When the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 25 that the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) subsidies for health insurance for the poor were indeed constitutional, liberals cheered. The last-ditch attempt by the right to gut President Obama’s signature act failed.
Too true. People running for Congress, the Senate, local offices, etc., etc., are needed far more than a president. If a president were elected even one who meant every word of his or her progressivespeak, who was totally for real in every possible way, he or she could never be anything more than a powerless figurehead who would be abused and blamed for everything without being able to accomplish anything.
It's a covert fact that big banks have been known to bet on both sides of a war by financing them. Similarly, titans of corporate industry frequently feather the nests of candidates in both parties so that whomever wins, quid pro quo arrangements can be easily made. Disaster Capitalism's chief commandment appears to be the law of the land: Thy Corporate Will (and policy) Be Done!
Perhaps from the mind of Frank Luntz came the idea of branding modern political race horses Democrat when their agenda would be no different than that of their former Republican opponents. In this way, the illusion of competition between two parties would deceive many into thinking that different interests were actually being served.
Most who read this site know Obama for the Trojan horse that he is, ditto Clinton.
While Obama promised to close Guantanamo... it's still open and maintaining an Orwellian system of imprisonment, and he was elected to stop at least some Middle East wars... as these continue on; this idea that padding the coffers of Insurance Companies is the same thing as health CARE has always been a Great Deception. Many in this forum understood that. I remember heated debates with Donna Smith on this very thing.
People in need of medical help and the financial assistance to meet its ridiculous costs under corporate hospitalization protocols argued that we should give Obama care a chance. That it's a good start.
The savvy understood that a major segment of Obama's campaign support (to the tune of a billion dollars) was FIRE = Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate entities. Obama Care meant payback time.
Persons trained in public relations, which is the kinder, gentler version of disinformation/propaganda come up with comforting TITLES for programs. Using a word like "care" implies caring, nurturing, and healing.
As Ms. Kolhatkar points out, this is merely a transfer of public money (through personal fees and government subsidies) to Big Insurance.
And that's why all this B.S. about TIPP and TPP being "good for jobs" and important to Americans is just more deception spewed from High Places.
The sell-out of human beings, the diminishment in the quality of life for so many, the false assurance of safety resulting from the various energy extraction systems that just about every week involve an oil spill, fire, explosion, train derailment, or slow steady toxic drip of fracking... show that there is Criminal Intent on the part of those with the authority to block or allow these systems of exploitation.
As I've said before, for all the investments in militarism masked as "National Security," the ACTUAL security of many human beings is increasingly more and more at risk. So much for tossing $ at guns and bombs... as people's bodies succumb to Cancer, Diabetes, Depression, Autism (in children), and so much else.
Policies are sickening and making people sick. And then the Insurance Mafia demands "protection money" for what its cohorts created. This is classic Shock Doctrine in its most devious and diabolical form.
Undermining Bernie Sanders because he is using the existing system (*it deadlocks around Dems & Republicans and shuts out 3rd parties as can be seen from past circumstances) seems like a sure way to get the usual suspect--a Bush or a Clinton--into office.
What makes you think there's enough time to get a different front-runner out there?
What makes you think that a total radical would appeal to a majority of voters in a nation where 65 million believe in End Times and fundamentalist Christian "values" like Holy War?
What makes you think such an iconoclast could get enough mass media limelight to be seen and heard by the millions of disaffected voters/citizens?
You're using a label to cripple the efforts of a candidate who has a lot of things right, and is exciting a lot of people.
I find this suspect.
The crux of everyone's issue with the ACA/Obamacare is that it takes a service that EVERY-LAST-MOTHER-LOVING-ONE-OF-US will NEED at least once in our lives and applies the American Capitalist angle to its implementation. That angle is this: Here in the US we are anti-communism. We are capitalists. And this means that whenever there is a service to be provided, we want a private enterprise to provide it, as opposed to the government. The thought is if companies compete for the business, then the profit margins will be driven down.
