Friday, October 31, 2014
street news, views and stories of justice and injustice
Follow me on Twitter

Search WitnessLA:

Recent Posts

Categories

Archives

Meta


“I am not bound to win, but I am bound to be true…”

March 20th, 2010 by Celeste Fremon

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy


As most of you likely know by now, on Saturday afternoon, on the eve of the health care reform vote,
Obama spoke to the Democratic caucus who listened with uncharacteristically silent attention. There was no pep rally atmosphere.

Obama centered the speech around a Lincoln quote: “I am not bound to win, but I am bound to be true. We are not bound to succeed, but we are bound to let whatever light we have shine.”

It was a very smart, very emotional, very carefully crafted speech—and worth listening to in its entirety.

Posted in health care, medical care, National issues, National politics | 55 Comments »

55 Responses

  1. reg Says:

    Great speech. Now THAT’S a President.

  2. Celeste Fremon Says:

    Precisely my thought.

  3. reg Says:

    The bill needs to pass on its merits, which despite criticisms including my own are considerable in comparison to the present situation. But the real news here is, IMHO, increasingly becoming apparent – the passage of this landmark legislation is going to change the terrain and the discussion about Dems prospects in the November elections. I’m beginning to believe – strongly – that while a few seats may be lost because of that mid-term pendulum, predictions of Democratic troubles are going to prove greatly exaggerated if they play to their obvious strengths – working to stabilize and stimulate the economy, passing some jobs bills and reforming health care versus the increasingly obvious nihilism and histrionics of the GOP. If the guy in that video is out there setting the tone for the Democratic congressional re-election campaigns I’m beginning to look forward to November.

  4. Mavis Beacon Says:

    May I suggest that this is a great opportunity for folks to make predictions about what is going to happen if the bill passes. I’ll take a crack when I have more time.

  5. Winny Says:

    If he’s bound to be true, I wonder when he’ll start.

    His monstrously ill-conceived health care bill will raise taxes and fees on middle class Americans, giving the big lie to one of his central campaign promises. How is that being true?

    He promised an open process, “televised on C-Span.” Instead, it has been a carnival of corruption–and all behind closed doors. How is that being true?

    He says if we like our health care, we can keep it (Gee, thanks, Barack–as if my health care is any of your business.) But private, first rate health care will be a victim of this bill. We will be Canada, we will be the UK, we will line up for permission to have needed medical procedures, and we will watch helplessly as the same caliber of worker who now staff the VA and the Post Office tell us if we qualify.

    Barack Obama is well on his way to ruining a medical infrastructure that, despite all of its flaws, is the envy of the world.

    He is a disgrace.

    He is a one-term president.

    He thinks he is making history tomorrow. But in the long run history will little remember him, except as a cautionary tale.

  6. Gava Joe Says:

    Shhh – Winny, let’s let the process process before we pass judgements. It really has been a wonderful lesson for all us novice obsevers of the legislative machinery. This Administration has seemingly dropped the curtain and given us all a clear view of the ingredients in the Kool-Aid.

  7. Woody Says:

    Great speech? Anyone can read a telepromter. Obama hasn’t even read the bill.

  8. Sure Fire Says:

    What we’ve seen in this debate is the unmasking of a thug politician whose blinding ambition to leave his mark on history will be his Waterloo. This is a shameless fraud who’s handing out the biggest entitlement in history at a time of record unemployment that will stifle small business and quite possibly end a health care system that’s the envy of the world even with its problems.

    Tell me Mavis, I agreed with the point of insuring those with pre-existing conditions, but do you think insurers shouldn’t be allow to figure the premium price with such a condition in mind? Last thing I read was that the bill restricted insurers from using such a condition when coming up with a price.

    The bill is bull shit, the president is a complete idiot and any of you that think this entire process was done in a way that promotes respect for any of the leaders who pushed this, especially the president, is more than an idiot, you’re a fucking fool.

  9. reg Says:

    Depends sale at Walgreens, SureFire !!! Get ‘em before Obama starts rationing them !!!

