Spintested: 2010

Only 21 Percent Of U.S. Voters Support Net Neutrality

Friday, December 31, 2010

Americans need a de-Frank Luntzian, a de-rhetorician, a de-spinner, on their side.
About Net Neutrality
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Poll Brings Obama Mixed News On Public Perception Of Policy Matters

Wednesday, December 29, 2010

PUMA = Hillary supporter = Me?

Are you ever off the mark.

If you had bothered to do any research on me, you would know that I'm no fan of the Clintons, (who are NOT liberals).

Better yet, had you complied with comment policy at HP, had you any legitimate argument or defense of Obama, you would have spoken to any of the points I've raised about Obama's very UN-Democratic governing.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Poll Brings Obama Mixed News On Public Perception Of Policy Matters

Do you like Obama's extending Bush's tax cuts for the rich?

Do you like that the legislation that now can be called Obama's tax cuts for the rich sets Social Security up for gutting and ending?

While some may personally like Obama, it doesn't mean that they like his policies, which are a continuation of Bush & Cheney's, with some going even further (according to Obama, a president can k!II American citizens with no due process, no oversight by Congress or the Courts, as well as preemptively and indefinitely imprison anyone, anywhere, even American citizens, with no due process or oversight by the Courts or Congress).

I would guess that most Americans don't know that is what Obama believes and is doing, and wouldn't like him very much once they learned about it.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Neil Abercrombie Should Rethink His Decision To Take On The 'Birthers'

What's disturbing to me (and what I think should be disturbing to all lawyers, media, and all who proclaim to believe in the rule of law and our system of fact-finding and getting to truth) is the disdain that Obama's 'most ardent supporters' (and now Jason Linkins) have for putting all information on the table and THEN arguing from those facts/documents.

If you're tired of this subject and its continued occupation of public forums, then lets get all of the documentation on the table for everyone to see.

Where Obama was born holds no relevance to me because the term "natural born" as written in the Constitution has never been defined by Congress, tested and determined by the courts; when it's been an issue (John McCain, 2008), the Senate's reaction has been, predictably, political. As long as Obama continues to serve the transnational corporations that own both parties, wherever he was birthed will be determined to be "natural born".

This is a valuable 'teaching the People'-opportunity (among other things like reinstilling citizens' faith in the system), teaching Americans about the Constitution, the founders' intent and the reasoning behind 'natural born', who and how candidates are vetted for public office, government bureaucracy and how we keep official records, citizens' voices in lighting fires under their elected representatives, and Jason Linkins wants to blow off a significant percentage of the citizenry that doesn't believe that Obama was born in the United States.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Chris Matthews: Why Doesn't Obama Demand A Copy Of His Birth Certificate? (VIDEO)

but the Hawaii Department of Health has declared that their records do not contain more information than what is on the Notification of Live Birth that Obama published. They have asserted that there IS NO SUCH THING as a "long form" birth certificate.

=============================================================

Link, please.

As far as I know, all that state officials Fukino and Onaka have attested to is have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.

I have some experience with how some states record vital statistics (including birth information) and it varies greatly.

I can tell you that what you're presuming from your own state's certification at the bottom of the "certified transcript of birth" you hold may be "a true and accurate transcription of the information recorded on the original certificate of birth on file with the New York Statement Department of Health" only if you consider that your parents' names and the state file number may be something other than what's on the certified transcript. That's a roundabout way of saying that if you had an amended birth certificate (e.g., adopted, ward of the state, etc.), you wouldn't know it from looking at the piece of paper in your possession -- You would need to see the original documentation.

My own original birth certificate (not from New York) lists the hospital where I was born, the physician who delivered me, my parents' names (mother's maiden name) and ages, birth weight, length, footprint, birth time, date, etc., but the certified copy I requested years later lists only my name, birth date, city and state.

I must state again that where Obama was born is irrelevant in this time of lawlessness in the US and around the world. Obama (or anyone that the political and transnational corporate elites vetted as their choice) could have been born on Mars and the path would be cleared so that he could be president.

This is the real problem of having a USSC decide an election and taking election and campaign finance reform seriously -- The distrust of the People in the system. The system is further corrupted when you have a president and his propaganda machine blowing off a faction of citizens, disparaging them, insulting them as nvtcases, using them for your own political purposes. It doesn't make your claims to be desirous of bipartisanship and representing all of the People sound sincere.
About Chris Matthews
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Chris Matthews: Why Doesn't Obama Demand A Copy Of His Birth Certificate? (VIDEO)

They want to see the document that this piece of paper was created from.
About Chris Matthews
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Chris Matthews: Why Doesn't Obama Demand A Copy Of His Birth Certificate? (VIDEO)

I repeat, the US legal system is based on English common law system, which is based on court cases and precedent. This is in contrast to Napoleanic code law.

Nothing is law unless it's been vetted by the court.

