How many of you saw this coming? I sure didn’t.

That’s because the watch dogs never barked. Per Jane Hamsher posting at HuffPo:

But this isn’t news. On July 1, Stupak wrote a letter signed by 19 Democrats saying they would do just what they’re doing right now — holding the bill hostage. And what did NARAL and Planned Parenthood do? Well, they released a lot of statements echoing the President’s contention that the bill contained no abortion funding. But that was never Stupak’s objection.

Also, per the Wikipedia:

The Stupak-Pitts Amendment (alternatively known as the Stupak Amendment and the Stupak-Ellsworth-Pitts-Kaptur-Dahlkemper-Lipinski-Smith Amendment) is an amendment to America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 written by Democratic Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan and Republican Rep. Joseph R. Pitts of Pennsylvania. Other prominent supporters of the amendment are representatives Brad Ellsworth, Marcy Kaptur, Daniel Lipinski, Kathy Dahlkemper and Chris Smith.

All six of the “prominent supporters” are Roman Catholics. Stupak also lives at the Christian cult C-Street House, made infamous by the extramarital affairs of some of its fundamentalist members. Marcy Kaptur is the feisty, liberal congresswoman prominently featured in Michael Moore’s latest movie.

That’s because the watch dogs never barked.

What do we call watch dogs who like sitting quietly in the veal pen?

Here is a three-minute video explaining the significance of the amendment.

is wasn’t just the stupak amendment.

* is was stripping out the kucinich amendment to allow states to experiment with single payer
* it was all the bennies for corporate interests at the expense of people’s health
* it was what was done to children via chip
* it was the gutting of the public option (which i thought was stupid policy to begin with, but was the defining issue for the progressive blogosphere which raised hundreds of thousands of dollars to support members of the cpc who promised to vote against a further weakened public option. there were varying definitions of that but 57 of them definitely pledged to vote against the bill, and as far as i can tell, i’m the only person who whipped their rep to live up to their promise. in the days before the vote, that issue and pledge was apparently thrown down the memory hole)

this was a stupid reactionary corporate approved neoliberal policy from the beginning — that was dishonestly sold to progressives from day one (see hcan).

who won? primarily big pharma and private insurance corps. and the politicians who depend on them for $$$.

Thank you. Dems snatch failure from the jaws of victory.

Thanks. Never knew where rope a dope came from.

Watching Sunday talk shows saying how the Dems freaked out the people because of being too bold. That is how the corporate media is framing it. Citizenry was freaking? No. Corporations were freaking. Citizens are angry because Obama loves status quo. Betrayer. People went against Corzine, etc., because obama administration and Dems are still carrying out the status quo in this country. I am tired of being lost in the furor of the wingnuts where the national media spotlight is aimed, protesting that the government is not hearing the real people. All of us who wanted Single Payer, IGNORED by media and by corporate-bribed reps.

The gumman at Fort Hood was a member of the military who was trying to communicate he was not capable of being deployed. He was breaking from harrassment. He was telling people. No excuses for slaughter, but this man was an extreme manifestation of cleaer symptoms and under-reported horrifying statistics. Keep deploying people in to hell, keep escalating an immoral war.

All the buzz and demonization of him and a reason to re-propagandize against Muslims, but to me, all the suicides, desertions, addictions, covert homicides in war or breakdown homicides back in states, sexual assaults, etc. The military and the government has their agenda.. and like the Catholic Church ignoring pedophilia …. shoving their issues under the carpet in industrial strength denial. And the media ignores the reality, what eles is new?

Obama and the wimps in Congresss. Wow. Only 36 in House protested the censure of the Goldstone Report.

We have a crisis of leadership in this country. And the media is on the corporate planett and the military planet. And the leadership is taking its cues from the corporate media. Or jumping through hoops for corporatists and neocons and Israeli lobby.

And the roll back of our rights …. of course going after “abortion” rights. Go after the women. The immigrants. The African Americans. Wow. Bachman and Boehner getting respectful air time.

Wow. Human rights and constitutional rights not a priority with our leadership. Cowardly group think. I look to iconoclasts like Kucinich. Why can’t we have more mensches speaking out?

All of us who wanted Single Payer, IGNORED by media and by corporate-bribed reps.

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.

An intensely bittersweet moment. Thanks Knox.

Dems snatch failure from the jaws of victory.

No, they snatched catastrophe from the jaws of failure.

How many of you saw this coming? I sure didn’t.

Seen it coming for about ten years.

So here’s my question. How come the “saps” who don’t see it coming are the ones who are able to post while the people who got it right all along are censored, moderated and eventually banned?

Is it cause or effect?

Btw you’re not yet seeing the big picture by any means.

Dems snatch failure from the jaws of victory.

Oh good grief. They won. YOU lost.