    These histrionics are pure comedy. Total fucking idiots.

  10. reg Says:

    “the same caliber of worker who now staff the VA”

    The VA operates one of the best health care delivery systems in the US – in terms of both cost-effectiveness and consumer ratings. I can back this up with links to patient surveys, Rand Corp. Studies and a wealth of other empirical data, but crazies like “winny” and the rest of our “conservatives” here are so unhinged and ridiculous, it doesn’t matter.

  11. reg Says:

    Again, it doesn’t matter but for the edification of the little cretin who has serially and bizarrely accused me of being a “child molester” in these comments threads (a window into his soul), President Obama spoke without a teleprompter and without a prepared text in delivering those remarks today. (Yeah, SureSnitch, the man is a “complete idiot.” Get back to me when you can explain, without foaming at the mouth, the insane slander you lodged against me a few threads back.)

  12. Sure Fire Says:

    You deserve ever bit of slander anyone throws at your Reg, many of your comments about what type of cop I must have been is ok but me tossing facts about what you’ve posted isn’t? Quit being a cry baby all day and night and act like a man.

    What substance is in your posts that you put up on this thread, that Obama made points and is the man now because he didn’t use a telepropter. Get real, you sound like one of the many liberals pols that were kissing the ass of Jim Jones when he was around.

  13. Sure Fire Says:

    The world of Reg in a nutshell..

    “The bill needs to pass on its merits, which despite criticisms including my own are considerable in comparison to the present situation. But the real news here is, IMHO, increasingly becoming apparent – the passage of this landmark legislation is going to change the terrain and the discussion about Dems prospects in the November elections”.

    Only Reg is right about the merits of the bill and only Reg’s criticisms of the bill are correct. Nothing else needs to be talked about, Reg Obama has made his choice for the board like the president has made the choice for everyone else.

    Oh yeah, I can’t wait for the mid-terms.

  14. reg Says:

    “what type of cop I might have been” – I don’t make up alleged anecdotes about what type of cop you might have been. All I’ve done is comment on what type of person you clearly are as evident from your resentment driven hysterics and abusive nattrings here.

    Tell me the “facts about what I’ve posted” that you were supposedly regurgitating. I asked you once before and all you did was go ballistic because you got called on your lame little schoolyard bully shit and couldn’t handle it. What are the “facts” that you allege ? Of course, you can’t come up with any “facts” to support your slanders. You are a liar. Nothing less. Maybe this tells us something about “what type of cop you might have been”, asshole. You don’t run your mouth as much as you have here and not show something about yourself.

    Anyone can read this thread and get the same nasty picture of you recycled for themselves. Your shit borders on insanity when you’re weak and cornered.

    As for the question of substance, you’ve shown once again that you are running on empty. How you leap from my taking the facts and schooling Woody for making shit up about Obama reading this speech off of teleprompters to invoking Jim Jones is an indication of just how desperate you are to try to score poinbts when you’re just falling flat on your face. If you were the type of cop that was anything close to what we see in your comments and your serial inability to commit to even a reasonable facsimile of honest discussion we see here, you were a pretty shitty cop who scammed the taxpayers. But don’t speak here as a cop, dish out your garbage and expect to get a pass and not have any questions asked about your professionalism.

    Angry, lying resentment-driven asshole – whining about “substance” but weak on delivering any. That’s not hyperbole – that’s what you’ve shown folks who read these threads. The classic “Cop-hater blog” summed up your anger and self-pity that turns so much of your commentary into a catalog of resentments. Your fixation on “snitches”, prison rape and constant invocation of “bitch” as epithet of choice says a lot about what you’re carrying around in that swelled head. This isn’t shit I’ve made up – it’s your face on this blog. Look in the fucking mirror before you go off on me again with your little schoolyard bully rants.

    And yes, I can’t wait for the mid-terms because I know the country is better than the ridiculous, utterly dishonest shit that dishonest little clowns like Woody and SureFire are shoveling at us.

