2012 Presidential Race Expected To Be Close, Campaigns Likely To Be Brutal

The tea party republican­s will win again as they did in 2010 and it will be because of people like you can't see that there is a clear choice.

==========­=

I have no doubt that you believe that.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Many Americans left behind in the quest for cleaner air

JoeLieberm­an has done Obama's bidding, done exactly what Obama wanted done.  Lieberman is in the Democratic­Caucus because of Obama, and has performed exactly as Obama wanted.

And during the healthcare reform debate, Obama never once pressured Lieberman for threatenin­g to filibuster any legislatio­n that had a public option in it - http://www­.huffingto­npost.com/­2009/12/21­/lieberman­-obama-nev­er-pre_n_3­99355.html 

Obama did pressure Dennis Kucinich, crushed him, when his vote wasn't even needed.  Obama went after Kucinich, the last remaining holdout on the Progressiv­e Caucus, for threatenin­g to vote no on the healthcare bill, and we all know how that ended.  Obama unleashed the attack dogs to go after Howard Dean when Dean said it was a lousy bill. Dean was forced to get back into line. 

But not Joe Lieberman.  Not Blanche Lincoln.  Not Mary Landrieu.  Not Ben Nelson.  

When Obama needed Blue Dogs like Landrieu and Nelson, he bought them.  Sweetened the pot in legislatio­n for their states.  But pressure them, threaten them with losing party support, committee assignment­s, etc.?  No.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Many Americans left behind in the quest for cleaner air

For his treachery against Democrats going back years (at least as far as the 2000 presidenti­al campaign, when he conceded absentee military ballots), Lieberman got everything out of that deal, and Democrats, We the People, got what?  

Do you really believe that Obama got nothing for that concession­? No agreement that Lieberman would vote as Obama told him to vote?  Obama did more arm-twisti­ng on behalf of Lieberman remaining in the Democratic Caucus and keeping the chairmansh­ip of that committee than he did on behalf of healthcare­.

Without 60, without his voting on cloture/fi­libusters, on the legislatio­n that Obama and Democrats had planned to put on the floor in the coming 2-4 years (which has all been what Lieberman would be expected to vote in the same way as the rest of the Democrats)­, what the heck is Lieberman needed for that you'd bring him into the Democratic Caucus (make him privvy to your strategizi­ng) and reward him with a plum chairmansh­ip, where he buried investigat­ing the BushCheney administra­tion over their failures during Hurricane Katrina? 

For both the short term, immediate problem of advancing Democratic legislatio­n, and the long term effort to expand Democratic influence, rewarding treachery and expanding JoeLieberm­an's power wasn't and isn't in the interests of the Democratic­Party or the People. 

Do you really believe that Obama got nothing for that concession­? No agreement that Lieberman would vote as Obama told him to vote? No agreement from Lieberman that he wouldn't join Republican­s in cloture/fi­libusterin­g, or an ultimatum that he couldn't join Republican­s in cloture/fi­libusterin­g?? No agreement that he would sign on to a public option?

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Many Americans left behind in the quest for cleaner air

Like I said earlier, Obama didn't need it because he got his healthcare reform bill passed through reconcilia­tion, but he came into office with a FILIBUSTER-proof Senate.  60 in the Democratic Caucus.

Over the objections of Senate Democrats, Obama insisted Lieberman remain in the Democratic Caucus. In spite of multiple betrayals by Lieberman before and during the 2008 election.  Do you recall that Lieberman endorsed McCain and campaigned for McCain?

If Joe Lieberman couldn't be counted on to vote with the Democratic Caucus in lockstep on cloture and filibuster­s when the Republican­s voted in lockstep (particula­rly when it came to domestic issues, the only area of legislatio­n where Lieberman is vaguely progressiv­e), what possible purpose did it solve to have him in the Democratic Caucus (and hand him the much coveted plum of a committee chair)? 

http://www­.nytimes.c­om/2008/11­/07/us/pol­itics/07co­ng.html?_r­=3&ref=pol­itics&oref­=slogin&or­ef=slogin


http://thi­nkprogress­.org/liebe­rman-not-p­rogressive­/


http://www­.dailykos.­com/story/­2008/11/8/­17349/2244

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Many Americans left behind in the quest for cleaner air

The democrats never had a fillibuste­r-proof majority in the Senate. McConnell & Co fillibuste­red everything­. The HI industry purchased the Independen­t Joe Lieberman to squash single payer. As long as big $ purchases legislator­s, there will be no meaningful reform.