We regularly challenge laws, whether we're fighting a traffic ticket or defending against mvrder charges or appealing verdicts/decisions.
About Chris Matthews
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Chris Matthews: Why Doesn't Obama Demand A Copy Of His Birth Certificate? (VIDEO)

six lawsuits filed by Orly Taitz on this matter have been thrown out of six different courts.

============================================

Orly Taitz hasn't filed six lawsuits on this matter (Obama's birth certificate).
About Chris Matthews
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Chris Matthews: Why Doesn't Obama Demand A Copy Of His Birth Certificate? (VIDEO)

Because the "short form" Hawaiian birth certificate states:

"This copy serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding".
==================================

Not when it, the document itself, is being challenged. Not when the actual authenticity of the document itself or the information that went into creating it is being challenged.

Don't play at being a lawyer on the internet and mislead people.
About Chris Matthews
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Chris Matthews: Why Doesn't Obama Demand A Copy Of His Birth Certificate? (VIDEO)

your side will lose.
==========================

I have no 'side' in this; I'm not a 'Birther'.
About Chris Matthews
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Chris Matthews: Why Doesn't Obama Demand A Copy Of His Birth Certificate? (VIDEO)

That's some America you're promoting. It's certainly not the America that Obama claims to want to preside over. If Obama is trying to be a president to all of the people, work in the spirit of bipartisanship, then blowing off citizens who have doubts he's even legally entitled to the job seems an odd way to go about it. If Obama wants respect, he has to give respect and address the questions that people have. That goes not only for Birthers, but for the Democratic Party's base which Obama has also blown off.

That's the way you put doubts about you and your credentials to rest; you meet the people where they are and you earn trust by showing people you're listening to them and responding to what is a very basic issue: Are you qualified for the job under the Constitution.

I'm not Birther -- I couldn't care less about where Obama was born. Our government is lawless at this point, so the circumstances of Obama's birth are small potatoes to me. I'm more cynical than Birthers, and my issues with Obama are more practical, about what he's doing with the awesome power We The People bestowed on him in 2008.
About Chris Matthews
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Chris Matthews: Why Doesn't Obama Demand A Copy Of His Birth Certificate? (VIDEO)

No, it's like a rung bell; you can't unring it.

Just as Bush and Cheney set precedent for illegal executive branch activities, when Obama and the Democratically-controlled Congress refused to investigate and prosecute, it set a precedent for all future presidents, their administrations and Congresses not to have to abide by the law.
About Chris Matthews
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Chris Matthews: Why Doesn't Obama Demand A Copy Of His Birth Certificate? (VIDEO)

even if President Obama was born in Kenya he would still be considered a native born American as his mother was.

==================================================================

No, not true.
About Chris Matthews
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Chris Matthews: Why Doesn't Obama Demand A Copy Of His Birth Certificate? (VIDEO)

'Citizen' and 'natural born' are not synonymous.
About Chris Matthews
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Chris Matthews: Why Doesn't Obama Demand A Copy Of His Birth Certificate? (VIDEO)

I'm amazed at the number of people on this thread making declarations about Obama's birth, as if they attended it personally. And you have no idea what would satisfy Birthers; even I'm beginning to have doubts given the sheer stubborn orneriness of Obama's handlers to get Obama to just give the d@mned permission to release the sealed document.

Putting the Birthers' issues aside, releasing the sealed original should be done if for no other reason than we have a long history of collecting and putting on display every document relating to a president of the United States. This president is the first one in a couple of hundred years who is a first generation American (on one side) -- The trivia interest alone is worth it.

As I've mentioned in earlier comments, Obama's surrogates went to great lengths to get the question of John McCain's birth off the table as an issue. Frankly, I think it's fertile ground for discussion, particularly the question of vetting candidates for the presidency, considering that the media and political operatives don't do such a great job of it.

At this stage in our history, anybody can be president. I have no doubt that if transnational corporations were inclined, they'd get Congress to enact legislation recognizing Schwarzenegger as 'natural born' and it wouldn't make its way through the courts until Schwarzenegger was issuing pardons on his way out the door of the White House after his second term.
About Chris Matthews
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Chris Matthews: Why Doesn't Obama Demand A Copy Of His Birth Certificate? (VIDEO)

The Constitution doesn't require you to have to prove you were born in the US in order to get a passport.

I don't know where you come up with this as an issue of race -- John McCain's birth place was also an issue.
About Chris Matthews
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Chris Matthews: Why Doesn't Obama Demand A Copy Of His Birth Certificate? (VIDEO)

Are you saying that you're psychic?

You can only know that if and when all information is provided.

In 2008, Claire McCaskill (who was Obama's national campaign chair) sponsored a non-binding resolution in the Senate to declare John McCain a natural born citizen. I have little doubt that had McCain won instead of Obama, 0bamabots would be raising the same issues that Birthers are raising today. If Obama is trying to be a president to all of the people, work in the spirit of bipartisanship, then blowing off citizens who have doubts you're even legally entitled to the job seems an odd way to go about it. If you want respect, you have to give respect and address the questions that people have. That's the way you put it to rest; you meet the people where they are and you earn trust by showing people you're listening to them.