  15. Woody Says:

    For the lying, psychotic school dropout in these threads, Obama still reads his speeches. He really knows nothing about the details of the bill, has done nothing of substance for unemployment except to make sure it stays bad with increased taxes, and will go down as the worst president in history for being responsible to making the United States a second class nation that no longer has power and respect. Now, that’s something I’m sure you’re celebrating.

  16. reg Says:

    Woody responds to a correction on the facts…

    Check out SureFire and Woody, folks. These guys are the face of contemporary “conservatism” – an “I’m with Stupid!” tee shirt, increasingly in tatters.

  17. Mavis Beacon Says:

    Not that the teleprompter talking point is anything but silly, but it is interesting that the official word is that there were no prepared remarks for that speech. Just Obama talking.

  18. Mick Says:

    Finally, an achievement–an attempt to cut through the BS and actually reform a broken system. The Republican Party is not the party of “no”, but the party of “no ideas”. Zilch. Thanks to the GOP, we have a near-bankrupt country from a lost decade of a useless war, cheap credit, near depression economy, no growth, no ideas–just sit with arms crossed and let the country go to crap. That’s the Republican Party, present and probably future.

    The Republican Party is like a fool who huddles in a corner when the house is burning, thinking that it will put itself out and all just go away. And this is a charitable interpretation, since the evidence suggests that the fool also started the fire.

    A messy, ugly process, dealing with zombie politicians, crooks and swindlers, idiots who care nothing about the problems of real folks. But Obama kicked some ass and kept up the fight. I’m damn pleased.

  19. WTF Says:

    In case someone wants to actually read about the Health Care Bill, or find a free book, manual or magazine. (Scrib)

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/28571851/Health-Care-Reconciliation-Bill

  20. reg Says:

    Mavis – it’s obvious watching Obama deliver the speech that there’s no teleprompter and that he doesn’t even have a printed version on the lectern in front of him. Just a piece of paper he draws from his pocket to get the Lincoln quote exactly right.

    Woody and SureFire would be lucky to get a job shining shoes in this White House.

  21. Woody Says:

    Obama hasn’t read the health care bill. Congress hasn’t read the health care bill. Yet, it has to be passed immediately. God help the U.S.

  22. Woody Says:

    “There is nothing more frightening than ignorance in action.” ~ Goethe

  23. reg Says:

    Only Woody, his guru Neil Boortz, Brent Bozell, Glenn Beck, John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, some lady in a funny hat calling Barney Frank a “faggot”, another crazy old man branding John Lews “nigger”, people ridiculing a man with Parkinson’s disease, the Bamboozilla from Wasilla and Phyllis Schlafly have read the health care bill and understand it well enough to know that America is doomed. No one who has worked on crafting and debating this legislation over the past year has a clue as to what’s in it.

    “There is nothing more frightening than ignorance in action.”

  24. Winny Says:

    Reg–

    I wrote (#5, above) against the bill and Obama’s sorry actions in support of it. Rather than respond in kind–on the merits–you characteristically chose to engage in personal villification, calling me one of “the crazies” (#10). I won’t sink to your level, but will merely point out that your rousing defense of the VA omits to mention….well, a lot of things, but in particular the situation at Walter Reed, where conditions are so appalling for vets (perhaps you remember the newspaper coverage?) that folks like Bill Shatner and his wife Elizabeth are raising money privately for clean linen. Clean linen, Reg. For maimed veterans. Yeah, great care, can’t wait until we can all enjoy it. I would also hope this monstrosity of a health care bill at least has sufficient funding to cover your anger management issues.

  25. reg Says:

    Walter Reed is not a VA hospital. You should know this. I think you’re proving my point that you don’t know WTF you’re talking about.