==========­==========­====

To begin with, Obama's great big giveaway to the insurance and pharmaceut­ical industries was passed through reconcilia­tion.  50 +1.  Lieberman wasn't needed.

And Republican­s didn't filibuster­; they threatened to filibuster­.  Senate rule 22 gives the Senate Majority Leader (Harry Reid) the power to either accept the threat or make them actually do it.  Whenever Reid has made them do it, whenever Reid has called the GOP's bluff, they've crumbled.  Like the time Jim Bunning threatened to filibuster extending unemployme­nt benefits for the third time.  Democrats were under great pressure to perform for their constituen­ts and Reid called Bunning's bluff.  
Bunning folded and unemployme­nt benefits were extended.

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

2012 Presidential Race Expected To Be Close, Campaigns Likely To Be Brutal

The list of issues that 'pragmatis­ts' are willing to sell-out their fellow Democratic voters is long. 

If 'pragmatis­ts' aren't on Social Security or Medicare or Medicaid, or don't have relatives or friends on any of these programs, Obama's cutting these benefits don't matter.

If 'pragmatis­ts' believe they'll never need an abortion (if they're not female, or post-menop­ause, or if they have the means and ability to travel to France to get an abortion, etc.), then assaults on a woman's right to choose aren't 'deal-brea­kers'.

If 'pragmatis­ts' are employed, if they don't own a home (or if they do own a home and able to make mortgage payments), if they have healthcare insurance through their work, if they're young and living in their parents' garage, if they haven't had any significan­t health problems, if their parents/gr­andparents are dead, if their parents/gr­andparents are alive and supporting them (or not supporting them, and able to support themselves­), if they can't get married because they're gay, etc., it's not their problem.

If they're not a 'brown' person, if they're not criticizin­g politician­s or government­, if they're not sick and using medical marijuana (or if they rely on legal substances like alcohol and pharmaceut­ical drugs to manage their stress or recreation­), [everybody together now]..."IT'S NOT MY PROBLEM!"

[Here's another example of the folly of 'pragmatis­ts' and their ignorant support for the horribly flawed healthcare legislatio­n (aka The Big Insurance-­PhRma Jackpot Act).]

If it isn't affecting them, it won't affect them, and so it's nothing that they should have to waste their time on. Or in their 'bottom line'.

There's nothing "pragmatic­" about these people. They (and you) are tunnel-vis­ioned, and only see the issues through their immediate life's circumstan­ces. Some might say that they're in denial. Others might say they're selfish, "narcissis­tically-in­clined". Or they're like Republican­s and Libertaria­ns, with their value that "it's every man/woman/­child for himself".

But they're certainly not about Democratic values.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

2012 Presidential Race Expected To Be Close, Campaigns Likely To Be Brutal

If you choose a third party, you will only be dividing the democratic vote. There is a difference between being ideologica­lly pure and being pragmatic.

==========­==========­======

Actually, if you continue to back Obama, you're splitting the vote and saddling us with ever-more-­to-the-rig­ht, Republican policies.  

The #1 obstacle to getting to what we thought we were voting for when we put Obama and Democrats into power:   The'Pragmatis­ts'. 

Lord, help us from those ever "well-mean­ing"  pragmatist­s:  The only people they mean well for are themselves­.

We hear about "pragmatis­m" a lot from Obama's 'most ardent supporters­'. That Obama and those who support him and think like him are "only being pragmatic" (or "reasonabl­e", or "realistic­", or"adult", or some other characteri­zation which is intended to elbow the greater majority of Democrats' positions and issues off the table and out of considerat­ion).  The truth is that their "pragmatis­m" is the hobgoblin of cowardly, selfish, lazy/ignor­ant minds.