The bill sucks and people are going to be furious when they discover all this Sturm and Drang amounted to very little. And then the chickens will come home to roost. The Dems will be blamed for doing nothing to stem the cost of healthcare, we will see rising insurance company profits and insurance premiums, more people without insurance, drugs that no one can pay for and an electorate that decides to stay home because what’s the point?. The Dems will be back in the minority and nothing on healthcare will be achieved for another 80 years, if ever. Doing it right the first time was key here. But the Dems failed and Obama didn’t lead. Another lost opportunity. Any one remember the catastrophic coverage law that had to be repealed? We just don’t learn.

How many rolls of toilet paper could be made from a 2000 page healthcare bill ?

Don’t be to quick to jump on the Kucinich ship.

I made that mistake myself, thought he was speaking truth.

But he also backed not having the vote on the single payer amendment. He was part of making the deal with leadership just as much as Weiner was.

Read between the lines.

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win…

…then they claim it was their idea all along (cf the Republican defense of Medicare).

How many times have the whole of health care reform prospects been declared dead so far? Almost as many times as Pres. O’s candidacy.

Four.

I agree with the tenor of the Article, and hell I’m even linked to which is cool.

But beware of making it seem like if Stupak hadn’t been in the bill it would have been a good thing. This bill was already bad for many many reasons. I’m sure you agree, just the article could be read to be a little misleading.

The Stupak amendment is another glaring example of Conservative Christians ramming their beliefs down the throats of the American public.

Kucinich warned from the start that the Weiner vote was a “set-up” (his term), and he was right. He should have made his public plea to call off the dogs on the Weiner vote many weeks ago. That’s all I fault him for on this. But he was making the same point to smaller audiences from the start, and he definitely was not part of any deal with leadership.

billybugs you forget — only Teh Gheys “ram it down people’s throats.”

“Conservatives” work for The Big Invisible Bi-Polar Daddy Who Lives in The Sky.

Very on point review/summary.

But it is not across any Finish Line yet.

Could become better. Could become even less reform of current regime.

My guess? Will become less reform of current regime.

The $$ involved being too great for current American healthcare regime to surrender. Too much built in campaign pay/play for both GOPers and Ds to surrender.

Obama WH in taking out Single Payer way forward doomed this reform from the start. Obama WH did not swing for the fences at any time during this so called reform process. Very doubtful it will at anytime during the conference process between upper and lower houses of Congress.

The real defeat is American economy will not not now evolve from employer based healthcare premise which erodes any competitive American economic progress.

The real defeat is rather than make American healthcare more simple to access,partake of or more secure regardless of employment,gender,marital status,genetic healthlines or put in real cost controls it is going more complex,more expensive,more inadequate.

The Ds taking credit for this mess is quite the lipstick on a pig dance.

The Ds so richly deserve to get beaten hard in 2010 and 2012.

The picture of what happened is not that they passed a bill, or how close the vote was, or even how good a bill it is.

It’s that damn near half of the Congress both Democrats and Republicans, voted against it.

This was not as they say, that this was the wrong bill or to expensive, but because they basically are to cheap, and don’t want to pay for healthcare.

Even at the cost of this bill, it is less than a twentyieth what the wars have cost. It is a hundredth of what the bank bailout cost. It is also hundredths less than what the prescription drug bill is costing.

A true honest healthcare system for everybody would make the whole population healthier, meaning lower costs for healthcare, and even drugs would be fare less. Their failure to keep the people healthy, is part of the reason health care costs so much, add on the profits in for profit healthcare and we find ourselves in the position we are today.

We should be blaming the Congress for it’s past actions, not celebrating anything they do now or in the future.

So here’s my question. How come the “saps” who don’t see it coming are the ones who are able to post while the people who got it right all along are censored, moderated and eventually banned?

Might be because people take offense to superior beings such as yourself labeling them “Thuggish brutes”, “Baby slaughterers”, and declaring that they have less character than “crack whores”. I believe there was something about “Murderous scum” in there as well.

Don’t think I have celebrated anything the Congress has done since the Civil Rights Act. Of course, they really don’t do much but hold hearings for tv face time and send stern letters.

AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…

Citizen Knoxville and the firepup Freedom Fighters:

Is it possible that the Stupid amendment could be stripped out in conference? And is it possible that at some point in the future with a different SCOTUS, the restriction of federal funding of termination of pregnancy could make the entire legislation unconstitutional? Or, in fact, could this existing fascist court pull a perverse fast one and declare the entire bill unconstitutional because of “equal protection”? Ain’t irony a motherfucker?!!

KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE AMMUNITION, THE STRUGGLE GOEZ ON AND ON AND…

Out of the 64 who voted “yea” on the Stupak amendment, there were 39 who then went on to vote for HR 3962:

Baca
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Carney
Cooper, weasel
Costa
Costello
Cuellar
Dahlkemper
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Driehaus
Ellsworth
Etheridge
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kildee
Langevin
Lipinski
Lynch
Michaud
Mollohan
Murtha
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Ortiz
Perriello
Pomeroy
Rahall
Reyes
Rodriguez
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Snyder
Space
Spratt
Stupak, royal asshole
Wilson (OH)

I am not a strong supporter of abortion ,especially healthy and viable fetuses.
There are I’m sure many valid and compelling reasons to make this choice , but being a male it’s a choice I’ll never have to make . In fact for most women this must be a difficult and agonizing decision to make , probably one of the hardest choices a women would ever make.
Even though I have my reservations ,I would never impose my beliefs on others. It is not my place to tell a women what she can do with her body.
Abortion is the law of the land and should remain legal, and accessable.