  26. reg Says:

    If that’s confusing to you, Walter Reed – which allowed an absolutely disgraceful situation in treatment of returning vets from Iraq and Afghnistan – is a military hospital run by the Department of Defense. The Department of Veterans Affairs adminsiters the VA hospitals. There was a period into the 90s where there was a lot of legitimate criticism of VA medical services, but the facts – not related your imaginings – are that the VA hospitals have raised their standards of care remarkably over the last 15 years and get the highest consumer/patient ratings and were rated among the best hospitals by the Rand Corporation and several other studies. Again, I’m not going to bother to link because you need to work on your own information gathering skills so as not to continue to embarrass yourself. I’m doing you a favor. Go spend some time on your homework. Oh – and here’s a little punctuation to this waste of my time that I find is always helpful with “anger management: LOL.

  27. Winny Says:

    The CARE the veterans get at Walter Reed is ABSOLUTELY administered by the VA, and that’s why it sucks. Obviously the Walter Reed BUILDING is a location where first-rate medical care is possible (presidents of the United States typically have their annual physicals there), but get the VA involved and you get the Dickensian conditions I described in #24, above. (Dear readers: Reg seems capable only of personal attack, but if you want to know which one of us is right about the VA offering shockingly substandard care–not ALWAYS, Reg, but with appalling regularity–just Google “VA” and read what comes up. Q.E.D.)

  28. reg Says:

    One more thing – there are plenty of anecdotal and systematic abuses and horror stories in our health care delivery system, to which I’m certain the VA hospitals are not immune. I’m not arguing they are perfect – but there is NO evidence in the comparative ratings of VA hospitals that puts them anywhere but among the better hospital systems. I’m sick of right-wingers just making up talking points on thread-bare facts or blatant ignorance. If these clowns want to defend the private insurance companies that shape so much of health care delivery against, say, the record of Medicare or to claim that VA hospitals are pits compared to private hospitals, when the evidence of all objective studies shows they’re not, it’s my judgement that we’re dealing with something less than serious people who have even a minimal commitment to rational debate or factual analysis. Thus “crazies.” Sorry. Actully, I think I’m being kind compared to the slander and abuse the Obama-hate-fest crowd routinely dishes out.

  29. reg Says:

    Winnie once again proves my point. You get your own opinions but not your own facts. Walter Reed is run and administered by the military, not the VA and the VA cannot be held responsible for the conditions there. Walter Reed is NOT a VA hospital or under VA “administration” as this person claims.

    Even more, if you think this character isn’t blowing smoke out of their butt. I googled VA – nothing came up on the first 2 pages to support any of your crazy ranting. I didn’t bother with pages 3 through 300,000. But google “VA hospitals quality of care” and you start to get a factual picture. Even one horror story about some poor care at a VA hospital notes that it was an exception in a generally very high quality system. As I said, there are terrible stories in our health care system and the way we provide coverage is disgraceful compared to nearly every other industrialized country, but the VA hospitals are among the better systems according to all objective reporting and assessment. This is not my opinion. Go check for yourselves.

  30. Winny Says:

    Hey Reg–

    If you want to rail against the “ignorance” of others simply because they have different opinions from your own, maybe you shouldn’t spell “threadbare” wrong….in the very same sentence.

  31. reg Says:

    Is that all you’ve got ?

    Here’s “the google” offering a Time article from 2006 on VA hospitals. Just in case folks don’t want to let their fingers do the walking:

    Veterans’ groups understandably want the health-care system expanded to accommodate vets with higher incomes and no service-related ailments. Tom Bock, commander of the American Legion, has another idea: allow elderly vets not in the system who are drawing Medicare payments to spend those benefits at a VA facility instead of going to a private doctor, as is now required by Medicare. “It’s a win-win-win situation,” he argues. Medicare, which pays more than $6,500 per patient annually for care by private doctors, could save with the VA’s less expensive care, which costs about $5,000 per patient. The vets would receive better service at the VA’s facilities, which could treat millions more patients with Medicare’s cash infusion.

    But conservatives fear such an arrangement would be a Trojan horse, setting up an even larger national health-care program and taking more business from the private sector. Congress has no plans to enlarge the scope of veterans’ health care–much less consider it a model for, say, a government-run system serving nonvets. But it’s becoming more and more “ideologically inconvenient for some to have such a stellar health-delivery system being run by the government,” says Margaret O’Kane, president of the National Committee for Quality Assurance, which rates health plans for businesses and individuals. If VA health care continues to be the industry leader, it may become more difficult to argue that the market can do better.