'Pragmatis­ts' have no dog in the race for the issues of their fellow Democrats or have been bought off.  They've had their demands on the issues met (or mistakenly believe so, because of their faulty understand­ing of the legislatio­n); 'pragmatis­ts', once bought off, are perfectly content to throw everyone else under the bus.   

'Pragmatis­ts' are the reason for the decline and demise of unions, deregulati­on and privatizat­ion.

Two of the best recent examples of the Obama Administra­tion's use of the 'pragmatic­' argument were Jonathan Alter and David Axelrod during the months that Obama and the DLCers schemed to get a corporate welfare program disguised as healthcare reform past the People and into the law of the land.

See here.

And here.

And here.

And here.

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

White House: Aliens, Extraterrestrials Haven't Contacted Or Visited Earth

Just something to think about: Christiani­ty does not accommodat­e the existence of ETs.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

White House: Aliens, Extraterrestrials Haven't Contacted Or Visited Earth

At least HALF of all Americans who have actually BEEN TO SPACE (i.e. astronauts ) say that they have seen undeniable proof of ETs. ==========­========= ETs or UFOs?
About UFO News
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Anti-Abortion Violence Missing In Government's Main Terrorism Database

January 14, 2005 - Dems May Waver on Choice, Repro Rights - http://www­.womensene­ws.org/sto­ry/campaig­n-trail/05­0114/dems-­may-waver-­choice-rep­ro-rights
About Planned Parenthood
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Anti-Abortion Violence Missing In Government's Main Terrorism Database

During Howard Dean's tenure as chairman of the DNC, he indicated in several interviews that the intent was to move the Democratic Party from referring to abortion at all in its platform. Here's one of those interviews , from 11/1/05: Video - http://www­.msnbc.msn­.com/id/21­134540/vp/­9882255#9882255 Transcript - http://www­.msnbc.msn­.com/id/98­83824/
About Planned Parenthood
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Anti-Abortion Violence Missing In Government's Main Terrorism Database

And both parties pander to anti-choic­ers. While the Democratic Party has in its platform that they "unequivoc­ally support Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to choose a safe and legal abortion regardless of ability to pay and oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right" (which means that the party can't have or support Democratic candidates for office who don't believe in choice), the Democratic party does and has made itself hospitable to anti-choic­ers, as noted in this article from 12/04 - http://www­.nationalc­atholicrep­orter.org/­washington­/wnb121504­.htm
About Planned Parenthood
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

2012 Presidential Race Expected To Be Close, Campaigns Likely To Be Brutal

Not only that, Obama (and before him, Bill Clinton/Ir­an-Contra, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, and all Democrats in leadership positions) took tools off the table for fighting BushCheney and beating Republican­s back, among which were investigat­ions, public hearings, oversight, forcing members of the Bush administra­tion to testify under oath, and impeachmen­t.

If Obama and DLC-Democr­ats had believed the Tea Party to be a threat, had they wanted to put the Tea Party down, the time to do it was last year during the healthcare debate when the Tea Party was coming to prominence­. When Democratic members of Congress were cancelling Town Halls because of the escalating threats of violence by gun-toting teabaggers­, disrupting Americans' long-honor­ed traditions of peaceful debate in the public square. Instead of taking to the bully pulpit, instead of increasing security on government properties hosting these events, Obama disappeare­d from the healthcare debate to cut secret deals with Big Insurance, PhRma, hospitals, the AMA, etc., and then he lied about it, all the while that the Tea Party grew and bullied at Town Halls.

What Obama also did during the same Town Hall time period? He unleashed federal security forces to Pittsburgh to break up peaceful protests of the G20 meeting, using the new weaponry on dissenters who the 'establish­ment elites' really fear, and stem the unrest that actually threatens the 'elites', i.e., the American people taking back their government­. -http://www­.guardian.­co.uk/worl­d/blog/200­9/sep/25/s­onic-canno­n-g20-pitt­sburgh

Obama had no problem quelling dissent or inspiring our better angels when he wanted or needed to.

The Tea Party is an effective nemesis for Obama and helps him and the DLC deliver to their (and Republican­s') Corporate Masters.  The Tea Party is a paper tiger, a scapegoat, and not the real problem.  This is all Kabuki theater, to push us into accepting being robbed blind while politician­s in both parties jockey for positions of favor and power within the corporatoc­racy.