In the bigger scheme of things, this is not a big request. It's pretty d@mned basic.
About Chris Matthews
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Chris Matthews: Why Doesn't Obama Demand A Copy Of His Birth Certificate? (VIDEO)

Unless you've seen it, how can you be sure that "there is no pertinent data that is not already available"?
About Chris Matthews
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Chris Matthews: Why Doesn't Obama Demand A Copy Of His Birth Certificate? (VIDEO)

Tuesday, December 28, 2010

No, that's not how it works.

The English common law system (which the US is based on) is based on court cases and precedent, in contrast to Napoleanic code law. So from a practical standpoint, you can say that nothing is law unless it's been vetted by the court.
About Chris Matthews
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Chris Matthews: Why Doesn't Obama Demand A Copy Of His Birth Certificate? (VIDEO)

(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person

(A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or

(B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 288 of title 22, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date; and

(h) a person born before noon (Eastern Standard Time) May 24, 1934, outside the limits and jurisdiction of the United States of an alien father and a mother who is a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, had resided in the United States.
About Chris Matthews
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Chris Matthews: Why Doesn't Obama Demand A Copy Of His Birth Certificate? (VIDEO)

Title 8 > Chapter 12 > Subchapter III > Part I > Section 1401

Title 8 of the US Code as currently published by the US Government reflects the laws passed by Congress as of Feb.1, 2010, and it is this version that is published here.

§ 1401. Nationals and citizens of United States at birth

The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:

(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;

(b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property;

(c) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;

(d) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;

(e) a person born in an outlying possession of the United States of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year at any time prior to the birth of such person;

(f) a person of unknown parentage found in the United States while under the age of five years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of twenty-one years, not to have been born in the United States;

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Far More Protected From Primary Challenge Than Clinton: Poll

Michael Lerner's very powerful case for primarying Obama.

Ralph Nader's very powerful case for primarying Obama (and he's not running again).

No one in the Democratic Party will do it. It would be su!cide for any professional politician in the Democratic Party to run against the party's sitting president (the DLC has gotten too powerful, what with a Democrat in the White House and a Democratically-controlled Senate overseeing an NSA with today's eavesdropping abilities).

Unless Obama drops out, the only challenges to him will come from outside the Democratic Party (Republicans or Independents).

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Chris Matthews: Why Doesn't Obama Demand A Copy Of His Birth Certificate? (VIDEO)

There were plenty of things that Bushies blew us off over, and expected, no, they DEMANDED that we trust Bush-Cheney's word for. WMD, for example.

If we want credibility, if we want respect, if we want trust, we earn it. 'Birthers' are our fellow Americans, and if Obama wants to be president to "all Americans", if he wants bipartisanship and cooperation, if it takes providing documentation on something as basic as his birth, then for flick's sake, JUST DO IT!
About Chris Matthews
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Chris Matthews: Why Doesn't Obama Demand A Copy Of His Birth Certificate? (VIDEO)

Because it will never be proof enough for the birthers.. ever.

========================================================

You don't know that. You can only know that if and when all information is provided.

Just do it. Why keep this issue alive, eating up valuable air time?
About Chris Matthews
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Chris Matthews: Why Doesn't Obama Demand A Copy Of His Birth Certificate? (VIDEO)

Does anybody doubt that had McCain won, the 'Birthers' would be Obama's 'most ardent supporters' questioning the validity of McCain's presidency due to his birth in Panama?

Where Obama was born holds no relevance to me because the term "natural born" as written in the Constitution has never been defined by Congress or determined by the courts and when it's been an issue (John McCain, 2008), the Senate's reaction has been, predictably, political. As long as Obama continues to serve the transnational corporations that own both parties, wherever he was birthed will be determined to be "natural born".

Why not comply and provide all the documentation?
About Chris Matthews
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Chris Matthews: Why Doesn't Obama Demand A Copy Of His Birth Certificate? (VIDEO)

That's not actually what 'Birthers' are referring to when they talk about a "birth certificate".

That's a contemporary document created by a state or county official from an original document on file with the state. If you look closely, you'll see that this document was created in June 2007.
About Chris Matthews
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Chris Matthews: Why Doesn't Obama Demand A Copy Of His Birth Certificate? (VIDEO)

What's disturbing to me (and what should be disturbing to all lawyers and all who proclaim to believe in the rule of law and our system of fact-finding and getting to truth) is how Obama's 'most ardent supporters' disdain for putting all information on the table and THEN arguing from those facts/documents.

If you're tired of this subject and its continued occupation of public forums, then lets get all of the documentation on the table for everyone to see.

Where Obama was born holds no relevance to me because the term "natural born" as written in the Constitution has never been defined by Congress or determined by the courts and when it's been an issue (John McCain, 2008), the Senate's reaction has been, predictably, political. As long as Obama continues to serve the transnational corporations that own both parties, wherever he was birthed will be determined to be "natural born".
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Number Of Uninsured Americans Soars To Over 50 Million

It's as plain as day to me, but the point you seem to be trying to make means that it's not as plain as day to you.