  32. reg Says:

    Is it “ass-hole” or “asshole” ? I always get confused by that one.

  33. Winny Says:

    Reg–

    Read this slowly. Twice. Three times. As many times as it takes. The rest of you will get this right away:

    ALL OF THE MEDICAL CARE A WOUNDED VET RECEIVES IS ADMINISTERED BY THE VA, WHICH IS THE SOLE FEDERAL AGENCY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE QUALITY OF THAT CARE. IF A VET IS FORCED TO LIVE IN SOILED SHEETS…WITH-BEDSORES….AT ANY HOSPITAL, IT OF COURSE REFLECTS ON THAT FACILITY BUT ALSO AND PRIMARILY UPON THE VA. THAT IS THE SORT OF CARE WE ALL WILL SOON BE RECEIVING UNDER OBABACARE. COUNT ON IT.

    Reg, I have to sign off now, much work to do today. Won’t be reading your next vile-filled rant. But soldier on. It’s what you do. Hold it dear!

  34. Mavis Beacon Says:

    Winny, I’m pretty sure you are wrong. It’s not super important, but Walter Reed is run by the US Army.

  35. Winny Says:

    Yes, Walter Reed is run by the military.

    St John’s in Santa Monica was started as a Catholic hospital.

    Cedars of Lebanon (the purple building on Fountain now owned by the Scientologists) had an interesting gestation–fascinating story about the Jewish community in LA.

    It evolved into Cedars-Sinai–different management structure.

    The point is, no matter who owns or runs a hospital, no matter the hospital’s own poilicies (i.e. the issue of abortion and Catholic hospitals), the auspices under which your health care is ADMINISTERED (in the case of wounded vets, the VA) is the controlling entity where that beneficiary’s quality of care is concerned.

    Reg thinks the quality of care under the VA is something to be proud of.

    I know for a fact it is not.

  36. Sure Fire Says:

    Reg, you spout all you want, you have that right. I’m confident at some point some guy way to high will think “wow this guy Reg must be some bad ass, look how he writes”. He would be very wrong, you’re an absolute weakling.

    You’re just a weak little man whose O.C. is way out of control here. When you takes walks with your wife does she have one of those kid leashes she makes you wear so you don’t run after cars or bite small kds? You’re seriously sick dude.

  37. sbl Says:

    By no longer being able to adjust price for those with pre-existing and possibly extremely expensive conditions, sometimes caused by lifestyle (e.g. obesity, inactivity, smoking or drinking or doing drugs heavily – of course they deny it so it’s not factored in), while pricing strictly on age, this will more heavily penalize anyone over 40 or especially 50 who’s super-healthy and does all the right things, has had no or few claims – strictly based on the statistical tables which the AMA uses and often misuses now. Nothing in this plan makes their insurance MORE affordable, to the contrary, especially if they’re a small business owner or individual. (surefire and other critics are right on that – even if they would likely criticize anything the Democrats cook up for partisan reasons.)

    While this purely blatant age discrimination is one of the most glaring oversights of this bill, even though the progressives touting it should know better. (Ironically, it’s the Republicans who are most worried about the negative impacts on older people, on top of this bill being paid for in part by stripping down MediCare even further – in Calif., as few as 1/5 to 1/3 of doctors depending on area accept it even as it is – partly out of an admitted unproductive, partisan ulterior motive to bring down “the thug from Chicago” as surefire calls him, but there is a solid kernel of truth to these concerns or they wouldn’t have gained such traction.) Also, no one has addressed the fact that if penalties for not buying insurance are tied to IRS records, those who don’t pay taxes – illegal workers – will be allowed to receive services without penalty. On the other hand, those of limited financial means who are struggling as independent contractors, will be required to pay at market rates, and/or face reduced MediCare coverage.
    I continue to remain extremely concerned about having our medical records not only all electronic where they’re easy to steal and abuse and sell for profit by big business especially pharmaceutical co’s without our consent or even knowledge (as we’ve seen over and over, in this industry as well as banking, real estate, internet/phone providers, etc.), but also having them linked to IRS – the “Big Government” aspects and potential for abuse are truly scary.