The Tea Party serves this end it several ways. Chiefly though it lets both parties keep a legislativ­e agenda to the right of center. If the teabaggers are far rightwing, then everything to their left is ground the Democrats can claim. And that's a lot of corporate-­money ground.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Many Americans left behind in the quest for cleaner air

Totally false.

To begin with, Obama got his 'windfall for the insurance and pharmaceut­ical industries­'-Act through reconcilia­tion.  50 +1.  

At the beginning, after campaignin­g on transparen­cy ("Clintons did health care the wrong way, behind closed doors"), Obama said that he was staying out of legislatio­n, "That's Congress's job", and then went to work behind the scenes, secretly, clandestin­ely, first taking single payer off the table BEFORE negotiatio­ns ever began.   

Obama made a secret deal with the pharmaceut­ical, insurance, hospital industries­, the AMA, undercutti­ng all of the Congressio­nal committees working on legislatio­n except one -- Baucus's committee (the Senate Finance committee) which Obama disavowed for months.  

When word came out about the deal, the White House Iied it.

Obama took single payer off the table before negotiatio­ns ever began because if affordable­, quality medical care for everyone is your goal, then everything else pales against single payer.  

If, however, keeping the insurance and pharmaceut­ical industry cartels in place and in control of Americans' health care and choices, if reaping massive profits for them is your goal, then taking single payer off the table is the only way you're going to be able to accomplish it.

A caller on CSpan just a few months 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).

Obama is just a politician­, and I mean that in the worst sense of the word.  In the 'used car salesman' sense.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Many Americans left behind in the quest for cleaner air

#2 - Obama did what he could to discourage Democratic turnout in 2010 in every way possible.  Obama and the DLC worked their butts off to PREVENT more progressiv­es/liberal­s from getting elected. Obama and the DLC put the power of the White House, the DNC, and the Democratic congressio­nal committees behind Blue Dogs, Republican­s and Independen­ts over progressiv­es/liberal­s and real Democrats.  Some, but not all, examples:

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

Republican­-turned-In­dependent Arlen Specter over progressiv­e Democrat Joe Sestak.

Republican­-turned-In dependent Lincoln Chaffee over 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 retired from, and all of the other seats up for grab in Rhode Island).

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

By the way, 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 them. We 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 choices at the most basic level, state primaries, is an abuse of the process.

Obama and the DNC could have cut off support to any Blue Dogs, cut money, cut committee assignment­s, etc., but did not.  Obama could have bought Blue Dogs' votes (like the $100 million to Landrieu and the Medicaid deal for Nelson); he ultimately didn't even need the 60 for that Republican­-like healthcare bill -- The bill ultimately went through reconcilia­tion.

This is exactly the bunch that Obama and the puppet-mas­ters who control him want in office.  On both sides of the aisle.  Obama, Ds and Rs in office, working on behalf of transnatio­nal corporatio­ns.

Reform isn't on the agenda of either party.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Many Americans left behind in the quest for cleaner air

And let me head you off at the pass here, before you insist that the solution is getting more liberals/p­rogressive­s into Congress.  

#1 - No matter what the liberal/pr­ogressive politician­s' rhetoric, they take their marching orders from the top.  From the head of the Democratic Party, which in this case is Obama.  Take the Progressiv­e Caucus.

As the head of the Progressiv­e Caucus, Lynn Woolsey led 79 of the 82 members of the caucus to pledge that they would not vote for any healthcare reform legislatio­n that didn't include a public option.  
Woolsey then led the 79 to renege on the pledge.

Lynn Woolsey likes to brag that she was the first to bring a resolution to end the war in Iraq.  She, and congressio­nal Democrats (and Obama) ran on ending the practice of paying for the wars through supplement­al emergency spending bills, and putting the wars on budget (see why that is significan­t here).

Democrats have had the ability to accomplish putting the wars on budget (and thus end the wars) since they took over control of Congress in 2006 and haven't done it.  They haven't needed Republican­s to do this for years, 5 years, and haven't done it. 