FDR was referring to putting people to work, creating jobs, massive public works projects. Obama isn't doing that.
About Health
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Number Of Uninsured Americans Soars To Over 50 Million

We have 'party government' in the US. We have since the 1790s. Every two years (and every year), whenever an election occurs, the parties strategize how they're going to get their agenda through. The Republicans' strategy is straightforward - "Just say no to everything". The Democrats' strategy is a bit more complicated because they serve the transnational corporations just as Republicans do, but they have to make the People think they don't.

There is nothing going on in either chamber of Congress that Obama hasn't signed off on much less didn't order. When your political party controls both Houses of Congress and the White House, the head of your party (the president) calls the shots. It's the only reason for having political parties.

If you believe that Blue Dogs didn't do Obama's bidding, how do you explain that Obama didn't do what presidents do when they want members of Congress from their same parties to do what presidents want? Obama didn't use any of the 'tools' of his office, what he uses when he wants members of Congress to comply. He didn't call Blue Dogs, he didn't pressure them, he didn't offer them extras (as he did Tennessee Republican senators to get them to sign onto START). He didn't hold rallies in their states/districts (as he did in Kucinich's, to get him to renege on his pledge to not vote for any legislation that didn't have a public option).

If you look at the Democrats' strategy to accomplish their goals, it's very 'Bushie' -- Lots o' shock & awe after slowing everything down. Obama's healthcare legislative strategy after entering office: Bringing the momentum for CHANGE to a screeching halt (when you're about to lose your filibuster-proof Democratic Caucus majority at any moment, when 2 of your 60-majority in the Senate are at de@th's door) by talk of "bipartisanship" (Republicans weren't wanted or needed for anything -- It was Republican legislation to begin with, not Democratic legislation), then dragging the legislative process out (until you lose that filibuster-proof majority with Kennedy's de@th), distractions (circuses, like teabaggers at townhalls), and then at the last minute, a false crisis is created where it just has to be done yesterday (the legislation doesn't actually begin for years).

What's the hitch for you? What's it going to take to get you to comprehend that the DLC, the group that controls the Democratic Party, are ideologically the Republicans of the 1950s and 1960s?
About Health
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Number Of Uninsured Americans Soars To Over 50 Million

Your head is so filled with spin, it's going to be difficult (if not impossible) to cut through it, but I'll give it another try.

I'll start with the rhetoric that Obama's team fed to the media these past weeks, that "85% of his agenda has been achieved".

I'm sure that's true -- But it's not 'our' (the American people's) agenda, but rather the agenda of transnational corporations. It's not what Obama ran on, it's not what Democratic voters put Obama and Democrats into power to do on their behalf.

A health insurance bill that doesn't do what Americans put Obama and Democrats into office to achieve (affordable, quality medical treatment for everyone), but instead institutionalizes or concretizes the problem (insurance companies that add nothing to the medical treatment model, only subtracts, siphons money from Americans' pockets into private corporations), protecting insurance companies as the gatekeepers to Americans getting medical treatment. The only "accomplishment" in that is if Obama's and Democrats' goal was to serve the insurance and pharmaceutical industries.
Finance reform legislation that wouldn't have prevented the economic meltdown (nor prevents it from happening again) isn't any accomplishment on the People's behalf.

KEEP READING
About Health
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Number Of Uninsured Americans Soars To Over 50 Million

What do you think FDR was referring to?

And what does that have to do with "Obama-bashing Dems" and why they shouldn't criticize him?
About Health Care
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Number Of Uninsured Americans Soars To Over 50 Million

Do you honestly believe that Republicans, in the minority, with the smallest numbers in 116 years, were able to stop and steamroll the majority party?

There is nothing that happens in either chamber of Congress that Obama hasn't signed off on, much less didn't order.

That's how 'party government ', which we've had since the 1790s, works. When your party controls both Houses of Congress and the White House, the president is the leader of the party, the goals to be achieved and the strategy for making it happen. The orders are top-down, and the strategy for achieving the party's aims is determined in the White House.

The office of the president, particularly a popular one, one who entered the Oval Office on a campaign of CHANGE and with more votes than any president in all of US history, has awesome power to effect his agenda. The fact that Obama slammed on the brakes of his momentous victory and reneged on just about every pledge and promise, and then has continued just about all of the Bush-Cheney policies says it all -- The man is a con artist.
About Health Care
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Number Of Uninsured Americans Soars To Over 50 Million

Those are kind and generous sentiments, Bellanova, thanks.

They come at a time when I don't know how to get through to people like MsGrlInTn who, if she's legitimate and authentic and not a paid political operative (I doubt she is one), is going to suffer terribly under Obama and DLC policies.

What's frightening is that my fate, all of our fates, are tied to low information voters like MsGrlInTn who refuse to learn the issues, but trust and rely on gut-level instincts, crushes that they have on politicians. I'm starting to resent that it's like somehow fallen to me to have to refute their words and challenge their contentions wherever I come across them.