    By jettisoning the “government option” that could have been the only thing providing competitive pressure to bring insurance rates down, and instead just penalizing those who don’t buy insurance at whatever rates the industry sets, this bill is a horse turned into camel by committee and it will be an extremely bumpy ride. DESPITE this, I think it’s time to try SOMETHING, and really wanted to see a viable plan: but it’s the shame of both totally obstructionist Republicans as well as ideologues like Pelosi who don’t listen to “middle America” and just exude a condescending contempt for them, that this poor plan will mean a massive series of shakeouts over the next decade until the frustrated public and politicians of both parties finally compromise on something better thought-out. During this next decade there will by many guinea pig “losers” as well as some winners.

  38. reg Says:

    Winny – your insistence that the VA is in charge of the care at Walter Reed is simply false. The VA does not have control of that facility. They are not in charge of the staff – don’t hire and fire or supervise at the facility. You’re picking at a nit which would is equivalent to stating that if a patient receives poor care in a lousy hospital ward, the insurance company that “administers” their care is responsible.

    I’m not saying that the VA shouldn’t have been a better watch dog for vets in military hospitals – I’m sure this is the case. But the poor quality of day-to-day care at Walter Reed was the responsibility of the Defense Department. They run the hospital, staff the hospital, are on site as the management of the hospital. The VA is not the “sole federal agency” in charge of the care delivered at Walter Reed. That is, simply put, a falsehood that you’re clinging to because you can’t back up your larger point, which was the the VA delivers shitty care across the board. Actually, by all measures, they deliver care which is above the average and generally – but of course not in all instances – proven to be high quality. This is based on the best empirical data, not my wishful thinking.

    Even if what you said were – in some semantic sense or moral sense – relevant, in terms of the VA’s responsibility to monitor the care delivered to wounded soldiers under treatment within the DOD systems, how do you explain the high scores for those hospitals – unlike Walter Reed – that the VA actually does directly administer ? Again, you offer an opinion that you can’t back up with facts. What you “know for a fact” can’t be the smoke you blow from your butt. Sorry.

    SureFire – you can quit waving your arms and pissing in my direction. You come off as more of a rancid piece of crap each time you comment. Lame shit.

  39. Woody Says:

    reg, if the health care bill isn’t even finished, but they’re voting on it. Even the Democrats don’t know what’s in a bill crafted behind closed doors.

    And, I’ll take the tea party crowd over crude, anti-U.S., chanting, pants wetting liberals.

  40. Mick Says:

    Crude? Ha ha ha, that’s funny. No crudeness at the tea parties. Just spitting, racial slurs, threats of violence, and other obscenities:

    http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/36016_What_Racism_at_the_Tea_Parties

    http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/36015_Tea_Partiers_Threatening_Violence_Where

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/20/tea-party-protests-nier-f_n_507116.html

    How “civilized”! What a sickening disgrace.

  41. Sure Fire Says:

    SBL, a very well thought out post. Nicely done.

  42. Woody Says:

    If you pick out a few out-of-line individuals and say they are typical of the entire tea-party movement, then you’re stupid or lying.

    On the other hand, radical left-wingers have historically supported movements to cripple our families, our education system, our economy, and our government. I can find hundreds of videos with left-wing crowds saying, “F- the police,” “F- Bush, and “F- the U.S.”

    I’m sorry, the left has a solid claim on crude violent protests…and, I’m not sure that the Democrats didn’t plant those people who were unrepresentative of the overwheliming majority. Such would help a President behind a lot of slimy backroom buyoffs and who wants to deflect attention from his crooked deals.

  43. Mick Says:

    “If you pick out a few out-of-line individuals and say they are typical of the entire anti-war movement, then you’re stupid or lying.”

