he will work to keep that base in the DP tent, yet at the same time will do nothing that would rock the DP PTB's boat .... he has demonstrated this over and over what I call party over principle .......But,, as has been said, you can't have a revolution in a counterrevolutionary party ... And as long as we fail to get serious about threatening the duopoly we will go nowhere but down. So this continued fascination with Sanders is, IMO, a distraction from taking us where we need to go - he is serving as that distraction because he believes that the DP is where we need to be .... That is the sum and substance of my critique - and it is by turns amazing and amusing the vitriol that is tossed at me for making this simple basic argument - as if it is a mortal sin in prog circles to critique the latest prog icon ( i got the same bit when i critiqued O in '08)

Also, I haven't said that "everyone is corruptible under threat ....

I agree with much of your analysis - as to why other reputed "prog leaders" stick with the DP - it appears for the same reason sanders does - they believe TINA to the D/Rs ....

I still don't understand why you do not see the Gp in the role of this "new party"...