We can start off by questioning whether it is morally right to make a profit off of the suffering of others. Indeed, when people need medical care, they are often suffering; a point upon which I hope we all agree, whether it's influenza or broken bone, or heart attack.
Perhaps the more realistic solution is for us to acknowledge that our chosen system is indeed the best, but also acknowledge that those in positions of power throughout corporate and government entities, have DIS-PROPORTIONATELY compensated themselves far beyond reasonable limits. And if they won't restrain themselves, then we must equal the playing field by electing someone who will more fairly tax egregious, unearned salaries. While we still can.
That's why I say: I'm with Bernie!
"Persons trained in public relations, which is the kinder, gentler version of disinformation/propaganda come up with comforting TITLES for programs. Using a word like "care" implies caring, nurturing, and healing."
Everyone on CD should read Edward Bernays' "Propaganda" (1928).
Bernie Sanders is authentic. He's the best chance we have (small as it is) to get out from under the boot of the plutocrats. You're doing a real disservice to the people, and serving the plutocrats, in lumping Bernie in with the corporate wing of the Democratic party.
HealthCARE is a medical product, insurance is a financial product.
The ACA is insurance "reform", not healthcare reform. It is insurance reform that further stacks the deck against those seeking healthcare.
As soon as the Supreme Court announced its ACA decision this week, Aetna announced it was merging with Humana, fulfilling the deal Obama made with them in 2009, Less competition means higher premiums and a much bigger taxpayer funded bailouts when the too-big-to-fail insurance companies get their tits caught in the ringer, or at least allege the same.
ACA style reform was first introduced by Newt Gingrich 20 years ago. I guess Gingrich is happy that the Romneycare label deflected attention from him.
The GOP play the Brer Rabbit role superbly, pretending they don't want THEIR ACA, letting the Democrats take heat for voting it in.
Now the GOP are refining their "Chief Justice Roberts is too liberal" skit, even though Roberts' role is to make sure the corporations always win in the SCOTUS.
The problem that the people who want to vote for Bernie Sanders for president still don't see is that even if they succeed in electing him to the presidency, without a congress and a senate filled with majorities of like minded people you won't gain anything. That includes like minded people in cabinet positions, along with like minded people in control of the Pentagon, CIA, NSA and State Department.
As for the people who still insist on referring to the four liberals on the Supreme Court, I'll repeat myself one more time, "there are no liberals on the US Supreme Court"! You have five wacked out ultra-right wing ideologues and four center-right corporatists who were the ones with the help of the two least wacked right wing ideologues to allow this corporate bailout to remain law!
So if you really want to see real change in this country, you can't just elect a president, you need to elect a completely new government! Anything else, and you are just pushing the status quo! So you and all of your friends had better get started now finding like minded Democratic-Socialist to fill all of the positions that are all going to have to be filled! Otherwise you're just going to be wasting a bunch of time and a whole lot of money!
This message brought to you by the American Legislative Exchange Council, a/k/a ALEC & Chambers of Commerce, everywhere.
Go ahead and hold your breath for Eugene Debbs to rise up from the dead.
I know ALL of the arguments having heard them--MANY TIMES over in these threads.
Based on where our country is today, Bernie is the best shot.
Do I think he, as some kind of "hero action figure" will be able to single-handedly turn around the MIC or the grip of the Deep State? Hardly. Do I think Jill Stein has a shot in hell. No. So it really will once again come down to a Bush or a Clinton as THAT is the default mechanism generated by and from systemic fraud: which best characterizes the U.S. voting system today.
Then again, you might just want a neo-Nazi judging by your Holocaust/numbers/denial posts. No wonder you backed away from the screen name you were known by while regurgitating that hate speech.
On this subject, and the complex metrics of financial fraud (characterizing too many U.S. corporations and industries today), you are very astute. No one has sharper insight and puts it as succinctly as you do... on this item.