    Fixed that for you, stupid. (Two can play the ad hominem game.)

    Here’s some more of your crude, obscene tea party friends. Nice folks you hang out with:

    http://www.dmzhawaii.org/files/2010/01/tea-party-racist-signs-01.jpg

    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_PlJTNgrwPpY/S6ZJnuJTHfI/AAAAAAAAD14/OZtXSKi40ls/s320/teapartypic.jpg

    http://ladylibertyslamp.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/obama-racist-latest.jpg

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d1/Obama-Nazi_comparison_-_Tea_Party_protest.jpg

    http://seesdifferent.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/racist-obama-pin.jpg

    http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_2b_SPCr78uQ/Sq2YtN3xxGI/AAAAAAAALyg/JihKjGHAvw8/s400/tea+party++7+dc+anichrist.jpg

  44. Celeste Fremon Says:

    Mick, you’re freaking out my spam catcher. Try doing fewer links, as if I’m not here, they’ll stay in comment jail until I notice them.

  45. Mick Says:

    Cool, Celeste. My point is made. No more links.

  46. Woody Says:

    Mick, your selected pictures prove nothing. Maybe I should give you quotes from the Unibomber and Al Gore to see if you can tell which is which. I’ll let your side have the SDS, the Weathermen, the Black Pathers, Bill Ayers, the Nation of Islam, and Rev. Wright’s congregation.

  47. Mick Says:

    My links prove at least as much as your comments: nuts on the extremist left, nuts on the extremist right. The difference between us is you are trying to defend extremists, while I keep away from extremists on the left and right.

    They’re called extremists for a reason. And you are apparently okay with yours. Which makes you, to use your words, either ignorant or stupid.

    Now, put down your Obamanazi signs for a moment and go out and celebrate the HCR bill. Soon we’ll have universal coverage, so you’d better save your energy for more crude and obscene protests that end up having zero effect on the outcome.

  48. Woody Says:

    Mick, you’re not very smart, are you? You haven’t proved anything except that you can find selective and inaccurate images to smear decent people. Also, I haven’t defended extremists…have I? But, that’s what you claimed. And, Nazi? You lose.

  49. Mick Says:

    Continuing the ad hominem, I see–you fit right in with your slurring name-calling extremist gang. But keeping on task, you’re simply wrong. You want to claim that anti-war protests and their accompanying obscene extremists are somehow qualitatively different from anti-HCR protests and their accompanying teapartying obscene extremists. You haven’t shown that, so you fail.

    And apparently you didn’t look at the links I posted: “Nazi” signs galore. The extremists’ favorite, and the obvious point that’s sailing over your not-smart head (ad hominem is the cheap way you out, you see. But others can play that game).

    So, no. You lose.

  50. Mick Says:

    “and, I’m not sure that the Democrats didn’t plant those people”

    I almost forgot this gem. Hilariously (eerily?) reminiscent of the comments that the wacky ANSWER folks used to make about Republicans planting over-the-top BUSHITLER signs at anti-war protests. Uncanny.

  51. reg Says:

    A GOP Congressman yells “Babykiller!” at Bart Stupack, no less, on the floor of Congress – I think that says more about the mindset that’s infected the highest levels of the TeaBagged GOP than any additional links.

    From HuffPo, a GOP congressman confirms it was one of his fellow party members:

    The shouter was not identified, but one reporter in the gallery thought it was Rep. John Campbell (R-Calif.). It was not, he told reporters…
    “It was on the floor, but it wasn’t very far behind me,” Campbell told reporters. “But it was definitely on the floor, but it wasn’t me. I don’t think it’s appropriate at all.”

  52. Sure Fire Says:

    You guys have Rag, I mean Reg, Mick. You lose.

  53. reg Says:

    Get back to us when you can explain your concocting slanderous bullshit, your cowardly responses when you’re cornered in a lie, your fixation on prison rape and your constantly calling other men “bitches.”