It's one thing to do the research, cull out the facts for voters like MsGrlInTn, but they're not even interested in it. They are only interested in that which validates their preconceived positions (loving Obama & DLC-controlled Democrats). In this, they are no different than Bushies. Both are a trial and a challenge. ;-)
About Health Care
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Number Of Uninsured Americans Soars To Over 50 Million

Americans have had it with political spin, and specifically political double-talk. Americans didn't like it when it came at them as Bush-speak and Americans really don't like it when it's Obama's lawyer-speak. He said that he supported single payer, and if "it's the best for the people" (as he communicated clearly), it's the best whenever.

Obama insisted that it was up to Congress to write the legislation, that he wasn't going to be involved in doing it. After promising transparency in his administration, he prevented transparency and kept hidden secret negotiations and deals he was making with PhRma, Hospitals and the AMA. After the secret deals came to light, Obama l!ed both to the American people and to Congress which had several committees working on legislation that Obama's secret deals undermined.

From day one, Obama conceded positions of the left, of the People, that weren't his to concede. Obama took single payer off the table because everything else pales against it. Obama unilaterally made the decision to forever tie Americans' getting healthcare through employer-subsidized insurance, in spite of the fact that employers don't want to do that and employees don't want it. (Dylan Ratigan nailed it on his show -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwyV59HyI-k )

Obama isn't an honest agent. In politics, all you have is your word, and with it your credibility. Obama's lost his;he's not anyone to trust.
About Health Care
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Number Of Uninsured Americans Soars To Over 50 Million

msgirlintn 7 minutes ago (4:09 AM)

No what is wrong with the American Democrats today is fair weather Dems like you and Marco that would rather whine and complain than be thankful for what has been accomplished. You want to hold the President accountable that your "wish list" wasn't fulfilled. He never campaigned on single payer. You admitted that, yet you want to criticize him for it not passing. That's being a hypocrite!

======================================================================

What Obama accomplished was pretty much RepublicanCare, Romney-care. That's certainly not what I voted for.

Candidate Obama was all over the place, depending on who was talking to at any given time and what day it was in the campaign, which primaries were done with and who he didn't need to woo anymore.

During the campaign, Obama supported "healthcare reform". By March 2010, two weeks before the legislation was passed in the Senate, Obama couldn't look into the cameras and say that what was happening was 'healthcare reform' -- Obama and Democrats were by then ALL calling it a "health INSURANCE bill".

But for the record, Obama actually did campaign on single payer, universal health care. In addition to the (now) infamous video clip from 2003 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpAyan1fXCE), there's a campaign ad featuring Obama himself - http://www.factcheck.org/video/obama_motherwmv.wmv. See the part where he says he has a plan to "cover everyone'? That's called "universal coverage". Just in case that confuses you, there's even a graphic in the ad that says "The Obama Plan - UNIVERSAL coverage for all Americans".

Here's another reference where Obama campaigned on public option - http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/09/10/yes-obama-campaigned-on-a-public-option/

I'm going to save us a few rounds of comments ("He supported single payer before he didn't support it; before 2008"), because even if it was true (that he didn't run on single payer or a public option), Obama ran against mandates, and criticized Hillary for them in her campaign promises. Most of those who voted for Obama want single payer, and it doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out (although most brain surgeons would agree) that the way to get affordable quality medical care is through single payer universal healthcare.

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Number Of Uninsured Americans Soars To Over 50 Million

Number Of Uninsured Americans Soars To Over 50 Million

Candidate Obama was all over the place, depending on who was talking to at any given time and what day it was in the campaign, which primaries were done with and who he didn't need to woo anymore.

During the campaign, Obama supported "healthcare reform". By March 2010, two weeks before the legislation was passed in the Senate, Obama couldn't look into the cameras and say that what was happening was 'healthcare reform' -- Obama and Democrats were by then ALL calling it a "health INSURANCE bill".

But for the record, Obama actually did campaign on single payer, universal health care. In addition to the (now) infamous video clip from 2003 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpAyan1fXCE), there's a campaign ad featuring Obama himself - http://www.factcheck.org/video/obama_motherwmv.wmv. See the part where he says he has a plan to "cover everyone'? That's called "universal coverage". Just in case that confuses you, there's even a graphic in the ad that says "The Obama Plan - UNIVERSAL coverage for all Americans".

Here's another reference where Obama campaigned on public option - http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/09/10/yes-obama-campaigned-on-a-public-option/

I'm going to save us a few rounds of comments ("He supported single payer before he didn't support it; before 2008"), because even if it was true (that he didn't run on single payer or a public option), Obama ran against mandates, and criticized Hillary for them in her campaign promises. Most of those who voted for Obama want single payer, and it doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out (although most brain surgeons would agree) that the way to get affordable quality medical care is through single payer universal healthcare.
About Health Care
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Number Of Uninsured Americans Soars To Over 50 Million

What you get is a day late and a dollar short.

Read Sam Graham-Felsen's oped in WaPo: Why is Obama leaving the grass roots on the sidelines?