Yes, I agree with you. Even so, Bernie needs a decent oponent so the race does not become boring; I suggest None of the Above.
The insurance industry wanted their own bailout. Obamacare was what they got. I knew from the start that thsi was what was happening and was when I lost all faith in Obama's promises.
And now, he wants to make it worse with handing the globe to private corporations/banks etc with his "behind closed doors trade deal:
If you'll recall... the ACA was also negotiated "behind closed doors by the biggest conservative senators O could find + Wellpoint
The shame of the sham
The ACA was produced by Congress because all legislation must arise in Congress (it is in the Constitution; you could look it up). The ACA requires that people purchase private health insurance because this is what Congress wanted. My own former Senator (a Democrat), Cornhusker Kickback Ben Nelson announced that he would not vote for cloture if the bill contained a public option (Medicare and Medicaid are public insurance). Without a vote for cloture, bills are filibustered to death, so Harry Reid had no choice but to bring a bill to the floor without a public option.
Even if Bernie Sanders were to win the presidency, he could not get single-payer (public health insurance like Medicare) passed because Congress must pass legislation and Congress is controlled by Republicans. Republicans have opposed all social welfare legislation passed by Democrats since the time of FDR; e.g., Social Security, disability insurance, unemployment insurance, a minimum wage, Medicare, Medicaid and expanding Medicaid under the ACA.
Those of you who argue that there is no difference between Republicans and Democarts are simply ignorant.
Fraud is the use of deceit to take something from another person. Bernie Madoff defrauded people and is in jail. The excesses on Wall Street that caused the housing bubble and subsequent economic collapse were not the result of fraud because what they did was not against the law.
Capitalism is predicated on humans acting out of rational self-interest and the invisible hand of the market producing the best outcomes, But when people are motivated by self-interest, the result will be: "greed is good" (Gordon Gekko in the movie "Wall Street") and "selfishness is a virtue" (Ayn Rand).
Alan Greenspan (the white knight of laissez-faire capitalism) testified before Congress after the housing bubble collapsed. He was asked why the invisible hand of the market did not prevent the excessive greed on Wall Street that caused the housing bubble. His response: "There must be a flaw in the theory." A flaw? Is the pope Catholic?
Much of the blame for the housing bubble was lax government regulation of Wall Street. For example, Brooksley Born warned President Clinton that the unregulated derivatives market was a house of cards. Because a lot of people were making a lot of money investeing in the derivatives, Clinton's economics gurus (Greenspan, Summers and Rubin) did not want to kill the goose that was laying the golden eggs by regulating Wall Street, so they called Born an abrasive woman. Clinton stupidly listened to his gurus and did not propose regulating Wall Street.
Political parties are not monolithic. Thinking they are will result in the same mistaken thinking that existed during the cold war: communism is monolithic.
Teddy Roosevelt, a Republican, was so outraged by the excesses of the Gilded Age (the inequitable distribution of wealth during the Gilded Age was worse than it is today) that he proposed steeply graduated income and inheritance taxes to redistribute the wealth.
Bill Clinton (a Democrat) stupidly signed the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act (this act regulated the banking industry by preventing commercial banks from investing in derivatives like big Wall Street banks). The reason for TARP was the big Wall Street banks had invested heavily in mortgage-backed securities. When the housing bubble burst, the big Wall street banks were in deep shit and had to be bailed out by we the people. Main street banks could not do this when Glass-Steagall existed. After the repeal, main street banks stupidly invested heavily in mortgage-backed securities and when the housing bubble burst many local banks also collapsed because they were not bailed out. We have socialism for the rich in this country.
So, a Republican called for raising taxes on the wealthy and a Democrat called for deregulating the banking industry. Who wulda thunk it?
Bernie chose to run as a Democrat, even though he wasn't a registered Dem - lie down with dogs, get up with fleas, as they say - he has tied his cart to the Dem donkey, but he ain't the driver ,,,,
Dance with the devil at your risk - never ends well ...