I had to express my views on this issue because the anti-abortion people are really burning my ass lately and I’m getting sick of hearing their rhetoric .

I’m surprised anyone’s surprised.

It was easy to see this coming a long way off.

The mistake progressives made was to work within the system for a good piece of legislation. Congress is incapable of producing good legislation.

From here on, progressives should work exclusively to tear down the system — if necessary, by supporting Repubs who challenge bad Dems.

If progressives don’t take this tack, things will never change.

…then they claim it was their idea all along (cf the Republican defense of Medicare).

LOL. most of the time i don’t even care (although i confess a button wrt dishonest/misleading narratives — but i’ll try to get over it if it means universal comprehensive healthcare *g*)

…not across any Finish Line yet.

while there is breath, there is hope (not sure but think i heard that from thich nhat hanh)

Everyone has a right to their beliefs and should follow them. If I say “it’s your decision to do what you think is best”, it’s vastly different than saying “this is what I believe and you have to think like this, too.” It’s a little thing called freedom and we cannot any longer sit quietly by and watch ours drift away under this constant assault.

The coverage for the 36 million, mainly the male ones, uninsured is uncovering women and cuts in Medicare. So women and senior citizen, who were never consulted, are the victim of a very partial reform. Illegal immigrants were thrown under the bus much earlier, although that stupid move will cost emergency room steeply and impose death penalty for hard working people.

Shame!

“We’ll fix it in conference!”

would you care to tell us how we win, because from where I stand, unless we win against Wall Street Vampires, there will be nothing left to salvage. This whole exercise seems to be a ruse deflecting our attention from the financial armageddon proceding apace with Obama’s and the Dems’ blessing.

Is that anything like “Rosebud?”

The Stupak Amendment was a huge disappointment. We need to work to have it removed from the final legislation or dramatically muted.

But, despite the Stupak Amendment, this was the best political win for progressives in damn near a half century. This bill is historic and sweeping. Pelosi, once again, showed she is the best Democratic Speaker
since at least Rayburn.

before you make such expensive statements find out why Dennis pulled back, he tells you his reason on his web site.

Moreover, this one was not a mistake?

Thanks ,I was hoping I got my point across without sounding like the wingnuts

I could agree that the health care “reform” legislation passed by the House – and soon to be rectified by the Senate, and then signed into law by Obama – will together form the last needed indication that the Democratic Party is an utterly vapid organization.

On its merits, this legislation is odious. First there is the simply wrong ban on reproductive health services for women. This ban is a an attack on reproductive freedom and church-state separation. More broadly, however, there is the fact that this legislation will effectively criminalize any “failure” to have a health insurance product, without:

1) providing any meaningful regulation of the notoriously exploitative health insurance and pharmaceutical industries,

2) providing any meaningful government alternative to private corporations in health care, now or ever.

Effectively, the Democratic Party has, in its desperate attempt to enact something that they can term “health care reform” in mass media prior to the mid-term elections, created an elaborate and effectively tyrannical system for upward transfer of wealth from people who work to the people who sit atop health insurance and pharmaceutical companies. I use the word “tyrannical” in the sense that this legislation is a contributor to an overall creeping, exploitative plutocratic dominance of society and our economic functioning.

While we can all ponder the implications of the apparent likelihood that it will be an ultimately jailable offense to not have an *insurance* policy, I think it should be immediately clear that no thinking, decent person should vote for any Democrat who voted for this (or will sign this) legislation. The “nothing is perfect, we must compromise” argument is being made by a President and by figures in the national political class who *do not suffer* as a consequence of this bill, whose *sponsors and special interest clubs* benefit from this bill, and who most of all will sacrifice any consideration in real health care reform to get a salable fiction in front of base voters.

One could re-cover the vacuous political gamesmanship and intra-party squabbling that led to this lunacy. One could re-examine the involvement of the famous lobbies and special interest groups that won the fight in DC. One can hem and haw and make excuses about what is “realistic” and what is “not” in the utterly bought-and-sold venue that is our national political class.

But there is no point to that. The legislation that is being passed – this “reform” that sets us back and cements the control over of us by big business interests that are the source of the problem needing reform – is all we need to see about the Democrats.

could you furnish some links to the Wiener statement, please.

A thought on abortion. The problem is that people who never will be put in that position to need one even have opinion on it.

The fetus is not yours to decide anything about whether viable or not, and it is not your decision to make on whether it should be carried to term or brought into the world.

You see what one believes no matter how strongly, should have no impact on others. People who try to make what they believe the Law, are very poor humans.

You see people against abortion are the true Hipocrites by caring caring for the fetus or baby being born, with no consideration to what being born might mean.