  54. reg Says:

    Krugman nails the cretins:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/22/opinion/22krugman.html?hp

    The day before Sunday’s health care vote, President Obama gave an unscripted talk to House Democrats. Near the end, he spoke about why his party should pass reform: “Every once in a while a moment comes where you have a chance to vindicate all those best hopes that you had about yourself, about this country, where you have a chance to make good on those promises that you made … And this is the time to make true on that promise. We are not bound to win, but we are bound to be true. We are not bound to succeed, but we are bound to let whatever light we have shine.”

    And on the other side, here’s what Newt Gingrich, the Republican former speaker of the House — a man celebrated by many in his party as an intellectual leader — had to say: If Democrats pass health reform, “They will have destroyed their party much as Lyndon Johnson shattered the Democratic Party for 40 years” by passing civil rights legislation.

    I’d argue that Mr. Gingrich is wrong about that: proposals to guarantee health insurance are often controversial before they go into effect — Ronald Reagan famously argued that Medicare would mean the end of American freedom — but always popular once enacted.

    But that’s not the point I want to make today. Instead, I want you to consider the contrast: on one side, the closing argument was an appeal to our better angels, urging politicians to do what is right, even if it hurts their careers; on the other side, callous cynicism. Think about what it means to condemn health reform by comparing it to the Civil Rights Act. Who in modern America would say that L.B.J. did the wrong thing by pushing for racial equality? (Actually, we know who: the people at the Tea Party protest who hurled racial epithets at Democratic members of Congress on the eve of the vote.)

    And that cynicism has been the hallmark of the whole campaign against reform.

    Yes, a few conservative policy intellectuals, after making a show of thinking hard about the issues, claimed to be disturbed by reform’s fiscal implications (but were strangely unmoved by the clean bill of fiscal health from the Congressional Budget Office) or to want stronger action on costs (even though this reform does more to tackle health care costs than any previous legislation). For the most part, however, opponents of reform didn’t even pretend to engage with the reality either of the existing health care system or of the moderate, centrist plan — very close in outline to the reform Mitt Romney introduced in Massachusetts — that Democrats were proposing.

    Instead, the emotional core of opposition to reform was blatant fear-mongering, unconstrained either by the facts or by any sense of decency.

    It wasn’t just the death panel smear. It was racial hate-mongering, like a piece in Investor’s Business Daily declaring that health reform is “affirmative action on steroids, deciding everything from who becomes a doctor to who gets treatment on the basis of skin color.” It was wild claims about abortion funding. It was the insistence that there is something tyrannical about giving young working Americans the assurance that health care will be available when they need it, an assurance that older Americans have enjoyed ever since Lyndon Johnson — whom Mr. Gingrich considers a failed president — pushed Medicare through over the howls of conservatives.

    And let’s be clear: the campaign of fear hasn’t been carried out by a radical fringe, unconnected to the Republican establishment. On the contrary, that establishment has been involved and approving all the way. Politicians like Sarah Palin — who was, let us remember, the G.O.P.’s vice-presidential candidate — eagerly spread the death panel lie, and supposedly reasonable, moderate politicians like Senator Chuck Grassley refused to say that it was untrue. On the eve of the big vote, Republican members of Congress warned that “freedom dies a little bit today” and accused Democrats of “totalitarian tactics,” which I believe means the process known as “voting.”

    Without question, the campaign of fear was effective: health reform went from being highly popular to wide disapproval, although the numbers have been improving lately. But the question was, would it actually be enough to block reform?

    And the answer is no. The Democrats have done it. The House has passed the Senate version of health reform, and an improved version will be achieved through reconciliation.

    This is, of course, a political victory for President Obama, and a triumph for Nancy Pelosi, the House speaker. But it is also a victory for America’s soul. In the end, a vicious, unprincipled fear offensive failed to block reform. This time, fear struck out.

  55. Sure Fire Says:

    I never lied about you Rag, prove it or move on.

Leave a Comment





Please note: Comment moderation is enabled and may delay your comment. There is no need to resubmit your comment.