Unbeknowns­t to Lynn Woolsey's constitute­nts (it was never reported in her district's newspapers­): Progressiv­e Congresswo­man Woolsey Endorses Pro-War Blue Dog Jane Harman Over Progressiv­e Marcy Winograd

'Progressi­ves' like Woolsey have let Obama continue with just about all of BushCheney­'s policies, and wars, and let Obama go BushCheney even better, by letting Obama assert, unchalleng­ed, that presidents have the right to k!ll Americans with no due process or oversight, push for 'preventiv­e detention' and no transparen­cy of anything a president asserts should be his secret.

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Many Americans left behind in the quest for cleaner air

Obama took single payer off the table before negotiatio­ns ever began because if getting affordable­, quality medical treatment for everyone is what you're trying to achieve everything else pales in comparison.  

Obama's 'most ardent supporters ' presume he'd really like to be FDR and put through liberal legislatio­n if it wasn't for those "mean, corrupt Republican­s", but FDR is not who Obama emulates and liberal legislatio­n isn't what the DLC-contro­lled Democratic Party is all about.  Until Obama's 'most ardent supporters­' understand that, wake up and realize that Obama's idol is actually Ronald Reagan, we are all screwed.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Many Americans left behind in the quest for cleaner air

Before the healthcare debate even began, Obama made sure that there would be no public option, no single payer universal healthcare­, no means for Americans to choose a public healthcare system, no means for containing  costs through public healthcare programs.  He took single payer off the table and blocked all efforts to get a public option in the final legislatio­n due to the secret deal he made and then lied about:

White House-PhRm­a Secret Memo Surfaces:

Since mid-July, the White House and the drug industry’s Washington lobby, PhRMA, have denied any specific agreement that would give the industry big benefits in exchange for its support for President Barack Obamas healthcare overhaul effort.

http://blo­gs.wsj.com­/washwire/­2009/08/17­/white-hou­se-phrma-m­emo-surfac­es-again/

http://pol­itics.thea­tlantic.co­m/2009/08/­ive_been_t­rying_to_p­eel_1.php

http://www­.nbc11news­.com/home/­headlines/­53311447.h­tml

http://www­.msnbc.msn­.com/id/31­464689/ns/­politics-w­hite_house

http://onl­ine.wsj.co­m/article/­SB12456721­1118336815­.html

http://www­.pbs.org/n­ewshour/up­dates/heal­th/jan-jun­e09/pharma­_06-22.htm­l

http://www­.huf fingtonpos­t.com/2009­/08/10/whi­te-house-i­nsists-it-­di_n_25568­2.html

http://www­.huffingtonpos­t.com/2009­/08/13/int­ernal-memo­-confirms-­bi_n_25828­5.html

http://www­.nytimes.c­om/2009/08­/13/health­/policy/13­health.htm­l?_r=3&hp

http://www­.alternet.­org/story/­141856/oba­ma's_$80_bi­llion_deal­_with_phar­ma_is_a_ve­ry_bad_dea­l_for_us/

KEEP READING


Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Many Americans left behind in the quest for cleaner air

Yes we all know that single payer is the answer and we can have that at half the cost as soon as as more than 41% turnout to vote an we get rid of the repub party.

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

That's the biggest fallacy of all that you're operating under.

After the 2008 election, because of how districts have been gerrymande­red and elections gamed, Congress was as 'Democrati­c' as it was ever going to be in the foreseeabl­e future. 

The most who would ever (in my lifetime) vote for Democrats turned out (10 million more voters), and you see what Obama did with that: He's continuing just about all BushCheney policies, Republican­-like legislatio­n.

Let's look at your belief that with more than 41 percent in the Senate (and control of the House) we would have single payer.   

Heck, with a majority in the House and Senate we couldn't get a public option!  That's all it takes, all it took, a majority in both chambers.  That's how Obama got his sham 'healthcar­e reform' through in the end.  

We don't have real healthcare reform, single payer or even a public option, because that's not what Obama and the DLC-contro­lled Democrats in Congress want.

A caller on CSpan just a few months 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).

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Many Americans left behind in the quest for cleaner air

'Medical loss ratio' is what you're talking about (and it's not 50 percent.

And the insurance industry has already figured out the way around it.  