Receiving communications from OFA isn't the same as an active organization engaged in carefully orchestrated campaigns networking to pressure members of Congress to get behind Democratic versions of legislation, and to work on the media, shaping the message.

In addition to Obama's having deactivated the OFA, Obama's told Democratic groups to stand down, as well.

Obama has a habit and pattern of doing the bare minimum possible, like sending OFA email at the last possible moment, just so that his political operatives can say, "OFA never stopped sending out communications."

'Plausible deniability' might be the slogan for Obama's career in office.
About Health Care
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Number Of Uninsured Americans Soars To Over 50 Million

As of early November, 2010, 111 corporations were issued waivers.

Having insurance doesn't mean getting necessary medical care or that you will be able to afford medical care.

Think about that for a minute, because I do understand how, after hours/days/months of spin by professional spinmeisters (politicians), you might not appreciate the distinction.

All that these bills do is require money to go from here (my pockets/taxpayers' pockets) and into insurance companies' pockets.

There is NO LIMITATION on insurance companies' charging and increasing co-pays and deductibles and eliminating services.

There is NO REQUIREMENT for insurance companies to have to provide services not paid for.

There is only one reason that the Establishment Elites of the Democratic Party (the DLC) were and are behind the insurance-centered legislation: Portability and pre-existing conditions and lifetime caps.

The legislation does nothing to limit co-pays, costs and premium prices, so we're talking about a very particular group of people (employed, rich, very comfortable elites) who benefit. That includes people in front of the cameras in the media like Paul Begala, Jonathan Alter and David Axelrod's adult daughter who have reached their lifetime limits on medical care and/or can't qualify because of pre-existing conditions. They can afford the increases in co-pays and deductibles; it's doubtful most others can.

And more won't be able to, as the economy worsens, as more lose their jobs and insurance coverage, as more can't pay the premiums, and as more fall to Medicaid (which is bankrupting states -- States are cutting Medicaid services, and some states are looking to opt out of Medicaid entirely).

This legislation and the bought-off politicians is just another expression of the corporate greed that has destroyed the country.
About Health Care
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Number Of Uninsured Americans Soars To Over 50 Million

Half of what you say isn't even true

================================================

Really?

The list is right there. What's not true?

You made the charge, you're calling me a l!ar, so back it up.

WHAT'S NOT TRUE?
About Health Care
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Number Of Uninsured Americans Soars To Over 50 Million

Bush happened because of the pardoning of Nixon. The Nixon pardon happened because of Cheney & Rumsfeld. These are not just disconnected events. These people have been up to mischief for a long while. They never got over Watergate & their fall from grace. They never believed they did anything wrong.

Running from these facts isn't going to make the Nixon-Reagan-Bush-Cheney-GOP-Conservatives behave, or go away. Waiting them out, until they d!e, isn't going to end it -- They've raised & trained an army of 'true believers' to carry on after they're gone.

Investigations and trials go a long way in dealing with that. It's not their minds you want to change, but the millions of Americans who never knew the facts. They broke the law, and we enforce the law so that people KNOW the laws and live by them. If People don't agree with the laws, if they don't like the laws, they can change the laws. But the People have to have a direct experience and understanding of the laws before they can change them. And that's how you get an informed, healthy and active democracy. With a knowledgeable electorate.
About Health Care
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Number Of Uninsured Americans Soars To Over 50 Million

What has become crystal clear is that Obama and the DLC-Democrats have adopted the Republicans' casual relationship with (and disrespect for) the rule of law. Preserving the rule of law underpins how the US has been the most successful, longest running democracy in world history.

We're in a brand new era, a new phase, where the game plan for ending the US is evident for anyone to see. And it begins and ends with the rule of law. By refusing to investigate and prosecute Bush, by "looking forward, not back", Obama has broken the covenant that the American people have with their government.

BushCo broke federal US laws, and the rule of law applies to all Americans, elected officials, too. Elected officials especially.

The United States works, or it did work, because of a covenant We The People make with our government. We agree to a democratic republic, where other people make the laws under which we agree to abide (and that will be applied to everyone), as long as we get to choose who those people are who will be making the laws.

It is under those conditions that we consent to be governed.

When we no longer trust in the process, when we no longer trust that the selection process by which our elected representatives is fair and accurate, or that the laws don't apply equally to all, then all bets are off.

And no government can stand once that happens.

For a president of the United States not to equally apply the law to all people, presidents, too, means that the grand experiment is over.

Not prosecuting BushCo is destroying the country. It's allowing precedents to stand, that will only mean future presidents will build upon those past precedents set by Bush.

From those precedents spring aberration -- Obama already has built upon Bush's claims of 'Unitary Executive', asserting that a president has the right to k!ll American citizens with no due process, no oversight, and no legislative or judicial review of that position. Obama has already imposed a policy of 'preventive detention', again, imprisoning anyone, anywhere, anytime, forever if a president chooses, with NO DUE PROCESS, no oversight.

How any Democrat defends that is beyond my understanding.

KEEP READING
About Health Care
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Number Of Uninsured Americans Soars To Over 50 Million

WestCoastWoman 19 minutes ago (3:10 AM)

I will get heat for this I know... but honestly I don't care... some may find it amazing that I consider myself to be a Progressive Dem but the Obama bashing is really starting get on my nerves. Every president campaigns on tough issues and then once in office, goes back on some things they campaigned on. They ALL do it! For any of us to expect President Obama not do this as well... you might have forgotton the past. There are things I have not agreed on nor liked with President Obama but I honestly think considering all he's had to deal with, he's doing a great job! Bash me all you want.. it won't offend me. This is simply my observation and opinion on the way things have been going.

=========================================================

You're a textbook case of denial.

What we're dealing with is a corporate takeover of both parties.

Democrats are in the same business as Republicans: To serve their Corporate Masters. Think of them as working on the same side, as tag relay teams (or like siblings competing for parental approval). 'Good cop/bad cop'. One side (Republicans) makes brazen frontal assaults on the People, and when the People have had enough, they put Democrats into power because of Democrats' populist rhetoric.

Once in power, Democrats consolidate Republicans' gains from previous years, and continue on with Republican policies but renamed, with new advertising campaigns. They throw the People a few bones, but once Democrats leave office, we learn that those bones really weren't what We, the People thought they were.

Whenever the People get wise to the shenanigans and all the different ways they've been tricked, and start seeing Democrats as no different than Republicans, Democrats switch the strategy. They invent new reasons for failing to achieve the People's business.

Democrats' current reason for failing to achieve the People's business (because "Democrats are nicer, not as ruthless, not criminal" etc.) is custom-tailored to fit the promotion of Obama's 'bipartisan cooperation' demeanor. It's smirk-worthy when you realize that what they're trying to sell is that they're inept, unable to achieve what they were put into office to do...And their ineptitude, like that's somehow "a good thing".

Obama's 'job', as he sees it, is to deliver to the top 2%. No amount of begging, imploring, wishing, pleading with Obama is going to move him off of that, as we've already seen with his plummeting job approval numbers.

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Number Of Uninsured Americans Soars To Over 50 Million

Obama's presidency = A continuation of the cruel & avaricious policies of Bush-Cheney
About Health Care
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Number Of Uninsured Americans Soars To Over 50 Million

The only way this HCR will be improved, will be to vote in more Dems in the House and the Senate.

======================================================

While the DLC-controlled Democratic Party tells constituents, "If you want liberal/progressive policies from Obama and Democrats in Congress, you have to get liberals/progressives into Congress", in fact, Obama and the Democratic Party's machine have worked to prevent liberals/progressives getting into office on a broad-based scale and with a scheme that has included:

Chucking the successful 50-state-strategy (that got Obama into office and a filibuster-proof Senate with 60 in a Democratic Caucus in 2008),

Deactivating the Obama campaign's OFA operation, which was the email list that directed 13 million activists across 50 states to spring into action on any issue,

Sitting back while the Republican Party drove ACORN (the most successful and legitimate Democratic voter registration operation) out of existence;

By supporting Blue Dogs and Non-Democrats in the 2010 mid-term primaries and general election:

* Blue Dog Blanche Lincoln over progressive Democrat Lt. Governor Bill Halter.

* Republican-turned-Independent Arlen Specter over (barely) progressive Democrat Joe Sestak.

* Republican-turned-Independent Lincoln Chaffee over (not progressive) Democrat Frank Caprio (which, in turn, is an effective endorsement of the Republican John Loughlin over Democrat David Cicilline for the congressional seat Democrat Patrick Kennedy is retiring from, and all of the other seats up for grab in Rhode Island).

* Republican-turned-Independent Charlie Crist over liberal Democrat Kendrick Meek.

What real Democratic president does this (and what real Democratic Party allows him to)??

By getting involved in the election at the primaries' stage, Obama became the first sitting president in US history to interfere with the citizens' very limited rights in this democratic republic to select who they will trust to make laws to which they consent to be governed.

Citizens have little enough of a Constitutionally-guaranteed role within this democracy as it is without a president usurping it. Citizens have the right to vote, but not to have our ballots counted (the founders were nothing if not ironic). But to have a president enter into our participation in this democracy at this most basic level, state primaries, and supercede our choice for his own, is an abuse of the process and a powerful message about Obama's contempt for the People's role in a democratic government, our voices and our choices.

Voting Obama and all of the incumbents out of office is the way, and we got a good start on it in the midterms.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Number Of Uninsured Americans Soars To Over 50 Million

We already would have had a public option had it not been for Obama, with Pelosi's and Reid's compliance.

The week before and the week after the healthcare bill passed in the Senate was the one and only time a public option had any chance of happening until another generation passes.

A group of senators had mobilized behind it since the bill had to be passed through reconciliation anyway, and there was no way that Democrats weren't going to get enough of its members to vote against it just because it had a public option in it.

Obama nixxed it.

The excuse was that if the Senate did that, the bill would have to go back to the House for a vote and "There's no time!"

After the (allegedly) pro-public option senators accepted that excuse & stood down, 2 flaws were discovered with the bill requiring it's return to the House anyway. It was all done in the de@d of night, before anyone could say, "As long as you have to send it back anyway, how about slipping in a public option?"

Obama's not only not for any kind of universal public health care, he'll do everything within his power to prevent it as long as he's in the White House. Because that was the deal that he made. Just three weeks ago on C-Span, Richard Wolffe (the journalist with an inside line to Obama and his White House) said, "There Won't Be Any Public Option--Obama Never Was For It".
About Health Care
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Number Of Uninsured Americans Soars To Over 50 Million

Who do you think just wrote that tax cut legislation preserving Bush's tax cuts for the richest?

Please, let's not go through this id!otic BS again -- Presidents write legislation all the time.
About Health Care
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Number Of Uninsured Americans Soars To Over 50 Million

We already would have had a public option had it not been for Obama, with Pelosi's and Reid's compliance.

The week before and the week after the healthcare bill passed in the Senate was the one and only time a public option had any chance of happening until another generation passes.

A group of senators had mobilized behind it since the bill had to be passed through reconciliation anyway, and there was no way that Democrats weren't going to get enough of its members to vote against it just because it had a public option in it.

Obama nixxed it.

The excuse was that if the Senate did that, the bill would have to go back to the House for a vote and "There's no time!"

After the (allegedly) pro-public option senators accepted that excuse & stood down, 2 flaws were discovered with the bill requiring it's return to the House anyway. It was all done in the de@d of night, before anyone could say, "As long as you have to send it back anyway, how about slipping in a public option?"

Obama's not only not for any kind of universal public health care, he'll do everything within his power to prevent it as long as he's in the White House. Because that was the deal that he made. Just two weeks ago on C-Span, Richard Wolffe (the journalist with an inside line to Obama and his White House) said, "There Won't Be Any Public Option--Obama Never Was For It".
About Health Care
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Number Of Uninsured Americans Soars To Over 50 Million

Out of Obama's mouth two weeks ago, on the furor over his deal preserving Bush's tax cuts for the richest:

"This is the public option debate all over again. So I pass a signature piece of legislation where we finally get health care for all Americans, something that Democrats have been fighting for for a hundred years, but because there was a provision in there that they didn't get that would have affected maybe a couple million people, even though we got health insurance for 30 million people, and the potential for lower premiums for 100 million people, that somehow that was a sign of weakness and compromise."

This is 'SMACK YA IN THE SIDE OF THE HEAD'-stuff coming out of Obama's mouth.

Obama didn't get health care for all Americans -- He sold insurance policies on behalf of insurance companies using Americans' money. Over-priced, lousy insurance policies, at that. Having insurance doesn't mean getting health care. BIG DIFFERENCE.

And there are no cost controls in what Obama got. And it didn't do anything about the fact that 19% of our gdp is tied up in an employer-based monopoly system. Ending employment-based insurance was what everybody wanted.

Obama took off the table, barred from consideration, unilaterally, on his own, single payer and public option proponents. Do you remember when we were all told, "Relaaaaaaax, it's a first step...We'll put a public option in..Real soon"?:

Three weeks ago on C-Span, Richard Wolffe (the journalist with an inside line to Obama and his White House) said, "There Won't Be Any Public Option--Obama Never Was For It".

And Obama's legislation leads to eliminating insurance coverage for all ab0rt!ons.

Then once the legislation passed, Obama then appointed former WellPoint executive Liz Fowler to write and enforce the regulations. A fox in charge of this chicken coop. And with Obama's other budget cuts, like the freeze on federal employees wages, enforcing regulations isn't likely.

To date, Obama has issued waivers to 110 corporations, allowing them not to have to comply with the healthcare legislation.

This guy's a real piece o'work.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Number Of Uninsured Americans Soars To Over 50 Million

Monday, December 27, 2010

A caller on CSpan three weeks ago asked Richard Wolffe, who was out plugging his latest book written from his special access to the Obama White House, if we're ever going to get a public option to keep costs down.

Wolffe makes it clear that Obama and the DLC-controlled Democrats never had any intention of going with a public option or expanding public healthcare in any way (although Wolffe is mistaken when he says that Obama never ran on supporting a public option).

Not only did Obama campaign on "a public option", he campaigned on single payer, universal health care.

Here's a campaign ad featuring Obama himself. See the part where he says he has a plan to "cover everyone'? That's 'universal coverage'. There's even a graphic in the ad that says "The Obama Plan - UNIVERSAL coverage for all Americans".

Obama ran against mandates, and criticized Hillary for them in her campaign promises. Here is Candidate Obama on mandates.

Here again -- Obama campaigned on public option.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Linkbar

Book Recommendations

Search This Blog

Spintested Twitter Feed

What I Read

Think Tanks

Blog Archive

Labels

Friday, December 31, 2010

Wednesday, December 29, 2010

Tuesday, December 28, 2010

Monday, December 27, 2010

About This Blog