Many mothers that abort babies are no more capable of raising and providing a good life to that child, supporting that child, and making that child become a good citizen and human being.

The people against abortion not only don’t care for the child, and what it’s life will be like, or what hardship it’s being born might place on others.

The worst part is that although willing at all cost to see that baby be born, they will not offer to pay for, raise, help, support or defend that child while being raised and educated to adulthood.

These same people complain about high taxes, the high cost of government, and that our society is not moral and to their liking.

Apologies for post-edit single-paragraph format – I hadn’t realized that the editor eliminated newlines completely.

Out of the 64 who voted “yea” on the Stupak amendment, there were 39 who then went on to vote for HR 3962:

CORRECTION: I meant to write that out of the 64 who voted “yea” on the Stupak amendment, there were 39 who then went on to vote “yea” on HR 3962:

[See list @ 26]

In other words, among these 39 are the weasels, like Cooper (D-TN05), who really didn’t want to vote “yea” on H.R. 3962 but agreed to on the condition that H.R. 3962 would suck even more than it already did.

And Pelosi gave in to them, all so she could declare victory and collect contributions for this pathetic failure…

Calves being fattened before they’re led to the slaughter?

It is really alarming the extent to which clear and precise information regarding this House bill is lacking in the news outlets.

How can anyone be expected to react to provisions in the bill that are harmful when they are never discussed. You would expect that for such an important piece of legislation the media would present a summary or highlights of the points that are contentious, but on the Sunday morning news shows you got virtually nothing of substance being discussed.

I checked to see the ratings of these shows in order to get a feel for the value people place on them, and it seems that people find themm less and less useful. In ‘06 the average viewership was 4 million and now less than 3 million.

There is no such thing as an informed public. Decisions affecting the country are made by the few for the few and sadly can be opposed on the back of the few.

“A thought on abortion. The problem is that people who never will be put in that position to need one even have opinion on it”
I may never have to fight in a war ,but I’m still entitled to express my opinion of such

without credit, with double digit unemployment, – none of this will matter!

Healthcare will continue to be unavailable to a rapidly growing number of unemployed, underemployed and underpaid americans, because the problem from which all other arise is the unholy collusion of Government and Wall Street.

WSe are getting riled up by secondary matters, all the while ignoring the real and immediate problems.

We are idiots.

yeah, i saw this comign from day one.
I knew the bill, if anything passed at all, would be a piece of shit.

Kucinich isn’t an inconoclast. He’s just an old-fashioned, normal moral person who knows who he is.

This is no surprise to many of us. Matt Taibbi reported in his Rolling Stone article “Sick and Wrong” that the fix was in way back in the Spring. The NT Times Magazine had an article called “The Insiders” about the White House and insiders like former Baucus chief of staff, Jim Messina, who is now Obama’s Deputy Chief of Staff. The Baucus Bill is what the White House wanted. So look for more crap to come.

I’m afraid it wouldn’t be very good toilet paper. Too may barbs and nettles.

Is there anyone in the House who speaks truth more often than Dennis?

Look, there are hundreds of flaws in the bill. But assume them all away. Imagine it’s single payer with every bell and whistle you might hope for. Assume it makes us into France!

For all that, there’s a flaw in the bill that’s the mother of all flaws. Its reforms don’t take effect until 2013.

Now you really have to stop and think how Democrats expect to run with this thing next year and two years thereafter, boasting about how — ON PAPER — they’ve fixed all of our problems.

Now all they need to do is build a time machine so the thousands of people who die each year for want of insurance can fast forward to the effective date before they expire.

It is more than I can understand, though this is less true than when I first noticed the kickoff date back in June. I am starting to get it. It is what happens when you try to mix corporatism with democratic forms. People lose sight of their own folly. You can be sure of what the public reaction will be: Great!!! There’s a future in which I am not dying of cancer without a way to cure myself!!!

People need to start doing the democrating thing, throw tomatoes and rotten eggs at physical faces, or drive people off the stage and put them in jail — disgrace them. What was just passed is disgraceful, and Stupak is the least of it.

To make the point from the corporatist end of things, can anyone here imagine Congress having the balls to “bail out” the banks wit a promissory note payable in 2013, then boasting to the banks about it? You know full well what the banks would say and do.

End of lesson.

Knox, Thanks for the diary and the list.

The Ds will very likely find themselves cursed if the Bachmannites and Beckians ever pick up this mandate part of this odious so called reform and turn it on the Ds to screw Ds in elections with. Only a matter of time.

Mandated join-up and pay-in benefits the for profit insurers very much on basis of getting increased cashflows,force of law to support the for profit model they worship and to subvert movement away from for profit premise in American healthcare provide. All Americans who will find themselves forced to pay either rent,the car loan or credit cards or this mandated health insurance rake in to for profits will not ignore that bend over request very long.

It were better to load all American employers and employees with a constant,steady tax load similar to current FICA regime and not get into mandated join and pay or suffer dances.

Back in mid 1970s WashingtonDC put under force of law that Americans could not start new 1974 cars without seatbelts connected. That idea soon came in for a flurry of scofflaw and avoidance.

I suspect we are about to see a similar playout of this mandated buy from Wellpoint or United HealthCare or suffer consequences idea.

I do hope the birthers,Tbaggers and other assorted American political fringers pick up mandated for profit insurance buy or suffer and crucify the Ds with it. Just for starters. Hopefully large swaths of Americans will all decide this is a very punitive and out of bounds reach in on how Americans make decisions or give up money.

The Ds truly have pulled the wrong political tail in American politics with this mandated notion. Obama WH really should not put away the luggage as 2012 may bring a eviction notice. Could not happen to a more deserving bunch of opportunists and poltical charlatans.

Here’s the awful truth, we don’t have the damn votes! Period.
Pelosi got what she could.

Progressives ought to use the filibuster in the Senate to tie up all business until either Medicare for All, or a Jacob Hacker type of PO is passed. At a minimum that would force the Senate to get rid of the filibuster.

A little bit of Matt Taibbi, a little bit of Max Keiser, an un-blinkered vision and we might have a chance.

Sorry, old one. This bill is a POS. See my reasons why. These don’t include this latest Stupak outrage. This bill is monument to the moral weakness of the progressives, which allows them to get rolled continuously. Tell me, if the Senate fails to include a PO at all in the their bill, will the progressives insist on it in conference, or vote the bill down when it goes back to the House for a final vote? I doubt it. These aren’t real progressives they’re Party people, and of the Party leader needs them, they’ll abandon the American people every time.

Politics is the art of the possible. This bill represents what is possible when Democrats approach elections with an “any ‘D’ will do” attitude. The DCCC and the DSCC don’t care about what candidates believe so much as they care about ‘winning’ elections. That leaves the party particularly ill-suited to produce the kind of ideological discipline needed for genuine reform.

Republicans have the discipline but their politics are even worse than Democrats.

Defeating the Democrats means allowing Republicans to win in 2010. I don’t see how that works in our favor. Putting up better Democratic candidates is one thing, but event that is an inexact science, as Kissel in NC makes clear.

This is an incrementalist political system. Has been for 200-plus years. That infers the necessity of taking a longer view.

too true, we need a movement, the Party system has failed us!

I’m afraid you’re right. But perhaps Scarecrow will make some balancing comments, or maybe Jason can tell us again about this being a bittersweet moment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPqN9swXsr0&feature=player_embedded

http://maxkeiser.com/2009/11/06/ote-26-on-the-edge-with-ellen-brown/

fuck ideology, we need to find common cause in the most immediate set of issues, and realize that the government as it exists right now is our enemy.

“The worst part is that although willing at all cost to see that baby be born, they will not offer to pay for, raise, help, support or defend that child while being raised and educated to adulthood.”

Yes. This has always driven me wild about the RTL people. Always willing to make women bear the children. Never willing to pay the costs of the moral decision they impose on others.

I think the level of the contributions will greatly disappoint all of them.

Speaking of the shows, Fareed Zakaria says he has a panel of prominent historians discussing the first year of Obama’s Presidency. Since when is Peggy Noonan “a prominent historian”?

Now all they need to do is build a time machine so the thousands of people who die each year for want of insurance can fast forward to the effective date before they expire.

The biggest part of what my comment @2 in Glenn’s post was about.

Matt saw it before I did, but I thought a real PO was over by July 24th. Since then we’ve had a lot of sound and fury, and things have gotten even worse.

the bail outs and the 2 wars constitute the totality of the Governments revenues.

This country is going down, – wake up! The real problems are in the Financial Sector’s capture of our Government!

I disagree, respectfully, with your comment “Now we can see that Speaker Pelosi got 218 votes for H.R. 3962 .

Given the actual final vote she may have had early support by deceitfully not mentioning that Stupak would pass by a huge margin. Once it did who knows how many Dems withdrew their support.

But I contend it was WE of the net roots who whipped our asses off going after the undecideds – votes Nancy knew nothing about yet- while the debate was underway.
WE got those few extra votes for her- in good faith and not knowing what she knew: that Stupak would pass and likely kill final passage.

We gave life to Stupak’s horrendous Amendment.

I wasn’t trying to say Kucinich gave in for the same reason as Weiner. I was merely warning not to give him a free pass. Doing that for Weiner is part of what got us here.

You’ve got it.

How many people are criticizing the bill because of the “band-aid period” and the lives lost, bankruptcies, and foreclosures that will result from it? Even here there’s not much of that. But see here, here, here, and here.

In the last one, see my long exchange with Scarecrow.

BS. They didn’t have the votes because Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and the veal pen refused tp mobilize the American people against the Congress as other American leaders have when they wanted something. They took an inside baseball approach to this from the beginning. Can you imagine Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Kennedy, or LBJ, or even Reagan taking this kind of weak approach to Congress? Enough said.

Now we can see that Speaker Pelosi got 218 votes for H.R. 3962

Actually, according to House Minority Leader John Boehner, it was Republicans who got the votes (without a single Republican vote in favor — who knew?!):

“Just because we pass an amendment to help facilitate the passage of what I think is a bad bill . . .” Boehner said.

To quote Tonto, “what do you mean we, white man?”

It wasn’t incrementalist in the ’30s. It wasn’t incrementalist in the ’60s, or on the other side in the ’80s. It doesn’t have to be incrementalist now.

Absoluty true, but opinions are like assholes everyone has got one.

Everyday I look accross the street. At sixteen the daughter was pregnant. Mom said You must have the baby I’m Catolic, now the Mother is raising not one but two. We paid for both and will pay till they are grown. The mother of the kids spends Her time trying to satisfy the sexual needs of as many guys as she can. Often letting four or five sleep over, while mother takes care of the kids. What a life for those little kids watching their mother climb all over hundreds of different guys, while being raised by the grandmother.

This is what not having an abortion can inflict on the kids, the society, and us taxpayers.

yeah, lets, but those people with a moral compass in the political class are SO RARE that they constitute a threat as “iconoclastic”, their down to earthness, illuminates the corrupted status quo enablers. They are one lone and futile voice. Like Feingold with the Patriot Act protest.

Have been reading more and more about the issues with Israel, and how Israel has the Christian Right so enthralled with their political agenda, that along with AIPAC, and then the military industrial profiteering, Israel’s war-mongering mixed with neocon war mongering is creating perpetual war and US colluding with war crimes and the denial of them (in Gaza) and perpetrating its own with more to come has left the US as a moral-less monster as well as puppet to Israel. Rhetoric for peace is more walkless talking the talk.

We are so disenfranchised.

Article I of the Constitution was desigened to thwart rapid change. In addition, Article II of the Constitution was written to give the President a weak hand in domestic matters.
The difficulty progressive have had in getting legislation passed is more systemic than personality driven.

Corporate media relays everything in terms of the corporate framing. And the reps and Obama are looking at media for cues. Obama used media for his branding.

So real people want a President to lead, media is relaying that citizenry is freaking out that Obama leading too far and fast… big government yada yada …. but really corporations are freaking over a molecule of “loss” of profit so they spin the media … but then low informed public watches tv and gets hypnotized and picks up the lying histrionics. What a cruel cycle of mass hypnosis and sabotage of the common good, the public trust.

And the teabaggers are the frosting on the corrupt cake of government. Faux self-destructive populism to make this whole thing crazymzking. They are doing the work of the corporations … being flattered and exploited by them. And the religious cronyism … makes the victims BLIND and victimizers of those trying to clean up the government.

False equivalency.There is no comparison between war and a personal medical decision,and if you have a dick you don’t make the decision.

Oh Yeah P.S. This bill SUCKS!

Unfortunately, you are confusing the difference between having and expressing an opinion, and making a decision. It doesn’t help the discussion.

Old one, It’s a long time since the constitution was written, and the system operates quite differently today. For example, the framers didn’t visualize the possibility of judicial review by the Supreme Court. They didn’t anticipate the impact of the Parties and the effect they would have on strengthening the executive. They also didn’t anticipate the filibuster in the Senate of the effect of the Seniority system on both Houses, or any of the future amendments and their impact. Yes, the constitution was designed for limited Government. But there have been many changes since, and Obama has not been using the full potential of teh Presidency to meet problems.

Obama won’t use populism on the left to pass legislation. he acts much more like a Republican than a progressive Democrat.

How can anyone be expected to react to provisions in the bill that are harmful when they are never discussed. You would expect that for such an important piece of legislation the media would present a summary or highlights of the points that are contentious, but on the Sunday morning news shows you got virtually nothing of substance being discussed.

[...]

There is no such thing as an informed public. Decisions affecting the country are made by the few for the few and sadly can be opposed on the back of the few.

How true, how true.

BUT, and more scandalously, the same is true of the United States House of Representatives and its membership. The House itself doesn’t “present [or allow] a summary or highlights of the points that are contentious” – in a sober, serious way, unpolluted by Party politics – even on its own floor before votes on self-described “historic” legislation. Thus, there is also no such thing as an informed Congressional incumbency, and even in that select body supposedly speaking for 300 million Americans, only a small minority of its 435 members have any real input into the contents of legislation, because the majority of members voluntarily cede our power as vested in them to a Party leadership to do with as it will. As I noted, with regard to the specific failures of process on this bill, in a couple of comments here yesterday about “the Party’s House.”

Maybe people think that the House floor has never been a place for genuine, deliberative debate and amendment of House legislation. If so, they would be wrong, and I have excerpts from an impressive 1938 House debate here that prove it.

It is a profound, and profoundly-disturbing and significant, fact of life that in the current Party-dominated House generally no meaningful work on legislation gets done on the House floor. Which means that if one of its 435 members doesn’t sit on a particular committee of jurisdiction, like the three committees involved in writing this bill, they have no ability to to impact or change the form of legislation (outside of private, segregated-by-Party ‘taking the temperature’ caucus meetings on broad subject matters). All they are left with is their Yea or Nay on the legislation in the form in which it comes to the floor. On the rare occasions when some few amendments are Party-approved for debate on the floor – like the Stupak amendment here – how does one second-degree-amend those amendments under the current, rigid Party rules? One doesn’t…

At midnight Friday, Marcy Kaptur assured the Rules Committee (where the only real – but ultimately futile – House debate on this legislation took place) that the Stupak amendment simply maintained current law. Maybe Kaptur really believes that – but a second-degree amendment offered on the floor might have ensured that that was indeed the case. More minds and perspectives giving input, more scrutiny, and more debate can only improve a final legislative product – but the current Party-dictated rules of the House prevent that from happening. As the authors of the other 200 House floor amendments which were never even allowed to see the light of day can attest.

Also too true, OccasionalObserver @53.

mikewstagg @60:

This bill represents what is possible when Democrats approach elections with an “any ‘D’ will do” attitude. The DCCC and the DSCC don’t care about what candidates believe so much as they care about ‘winning’ elections.

[Just think about Rahm Emanuel for the truth of that statement.] But doesn’t that raise this question: How much of a national Party platform does someone need to believe in to be considered a “member” of that Party? 10%? 50%? 100%? None? And if we can’t answer that question, do we understand the point or purpose of the two national political Parties today?

As I’ve noted at length, the two Parties in Congress now function as power aggregrators, not unlike a Soviet “legislature,” on someone’s behalf, but apparently mostly not on behalf of their purported reason for being: the Party’s policy issue platform.

That leaves the party particularly ill-suited to produce the kind of ideological discipline needed for genuine reform.

What “discipline” does a Party need “to produce” if its members are members because they believe in the Party platform, which is presumably what the efforts of the Party leadership in Congress are directed toward implementing? And if that’s not what the efforts of the Party leadership are currently directed toward, as seems all too obvious, then Party-weakening by focusing on Congressional reform (especially campaign finance reform) seems the only way out of the partisan war that the present Parties – in their ceaseless pursuit of power – have forced on the nation, helped by a media that’s financially well-rewarded – in 30-second campaign buys – for continuously inciting and promoting that partisan war.

Kucinich held a conference call for single-payer supporters around the second week of September, where he made essentially the same points about the Weiner vote that he and John Conyers made in their open letter to supporters this past Thursday. I’m sorry I don’t have a link or transcript of the audio, but he referred to the deal for a Weiner floor vote as a “set-up.” I commented on this and posted a response by Donna Smith of CNA/NNOC here.

thanks, will try to google it.

End the cliches and weasel words! Politics is not an art. Politics is not a science. It’s a racket. This system is screwed up and the only way out is not through electoral politics. It’s organizing from the bottom. Read Mark Rudd’s article in Counterpunch on the difference between activism and organizing. He thinks that activism is about self and organizing is about collectivism. He said that the Alinsky model is top down. The model we should use is the Southern black church women model. He quotes from the African-American socialogist Charles Payne’s book “I’ve Got the Light of Freedom: the Organizing Tradition and the Mississippi Freedom Struggle”:

Black churches usuallyhad charismatic male ministers, who, as a consequence of their positions, led in an authoritarian manner. The work of the congregations themselves, however, the social events and education and mutual aid were organized at the base level by women, who were democratic and relational in style.

Rudd speaking of the SDS “We had, in effect, moved backward from organizing to self-expression, believing, ridiculously, that this would build the movement. At the moment when more organizing was needed to build a permanent anti-imperialist mass movement, we abandoned organizing.”

your clarity on these issues is breath taking, – thanks!

While many of us have little grasp of the dark and intricate crevices of our government, if we trust our instincts, we too can arrive at seminal truths. Campaign finance reform now, or blood in the streets in not too distant future; as we are loosing our well-being to nearly fully realized fascist state.

All progressives should cease giving to anyone but Kucinich for 2010. Make him progressive kingmaker, send a message to all other Democrats: He’s our gold standard. You want our bucks, vote like him.

Missing Baron Hill – he voted for both Stupak and HR3692.

Blue dog to the bone.

The changes you note only make the system that more difficult to negotiate for progressive causes. For the most part our problems are systemic and not, except on the margins, based on the supposed character deficiencies of our leaders.

as far as i can tell, i’m the only person who whipped their rep to live up to their promise

it’s probably the first time in my life i’ve been happy to live in a district represented by a rabid republican who will reflexively vote against anything the democrats say they want.

The problem, not the solution.

Indeed, Baron Hill is added to the list of sleazy weasels.

In DDay’s latest post HERE, he says there were 41.

Between my list @ 26 and your addition of Hill, that’s 40. We’re still missing one. Anyone know who it is?

faux-populism I meant to say, lets. which is the worst kind cuz it is crazymaking. media points to it like it is populism but they are on the wrong side, for the corporate interests against their own and doing it with the righteousness of God!

Obama, friend of a rotting status quo, lost to the matrix

I empathize with your concerns but there are definitely actions one can take.

As to political disenfranchisement, a strategy of singling out a given vulnerable but significant candidate can be pursued for removal from office. For me, such a candidate would be Reid and an attempt to find a primary challenger now would signal the credibility of that threat.

As to collusion among Banks and their endless speculation with public funds, one can withdraw their money form those accounts and make plain their reason for doing so.

And so on.

I realize that for this strategy to work it must be well organized but thankfully the internet allows for that. This is still a free and open country but the electorate is just too fragmenmted. I think that the reluctance to act even though it is still unencumbered is what leads to despair.

Well if gossip is to be believed she does have a pretty prominent history.

If incementalism, or any other approach, is to succeed then you must have an ultimate destination. If it is single payer then there is much work to be done. And what is the next step. If it is to be the unseating of incumbents then who is the next target.

To say that a goal is to be accomplished incrementally, by design or otherwise, or to be accomplished in one fell swoop doesn’t say much. The goal is to start working on achieving that goal now. Thinking and acting about what the next step is now. And to act collectively.

So, to review:

H R 3962 with the Stupak Amendment creates a public health insurance option that will be available to some, but only few years from now, and it creates a new health insurance exchange to force greater competition among private plans so as to bring costs down, none of which will be available to women unless they voluntarily give up their constitutional right in a matter of conscience.

Correct?

Rep. Garamendi stopped by to issue a statement, saying in part:

Yesterday’s plan also includes a public option that, while not as expansive I would have liked, is still very worthy of support. And as most of you are well aware, we had an unfortunate setback for women’s health in yesterday’s voting. But on the whole, this is change we can believe in. (emphasis added)

I’m sorry, Rep. Garamendi, but this is not change we can believe in.

Well, oldie, You can’t deny the success of earlier Presidents in moving the system, so one has to include that Obama ain’t doing it right.

We ought to give all our money to Kucinich and let him decide who the reliable progressives are who deserve our support.

I know it sounds crazy, but he’s the only reliable progressive I see in this bunch. He’s already in power. Other progressives all caved on this bill. He was intransigent in his principled support for a sensible solution to this problem. And he always has been. He’s been a Presidential candidate, so we know he has set his sites high. I really think it would send a message to the Democratic Party in a way they understand (dollars and cents). And Kucinich could decide where the money went, yes – to other progressive candidates, causes, media. I think it would work. It would certainly garner some MSM attention. Dunno…

Kucinich in 2012. So tired of Obama cold shouldering the left.

ps. and shifting political sands always drifting RIGHT!!!!

Defeating the Democrats means allowing Republicans to win in 2010. I don’t see how that works in our favor. Putting up better Democratic candidates is one thing, but event that is an inexact science, as Kissel in NC makes clear.

A CEO of a startup I used to work for said “Brands are important, aren’t they?” I replied, “Only when they stand for something.”

To paraphrase Orwell, “The Party exists for its own sake.” Parties need to serve various purposes, not least of which is quality control, i.e. strong adherence to a consensus political platform. What’s the difference between a cockroach in every fourth can of Campbell’s Soup and the current D party situation?

Recourse.

Rep Van Hollen is always warning us that the base could become too complacent for the Democrats to win, just as he did the other night after the Governor’s races came crashing down. Quite frankly, I am getting increasingly enraged with just how concerned the Democrats are with their own re-elections. You would think that getting re-elected was the urgent issue before us all, not a true health care reform bill to take care of all of the sick at an affordable price that does not bankrupt the unfortunate. They really do not deserve to be re-elected. I will do my part to help them into another line of work more suitable for their talents. I can’t really suggest a line of work though, because all of the obvious suggestions are just not that funny anymore.

Shouldn’t Obama be telling us what that plan is?

Well said. Ironically, by focusing on getting re-elected, they are losing all the momentum that was put in motion last year. Their calculation has to err on the side of timidity rather than to act courageously to deliver the change that we were told to believe in.

Van Hollen is only one of several Democratic leaders expressing this concern about the base becoming too complacent, and their solution is proving to be yet another miscalculation.

They thought that they could energize the base by pointing again and again to Republicans and the right wingnuts as the ones creating obstacles to real change. One obvious example is the recent effort to target Fox News. They also send out emails trying to convince us that we should be blaming Boehner and even Palin.

But they’re in power, not the Republicans. In fact, what they’ve been doing is create an impression that the Republicans have more power than they do, which has been a bad move.

The problem isn’t that the Republicans have been too successful.

The problem is that these current Democratic leaders are morally weak failures.

Economic populism in the Democratic Party has been dead since RFK. It’s such a wasted opportunity. Good policy, paid for and benefiting the general public, as an electoral meal ticket: what a novel idea…Pay for HR 676 with a Value Added Tax starting tomorrow and win big in the next election cycle (or the one after that). Do the right thing!

He’s got my vote.

well said. thanks, gam!

yeah, and I am thinking Nader had it right when he said the two parties were amoral twins.