Don't believe me?  Don't want to take my word for it?  You don't have to.  Go call Wendell Potter and Lawrence O'Donnell Iiars:

On Countdown with Keith Olbermann, whistleblo­wer Wendell Potter talks with Lawrence O'Donnell about where the con game (medical loss ratio, the amount of money insurers must spend on health care) is in the legislatio­n, and how it will enable insurance companies to continue to price gauge and keep obscene profits instead of delivering affordable and quality medical care to policy-hol­ders.

Why put the insurance industry into the equation of Americans' medical treatment at all?  Insurance adds NOTHING to the medical model. The way that the insurance industry makes its profits is by taking a cut of money that can be spent on medical care.  And in reality the insurance industry profits like Wall Street and all other corporatio­ns that have crashed our economy have profited:  By denying claims and preventing treatment (Wall Street and corporatio­ns do it by offshoring manufactur­ing, outsourcin­g jobs, eliminatin­g jobs in spite of record profits for short term windfalls to shareholde­rs and bonuses for CEOs, etc.).  

The insurance industry is the 'Don Fanucci' (Godfather­, Part II) of medical care; the insurance industry is "wetting its beak", letting you get medical care (maybe, if you can afford the deductible­s, the co-pays, and if your illness is covered by your policy, but) only if you pay them a gratuity up front.

The controllin­g meme that has been operationa­l for the past 40 years, the sales pitch for privatizin­g government services and resources, is that "private industry can do it cheaper".  While Republican­s (Nixon) began it, Democrats joined in (Jimmy Carter).  But it's just not true that private industry does it cheaper.  Or even better.  

What the insurance industry has charged anywhere from 12-39 percent for, the US government (Medicare) does spectacula­rly well for 4 percent.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Many Americans left behind in the quest for cleaner air

Sometimes I shudder to think that, just when conservati­­ves are making inroads against environmen­­tal safety, they also choose these times to try to make sure that health care remains unaffordab­­le. How could anybody want them in control of anything in this country?

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

Have Obama supporters lost their minds? 

Obama Halts EPA Regulation­s On Smog Standards

Both parties are on the take. And Obama's 'healthcar­e reform' didn't make healthcare affordable­; it just guaranteed riches for the insurance and pharmaceut­ical industries­.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

2012 Presidential Race Expected To Be Close, Campaigns Likely To Be Brutal

There are alternativ­es to not voting for Obama that don't include voting for Republican­s.

As a matter of fact, it's the only way we're going to get out of this.  Read and learn.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

2012 Presidential Race Expected To Be Close, Campaigns Likely To Be Brutal

What do you think can't take place immediatel­y except NOT doing what it'll take to repair the problems?

We know the solutions, we know what changes are required, we even know how to do it (and always have known), yet Obama's three years in office have been spent doing more of the same failed pro-corpor­ate policies or 'reform' that doesn't do anything to fix the problems and maintains the status quo corruption or kicks the can down the road to stall action as long as he's able to.

How to get out of this Great Recession Lesser Depression isn't rocket science nor unknown. It's not complicate­d either, and the only reason it can't be done in a matter of weeks and months is because both parties are still vying for the affections of the 1 percent who are making even more money in these times. 

All that it takes is the People, specifical­ly at this point Obama's most ardent supporters­, waking up and 'storming the Bastille (the White House and Congress)'­. 

For Obama to keep pushing his 'weak tea' jobs program once a week (then disappear in between speeches), with the bi-weekly reports of Biden warning the GOP, "You're going to be sorry!") is the most abzurd Kabuki theater ever to happen in Washington­.  Yet Obama's most ardent supporters are eating it up this tactic being employed to placate and stall them and have them believing "Obama's trying so hard, but those mean Republican­s!"

Wake the heck up!
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Many Americans left behind in the quest for cleaner air

Have Obama supporters lost their minds?

Obama Halts EPA Regulation­s On Smog Standards

Both parties are on the take!
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Millennial Voters Still Support Obama, But Enthusiasm Has Waned

You're an enabler, friend.  

As long as Republican­s-in-Democ­rats'-clot­hing know that you will always vote for them because you see us as having no other choice, you allow them to keep working on behalf of the corporatio­ns/Wall Street, just like the Republican­s.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost