Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Faryn Balyncd
Faryn Balyncd's Journal
Faryn Balyncd's Journal
October 17, 2013
So here's the audio of what the Holy Spirit woke up Diane Reidy to say to those apostate Congressmen:
https://soundcloud.com/toddzwillich-1/floor1-101612-wav
"“He will not be mocked! This is not one nation under God. It never was.
The greatest deception here is this is not one nation under god! It never was.
Had it been, it would not have been!
The Constitution would not have been written by Freemasons!
You cannot serve two masters! You cannot serve two masters!
Praise be to God, Lord Jesus Christ."
God not happy with US voting to pay its bills! Sound file:
So here's the audio of what the Holy Spirit woke up Diane Reidy to say to those apostate Congressmen:
https://soundcloud.com/toddzwillich-1/floor1-101612-wav
"“He will not be mocked! This is not one nation under God. It never was.
The greatest deception here is this is not one nation under god! It never was.
Had it been, it would not have been!
The Constitution would not have been written by Freemasons!
You cannot serve two masters! You cannot serve two masters!
Praise be to God, Lord Jesus Christ."
October 15, 2013
Stopping at the pharmacy on the way home from the hospital with my post-op wife, we dropped off her prescription at the pharmacy. When we called to see if it was ready, we were told that the Humana Prescription Drug Plan had refused coverage because the licensed physician who signed the prescription was employed as a resident physician.
When I called Humana, the very nice person person who Humana had hired to field such calls relayed to me the message Humana has trained her to tell such policy purchasers: that "THE GOVERNMENT MADE US DO IT. Medicare won't allow insurance companies to pay" for prescriptions written by fully licensed physicians who happen to be employed as a resident physician at the time.
How much Humana paid the person who dreamed up that blatant lie is unclear.
But what is clear is the type of business practices that have become "business as usual" in our current corporate culture.
These everyday nickle and dime denials make sense from one and only one perspective: These are the foundations which allow Humana's current CEO Bruce Broussard to be paid $10.5 million per year, (not counting $323,000 in "commuting" expenses), even as they pay peanuts to the nice people they hire to man the complaint lines.
PGA TOUR golfer Scott McCarron cracks a joke as (from left) Humana Challenge CEO Bob Marra, Humana President and CEO Bruce Broussard, and Desert Classic Charities President John Foster share a laugh at the Humana Challenge Mayor's Breakfast
What passes for "capitalism" in today's culture would make Adam Smith VOMIT.
Humana Pays CEO Broussard $10.5 million by cheating post-op patients out of their precriptions:
Stopping at the pharmacy on the way home from the hospital with my post-op wife, we dropped off her prescription at the pharmacy. When we called to see if it was ready, we were told that the Humana Prescription Drug Plan had refused coverage because the licensed physician who signed the prescription was employed as a resident physician.
When I called Humana, the very nice person person who Humana had hired to field such calls relayed to me the message Humana has trained her to tell such policy purchasers: that "THE GOVERNMENT MADE US DO IT. Medicare won't allow insurance companies to pay" for prescriptions written by fully licensed physicians who happen to be employed as a resident physician at the time.
How much Humana paid the person who dreamed up that blatant lie is unclear.
But what is clear is the type of business practices that have become "business as usual" in our current corporate culture.
These everyday nickle and dime denials make sense from one and only one perspective: These are the foundations which allow Humana's current CEO Bruce Broussard to be paid $10.5 million per year, (not counting $323,000 in "commuting" expenses), even as they pay peanuts to the nice people they hire to man the complaint lines.
PGA TOUR golfer Scott McCarron cracks a joke as (from left) Humana Challenge CEO Bob Marra, Humana President and CEO Bruce Broussard, and Desert Classic Charities President John Foster share a laugh at the Humana Challenge Mayor's Breakfast
What passes for "capitalism" in today's culture would make Adam Smith VOMIT.
October 11, 2013
Here's a pithy quote from The American Conservative's "State of the Union" editorial "It’s Time to Throw the Tea Party One Ring into Mount Doom", published October 8, discussing what this old line, right-wing, conservative (and certainly not "moderate"
publication terms the " implacability of the House's kamikaze-cons" :
". . . Why are Republicans inflicting real, immediate, and tangible harm on the economy in order to accomplish the impossible (delay or defund Obamacare) address an abstract future threat (debt) or merely to save face? Why isn’t the majority of the House majority isolating its rightmost faction and ending this pointlessly asinine pissing match?"
"Contra the conventional wisdom, I maintain that no one in leadership will lose his job. The very nature of Tea Party opposition, whether it issues from the likes of Bazooka Ted and His Gang in the Senate or the unappeasable Jacobins in the House, is to throw weight without consequence. They evince no interest in actually wielding power from the inside, which would require restraint, conciliation, and moderation. They are hysterics on the brink of utter demoralization. The danger they pose to democratic norms, institutional comity, and political functionality is precisely why they can’t be bargained with; they must be marginalized."
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/its-time-to-throw-the-tea-party-one-ring-into-mount-doom/
Thinking it might be appropriate to simply (& politely) inquire if my Republican representative had read this editorial, and what his position on the House Republican direction since being taken over by the Kamakaze Cauucus, I called both my representative's office, and also Speaker Boehner's office.
Unfortunately, unlike my representative, none of Speaker Boehner's offices seem to be answering their telephone today, or at least not within 1 hour. (Can't imagine why)
Here's a link to House members office telephone numbers:
http://www.house.gov/representatives/
(While it's important to keep the conversation polite) . . . should not any Republican representative have an opinion on the Kamakaze-cons that are tearing apart their own party?
If your Representative is a Republican, ask if he/she has read The American Conservative's Op-Ed:
Here's a pithy quote from The American Conservative's "State of the Union" editorial "It’s Time to Throw the Tea Party One Ring into Mount Doom", published October 8, discussing what this old line, right-wing, conservative (and certainly not "moderate"
publication terms the " implacability of the House's kamikaze-cons" :
". . . Why are Republicans inflicting real, immediate, and tangible harm on the economy in order to accomplish the impossible (delay or defund Obamacare) address an abstract future threat (debt) or merely to save face? Why isn’t the majority of the House majority isolating its rightmost faction and ending this pointlessly asinine pissing match?"
"Contra the conventional wisdom, I maintain that no one in leadership will lose his job. The very nature of Tea Party opposition, whether it issues from the likes of Bazooka Ted and His Gang in the Senate or the unappeasable Jacobins in the House, is to throw weight without consequence. They evince no interest in actually wielding power from the inside, which would require restraint, conciliation, and moderation. They are hysterics on the brink of utter demoralization. The danger they pose to democratic norms, institutional comity, and political functionality is precisely why they can’t be bargained with; they must be marginalized."
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/its-time-to-throw-the-tea-party-one-ring-into-mount-doom/
Thinking it might be appropriate to simply (& politely) inquire if my Republican representative had read this editorial, and what his position on the House Republican direction since being taken over by the Kamakaze Cauucus, I called both my representative's office, and also Speaker Boehner's office.
Unfortunately, unlike my representative, none of Speaker Boehner's offices seem to be answering their telephone today, or at least not within 1 hour. (Can't imagine why)
Here's a link to House members office telephone numbers:
http://www.house.gov/representatives/
(While it's important to keep the conversation polite) . . . should not any Republican representative have an opinion on the Kamakaze-cons that are tearing apart their own party?
October 11, 2013
From, of all places, "The American Conservative":
". . . on the implacability of the House's kamikaze-cons . . . "
". . . Why are Republicans inflicting real, immediate, and tangible harm on the economy in order to accomplish the impossible (delay or defund Obamacare) address an abstract future threat (debt) or merely to save face? Why isn’t the majority of the House majority isolating its rightmost faction and ending this pointlessly asinine pissing match?"
"Contra the conventional wisdom, I maintain that no one in leadership will lose his job. The very nature of Tea Party opposition, whether it issues from the likes of Bazooka Ted and His Gang in the Senate or the unappeasable Jacobins in the House, is to throw weight without consequence. They evince no interest in actually wielding power from the inside, which would require restraint, conciliation, and moderation. They are hysterics on the brink of utter demoralization. The danger they pose to democratic norms, institutional comity, and political functionality is precisely why they can’t be bargained with; they must be marginalized."
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/its-time-to-throw-the-tea-party-one-ring-into-mount-doom/
Now that "Tea Party" has overstayed it's welcome, maybe the GOP should try some re-branding.
"Kamikaze-cons", "Kamakazecans", or "Banana Republicans"?
The American Conservative: Throw Tea-Party "Kamikaze-Cons" into Mount Doom
From, of all places, "The American Conservative":
". . . on the implacability of the House's kamikaze-cons . . . "
". . . Why are Republicans inflicting real, immediate, and tangible harm on the economy in order to accomplish the impossible (delay or defund Obamacare) address an abstract future threat (debt) or merely to save face? Why isn’t the majority of the House majority isolating its rightmost faction and ending this pointlessly asinine pissing match?"
"Contra the conventional wisdom, I maintain that no one in leadership will lose his job. The very nature of Tea Party opposition, whether it issues from the likes of Bazooka Ted and His Gang in the Senate or the unappeasable Jacobins in the House, is to throw weight without consequence. They evince no interest in actually wielding power from the inside, which would require restraint, conciliation, and moderation. They are hysterics on the brink of utter demoralization. The danger they pose to democratic norms, institutional comity, and political functionality is precisely why they can’t be bargained with; they must be marginalized."
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/its-time-to-throw-the-tea-party-one-ring-into-mount-doom/
Now that "Tea Party" has overstayed it's welcome, maybe the GOP should try some re-branding.
"Kamikaze-cons", "Kamakazecans", or "Banana Republicans"?
October 8, 2013
...or is it something else?
Is the Republican Supercommittee a revived Catfood Commission on steroids?
...or is it something else?
October 7, 2013
Republicans could never admit that the ACA was a centrist plan that in its essentials was the Heritage Foundation designed 1993 Republican plan. To do so would destroy their propaganda. So they portray a centrist health care plan (which Republicans formerly endorsed) as "socialism", and mount a late hour obstructionist drama (which was doomed to fail) in order to placate their base, and in order to set up a crisis in which:
1. They hope to get a deal gutting SS and MC, and
2. They want it done in the context of a fight "about "Obamacare", so they can continue to peddle the ridiculous (but widely believed) lie that "Obamacare" is an attack on Medicare..... In this fashion they hope to accomplish their goal of gutting Social Security & Medicare, but escape paying the political price, since their propaganda machine will peddle the meme that "Obamacare" created the crisis and bears the blame for cuts to SS and MC.
Now, a Tea Party favorite House Republican (with one of the "most conservative" ratings by the Club for Growth and the American Conservative Union) is now pushing for exactly such a (so-called) "compromise". Moreover, Rep. Dennis Ross (R-FL) now frankly ADMITS that the original opposition to "Obamacare" was done to "maintain credibility" with the Republican extremist base (since Republicans "ran on repealing Obamacare" , but that the REAL OBJECTIVES are "rolling back entitlements" and "tax reform" (for the 1%).
Rep. Dennis Ross (R-FL)
Bloomberg reports that Ross is supportive of a "deal" that would include (you guessed it) "means testing Medicare", chained CPI, and would lead to what right wingers label "tax reform"
Ross is not alone:
“You’re starting to see a shift in the thinking among members of the conference from all factions,” said Representative Charles Boustany, a Louisiana Republican. Boustany said he would also back a deal that didn’t delay the health-care law’s individual mandate -- a requirement that Americans who lack insurance purchase it through government-run exchanges -- if it also repealed a tax on medical devices, led to entitlement cuts and created a process for tax reform.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-04/tea-party-s-ross-says-debt-worth-yielding-on-obamacare.html
What Ross describes is, of course, classic "Shock Doctrine" strategy as described by Naomi Klein.
But, of course, corporate media will be too busy mimicking Fox News/Koch Brothers memes (in the corporate media's never ending quest to disprove the lie of "liberal media bias" , to discuss the methods of Shock Doctrine Disaster Capitalism.
President Obama's job will not be made easier by the "false equivalencies" promoted by a corporate media intent on promoting endless "compromises" between centrist and ever more far right extremist positions.
Our President's negotiating position will be strengthened by an perceptive, active (and yes, DEMANDING) Democratic base that recognizes the political reality and that strengthens the President's hand by clearly communicating that compromises that weaken essential programs are not acceptable, and through mobilizing such an assertive and articulate Democratic base, actually reversing the ever more rightward tilt in the public discourse.
The reason our President explicitly told us our job, to "hold my feet to the fire", is because reversing this ever-rightward tilt (of public discourse & debate) is what strengthens his hand.
"Your job is to hold my feet to the fire. . . So, you need to be out there everyday raising these issues, telling us when we’re doing the right or wrong thing. . . My role is to be President of the United States. . . "
http://www.stanforddaily.com/2011/12/01/a-foot-in-two-worlds/
And in this age of a dysfunctional, derelict corporate media, our President needs us to do our job more than ever.
Republican ACA Obstructionism: Smokescreen for BROADBASED Shock Doctrine Attacks
Republicans could never admit that the ACA was a centrist plan that in its essentials was the Heritage Foundation designed 1993 Republican plan. To do so would destroy their propaganda. So they portray a centrist health care plan (which Republicans formerly endorsed) as "socialism", and mount a late hour obstructionist drama (which was doomed to fail) in order to placate their base, and in order to set up a crisis in which:
1. They hope to get a deal gutting SS and MC, and
2. They want it done in the context of a fight "about "Obamacare", so they can continue to peddle the ridiculous (but widely believed) lie that "Obamacare" is an attack on Medicare..... In this fashion they hope to accomplish their goal of gutting Social Security & Medicare, but escape paying the political price, since their propaganda machine will peddle the meme that "Obamacare" created the crisis and bears the blame for cuts to SS and MC.
Now, a Tea Party favorite House Republican (with one of the "most conservative" ratings by the Club for Growth and the American Conservative Union) is now pushing for exactly such a (so-called) "compromise". Moreover, Rep. Dennis Ross (R-FL) now frankly ADMITS that the original opposition to "Obamacare" was done to "maintain credibility" with the Republican extremist base (since Republicans "ran on repealing Obamacare"
, but that the REAL OBJECTIVES are "rolling back entitlements" and "tax reform" (for the 1%).
Rep. Dennis Ross (R-FL)
Bloomberg reports that Ross is supportive of a "deal" that would include (you guessed it) "means testing Medicare", chained CPI, and would lead to what right wingers label "tax reform"
Ross is not alone:
“You’re starting to see a shift in the thinking among members of the conference from all factions,” said Representative Charles Boustany, a Louisiana Republican. Boustany said he would also back a deal that didn’t delay the health-care law’s individual mandate -- a requirement that Americans who lack insurance purchase it through government-run exchanges -- if it also repealed a tax on medical devices, led to entitlement cuts and created a process for tax reform.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-04/tea-party-s-ross-says-debt-worth-yielding-on-obamacare.html
What Ross describes is, of course, classic "Shock Doctrine" strategy as described by Naomi Klein.
But, of course, corporate media will be too busy mimicking Fox News/Koch Brothers memes (in the corporate media's never ending quest to disprove the lie of "liberal media bias"
, to discuss the methods of Shock Doctrine Disaster Capitalism.
President Obama's job will not be made easier by the "false equivalencies" promoted by a corporate media intent on promoting endless "compromises" between centrist and ever more far right extremist positions.
Our President's negotiating position will be strengthened by an perceptive, active (and yes, DEMANDING) Democratic base that recognizes the political reality and that strengthens the President's hand by clearly communicating that compromises that weaken essential programs are not acceptable, and through mobilizing such an assertive and articulate Democratic base, actually reversing the ever more rightward tilt in the public discourse.
The reason our President explicitly told us our job, to "hold my feet to the fire", is because reversing this ever-rightward tilt (of public discourse & debate) is what strengthens his hand.
"Your job is to hold my feet to the fire. . . So, you need to be out there everyday raising these issues, telling us when we’re doing the right or wrong thing. . . My role is to be President of the United States. . . "
http://www.stanforddaily.com/2011/12/01/a-foot-in-two-worlds/
And in this age of a dysfunctional, derelict corporate media, our President needs us to do our job more than ever.
October 5, 2013
Who woulda thunk it?
After the much heralded (& non-existent) "moderate" Republicans ended up voting along party lines to block a clean bill to end the shutdown, we now see hints of the GOP's real strategy emerging. Coming in the form of a "willingness to compromise", but rather than coming from a so-called "moderate", it comes from an unabashedly far right, Tea Party backed Republican House member rated as one of the House's "most conservative" members by both the government hating Club for Growth, and the American Conservative Union.
Rep. Dennis Ross explains his "turnaround" on the ACA by stating that the hard line he supported last month was necessitated by the fact that Republicans “were elected to repeal and replace Obamacare" and had "to offer an alternative for the sake of our credibility".
Bloomberg now reports that Ross is supportive of a "deal" that would include (you guessed it) "means testing Medicare", chained CPI, and would lead to what right wingers label "tax reform".
Bloomberg reports that Ross is not alone:
“You’re starting to see a shift in the thinking among members of the conference from all factions,” said Representative Charles Boustany, a Louisiana Republican. Boustany said he would also back a deal that didn’t delay the health-care law’s individual mandate -- a requirement that Americans who lack insurance purchase it through government-run exchanges -- if it also repealed a tax on medical devices, led to entitlement cuts and created a process for tax reform.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-04/tea-party-s-ross-says-debt-worth-yielding-on-obamacare.html
An interesting aspect is that while the so-called "moderate" Republicans have been a fantasy, what we see now emerging is coming not only from one of the Club for Growth's most hardline anti-government "conservatives".
And from one who admits that the initial position (focusing on "Obamacare" was necessitated by the need to "maintain credibility" with their base (having campaigned on the promise to repeal "Obamacare" , but that their real target is crafting a deal with broader goal: gutting social services in general and tax cuts for the 1%.
Bloomberg: Tea Party’s Ross Says Debt Worth Yielding on Obamacare
Rep. Dennis Ross (R-FL15)
U.S. Representative Dennis Ross, a Florida Republican, said he would support a broad spending deal that didn’t include changes to the health-care law, becoming the first Tea Party-backed House lawmaker to publicly back off the fight that has shut down the government for five days....Ross, ranked among the House’s most conservative members by both the Club for Growth and the American Conservative Union, said he shifted his position...
...Now, Ross is pushing for other changes, such as means-testing for Medicare payments and switching to a formula that may make Social Security beneficiaries’ cost-of-living increases rise more slowly. Those would be “major reforms” that should win Republican votes.
Rep. Charles Boustany (R-LA3)
. . . . “You’re starting to see a shift in the thinking among members of the conference from all factions,” said Representative Charles Boustany, a Louisiana Republican. Boustany said he would also back a deal that didn’t delay the health-care law’s individual mandate -- a requirement that Americans who lack insurance purchase it through government-run exchanges -- if it also repealed a tax on medical devices, led to entitlement cuts and created a process for tax reform. . . . . . .Ross took a hard-line stance just last month, saying that Republicans who took office in 2010 “were elected to repeal and replace Obamacare." . . . "We’ve got to offer an alternative for the sake of our credibility,” he said then.
A spending deal would clear the way for compromises on other issues, such as immigration and revising the tax code, he said....“There are a whole lot of other issues that haunted us at the election other than Obamacare,”
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-04/tea-party-s-ross-says-debt-worth-yielding-on-obamacare.html
The battle is just beginning.
Bloomberg: GOP Rep. Ross reveals GOP's REAL goal: gut Medicare, chained CPI, & cut taxes.
Who woulda thunk it?
After the much heralded (& non-existent) "moderate" Republicans ended up voting along party lines to block a clean bill to end the shutdown, we now see hints of the GOP's real strategy emerging. Coming in the form of a "willingness to compromise", but rather than coming from a so-called "moderate", it comes from an unabashedly far right, Tea Party backed Republican House member rated as one of the House's "most conservative" members by both the government hating Club for Growth, and the American Conservative Union.
Rep. Dennis Ross explains his "turnaround" on the ACA by stating that the hard line he supported last month was necessitated by the fact that Republicans “were elected to repeal and replace Obamacare" and had "to offer an alternative for the sake of our credibility".
Bloomberg now reports that Ross is supportive of a "deal" that would include (you guessed it) "means testing Medicare", chained CPI, and would lead to what right wingers label "tax reform".
Bloomberg reports that Ross is not alone:
“You’re starting to see a shift in the thinking among members of the conference from all factions,” said Representative Charles Boustany, a Louisiana Republican. Boustany said he would also back a deal that didn’t delay the health-care law’s individual mandate -- a requirement that Americans who lack insurance purchase it through government-run exchanges -- if it also repealed a tax on medical devices, led to entitlement cuts and created a process for tax reform.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-04/tea-party-s-ross-says-debt-worth-yielding-on-obamacare.html
An interesting aspect is that while the so-called "moderate" Republicans have been a fantasy, what we see now emerging is coming not only from one of the Club for Growth's most hardline anti-government "conservatives".
And from one who admits that the initial position (focusing on "Obamacare"
was necessitated by the need to "maintain credibility" with their base (having campaigned on the promise to repeal "Obamacare" , but that their real target is crafting a deal with broader goal: gutting social services in general and tax cuts for the 1%.
Bloomberg: Tea Party’s Ross Says Debt Worth Yielding on Obamacare
Rep. Dennis Ross (R-FL15)
U.S. Representative Dennis Ross, a Florida Republican, said he would support a broad spending deal that didn’t include changes to the health-care law, becoming the first Tea Party-backed House lawmaker to publicly back off the fight that has shut down the government for five days....Ross, ranked among the House’s most conservative members by both the Club for Growth and the American Conservative Union, said he shifted his position...
...Now, Ross is pushing for other changes, such as means-testing for Medicare payments and switching to a formula that may make Social Security beneficiaries’ cost-of-living increases rise more slowly. Those would be “major reforms” that should win Republican votes.
Rep. Charles Boustany (R-LA3)
. . . . “You’re starting to see a shift in the thinking among members of the conference from all factions,” said Representative Charles Boustany, a Louisiana Republican. Boustany said he would also back a deal that didn’t delay the health-care law’s individual mandate -- a requirement that Americans who lack insurance purchase it through government-run exchanges -- if it also repealed a tax on medical devices, led to entitlement cuts and created a process for tax reform. . . . . . .Ross took a hard-line stance just last month, saying that Republicans who took office in 2010 “were elected to repeal and replace Obamacare." . . . "We’ve got to offer an alternative for the sake of our credibility,” he said then.
A spending deal would clear the way for compromises on other issues, such as immigration and revising the tax code, he said....“There are a whole lot of other issues that haunted us at the election other than Obamacare,”
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-04/tea-party-s-ross-says-debt-worth-yielding-on-obamacare.html
The battle is just beginning.
October 4, 2013
Could the real reason for the GOP's insane & belated attack on what they label "Obamacare" (despite indisputable resemblance to previous plans advanced by Republicans in 1993, devised by the Heritage Foundation, & even legislated by their own 2012 presidential candidate) be something other than the delay or repeal of the Affordable Care Act?
Could the GOP's last hour obstructionism have a more devious purpose? . . . NOT to delay or roll back the implementation of the ACA, but to provide a smokescreen for their REAL purpose: not only to manipulate the President into a deal to slash Social Security and/or Medicare, but to do so in a context in which they can BLAME the President and "Obamacare" for such cuts?
That facts and logic do not impede the GOP from peddling nonsensical propaganda to their target audience was illustrated to be yesterday in a conversation with an acquaintance in his 60's, a Social Security recipient who had recently undergone major surgery. When this educated business-owner brought up "Obamacare", the major concern he expressed was an anxiety that Obamacare would damage his Medicare. Wherever he acquired that concern, facts made no difference.
He failed to mention any concern that the very Republicans he had recently given his votes to were, as we spoke, salivating over the prospects of slashing his Medicare as well as his Social Security.
How many Americans have been likewise conditioned by the Republican propaganda machine to view the availability & purchase of health insurance for all Americans (a plan which, until recently, they themselves had championed) as a "socialistic" threat to their own Social Security and Medicare (and do so with no sense of irony, or of the absurd)? . . . and to view Democrats fighting to defend these very programs upon which they depend as the villain?
Are the causes of the illogical Republican attacks on a moderate healthcare plan like the ACA, a plan that by all historic precedent should be viewed as a quintessential non-partisan plan, more than just Republican stupidity?
Does their insanity have purpose?
And is their purpose in placing "Obamacare" front and center in this shutdown crisis, not the delay or modification of "Obamacare" (which is on track and not going to be stopped), but to serve as a scapegoat so that if they can succeed and revive a "Grand Bargain", that the BLAME for cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and other programs can be, despite the facts, be laid on "Obamacare" and on the President?
Is the real GOP target NOT the ACA, but to gut SS/MC & then BLAME Obama & ACA?
Could the real reason for the GOP's insane & belated attack on what they label "Obamacare" (despite indisputable resemblance to previous plans advanced by Republicans in 1993, devised by the Heritage Foundation, & even legislated by their own 2012 presidential candidate) be something other than the delay or repeal of the Affordable Care Act?
Could the GOP's last hour obstructionism have a more devious purpose? . . . NOT to delay or roll back the implementation of the ACA, but to provide a smokescreen for their REAL purpose: not only to manipulate the President into a deal to slash Social Security and/or Medicare, but to do so in a context in which they can BLAME the President and "Obamacare" for such cuts?
That facts and logic do not impede the GOP from peddling nonsensical propaganda to their target audience was illustrated to be yesterday in a conversation with an acquaintance in his 60's, a Social Security recipient who had recently undergone major surgery. When this educated business-owner brought up "Obamacare", the major concern he expressed was an anxiety that Obamacare would damage his Medicare. Wherever he acquired that concern, facts made no difference.
He failed to mention any concern that the very Republicans he had recently given his votes to were, as we spoke, salivating over the prospects of slashing his Medicare as well as his Social Security.
How many Americans have been likewise conditioned by the Republican propaganda machine to view the availability & purchase of health insurance for all Americans (a plan which, until recently, they themselves had championed) as a "socialistic" threat to their own Social Security and Medicare (and do so with no sense of irony, or of the absurd)? . . . and to view Democrats fighting to defend these very programs upon which they depend as the villain?
Are the causes of the illogical Republican attacks on a moderate healthcare plan like the ACA, a plan that by all historic precedent should be viewed as a quintessential non-partisan plan, more than just Republican stupidity?
Does their insanity have purpose?
And is their purpose in placing "Obamacare" front and center in this shutdown crisis, not the delay or modification of "Obamacare" (which is on track and not going to be stopped), but to serve as a scapegoat so that if they can succeed and revive a "Grand Bargain", that the BLAME for cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and other programs can be, despite the facts, be laid on "Obamacare" and on the President?
October 4, 2013
Despite the $2.6 trillion balance of the SS Trust Fund, designed with the express purpose of separating SS transactions from general Treasury transactions, we are now hearing hints that SS checks may be delayed if the debt ceiling is not raised by October 17.
The Republican desires to resuscitate hopes of a "Grand Bargain" to finally achieve their dream of "chained CPI" and Medicare cuts, has been reported met not only with rejection, but appropriately with dismissive laughter.
While the Republican strategy of endless debt ceiling crises including shutdown has not achieved their goals, is the delay of SS checks the Shock Doctrine crisis needed to create political pressure for the revival of a "chained CPI"/Medicare cut "Grand Bargain"?
If so, on what legal, constitutional basis can the Trustees of the Social Security Trust Fund be prevented from using the $2.6 trillion balance, created from the surpluses of lifetimes of SS contributions, to meet existing obligations?
Will we persevere to prevent the gutting of SS and Medicare? Or are we back to kabuki theater?
Disaster Capitalism: Is delaying SS checks the kabuki crisis the RW needs for "Grand Bargain"?
Despite the $2.6 trillion balance of the SS Trust Fund, designed with the express purpose of separating SS transactions from general Treasury transactions, we are now hearing hints that SS checks may be delayed if the debt ceiling is not raised by October 17.
The Republican desires to resuscitate hopes of a "Grand Bargain" to finally achieve their dream of "chained CPI" and Medicare cuts, has been reported met not only with rejection, but appropriately with dismissive laughter.
While the Republican strategy of endless debt ceiling crises including shutdown has not achieved their goals, is the delay of SS checks the Shock Doctrine crisis needed to create political pressure for the revival of a "chained CPI"/Medicare cut "Grand Bargain"?
If so, on what legal, constitutional basis can the Trustees of the Social Security Trust Fund be prevented from using the $2.6 trillion balance, created from the surpluses of lifetimes of SS contributions, to meet existing obligations?
Will we persevere to prevent the gutting of SS and Medicare? Or are we back to kabuki theater?
October 4, 2013
a rather remarkable article from, of all places, The American Conservative:
"When President Obama sees negotiating with Iran as a more reasonable option than negotiating with Republicans over the debt ceiling, we are through the looking glass. . . . It is pathetic. . ."
Republicans, Over the Cliff
Republicans . . . are a barking-mad pack of ideologues, is what they are. . . . These guys are taking the government and the economy to the brink of crisis, and for what? For the sake of rebel yells and the Lost Cause?
. . . When I think of the Republican Party, I don’t think of principled conservative legislators who are men and women of vision strategy. I think of ideologues who are prepared to wreck things to get their way. They have confused prudence — the queen of virtues, and the cardinal virtue of conservative politics — with weakness. I know I’m very much a minority among conservatives in this, but the behavior of Congressional Republicans pushed me out of the party two years ago, even though I almost always vote Republican, or withhold my vote. I am not a liberal, and do not want to vote for liberals, especially on social policy. But I told a Louisiana conservative friend the other day that the Congressional Republicans are making me consider the previously unthinkable: throwing my vote away by voting for a Democrat in the special election next month to replace my GOP congressman, who just resigned to take another job. The GOP candidates in this local race are hot and heavy to overthrow Obamacare. I think about how poor this district is — 26 percent of the district lives in poverty, making it one of the poorest Congressional districts in America — and how badly we need jobs and economic growth, and I think: What kind of world do these people live in?
By the way, political analysts rate the Louisiana 5th district safe Republican; my frustration with the GOP candidates is almost certainly a marginal phenomenon. You could probably put all the conservatives in this district who are fed-up with this mess on my front porch, and still have room for the tuba players from the LSU Tiger Band. Still, there it is. I’m considering voting Democratic not because I believe in the Democrats, but because it has gotten to the point where they don’t unnerve me like the Republicans. As poor as our district is, these guys would make our economic situation even more parlous by shutting the government down to overturn what in any stable political environment would have been a settled law?
. . . What are the probable long-run consequences of shutting the US Government down over Obamacare? Do the Congressional Republicans care? Do they care what kind of damage they are doing to the ability of Congress to legislate effectively on all kinds of matters? The damage they are doing to the economic stability of the United States? This kind of brinksmanship might — might — have been defensible during the Obamacare fight, but today? I can’t see it. I can’t see any good coming out of this, at least any good that stands to outweigh the bad. . . . there’s no doubt in my mind who is responsible for the government shutting down: the GOP.
. . . Divided government used to work—it created the Marshall Plan, civil rights legislation, and all the accomplishments of the Reagan era. Independent voters like me have traditionally voted for divided government in the hopes that it would restrain any one party’s impulse to ideologically over-reach by imposing common sense checks and balances. But divided government now looks like dysfunctional government. And despite the political security created by the rigged system of redistricting, Republicans may suddenly find the congressional midterms a referendum on their ability to get things done. The scorecard is ugly on that front, providing yet another reason for Democrats to accept a government shutdown, however painful.
. . . Republicans are realizing that the angry conservative populist forces they empowered to achieve power have turned on them and are now actively restricting their ability to be taken seriously as a governing force. When President Obama sees negotiating with Iran as a more reasonable option than negotiating with Republicans over the debt ceiling, we are through the looking glass. . . . It is pathetic that is has come to this: a great power that cannot agree on practical ways to keep its government functioning.
. . . The Republicans cannot govern. These people aren’t conservatives. They are radicals. What on earth would Russell Kirk say if he were alive to see this?
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/republicans-over-the-cliff/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=republicans-over-the-cliff
The American Conservative: Republicans are "a barking-mad pack of ideologues"
a rather remarkable article from, of all places, The American Conservative:
"When President Obama sees negotiating with Iran as a more reasonable option than negotiating with Republicans over the debt ceiling, we are through the looking glass. . . . It is pathetic. . ."
Republicans, Over the Cliff
Republicans . . . are a barking-mad pack of ideologues, is what they are. . . . These guys are taking the government and the economy to the brink of crisis, and for what? For the sake of rebel yells and the Lost Cause?
. . . When I think of the Republican Party, I don’t think of principled conservative legislators who are men and women of vision strategy. I think of ideologues who are prepared to wreck things to get their way. They have confused prudence — the queen of virtues, and the cardinal virtue of conservative politics — with weakness. I know I’m very much a minority among conservatives in this, but the behavior of Congressional Republicans pushed me out of the party two years ago, even though I almost always vote Republican, or withhold my vote. I am not a liberal, and do not want to vote for liberals, especially on social policy. But I told a Louisiana conservative friend the other day that the Congressional Republicans are making me consider the previously unthinkable: throwing my vote away by voting for a Democrat in the special election next month to replace my GOP congressman, who just resigned to take another job. The GOP candidates in this local race are hot and heavy to overthrow Obamacare. I think about how poor this district is — 26 percent of the district lives in poverty, making it one of the poorest Congressional districts in America — and how badly we need jobs and economic growth, and I think: What kind of world do these people live in?
By the way, political analysts rate the Louisiana 5th district safe Republican; my frustration with the GOP candidates is almost certainly a marginal phenomenon. You could probably put all the conservatives in this district who are fed-up with this mess on my front porch, and still have room for the tuba players from the LSU Tiger Band. Still, there it is. I’m considering voting Democratic not because I believe in the Democrats, but because it has gotten to the point where they don’t unnerve me like the Republicans. As poor as our district is, these guys would make our economic situation even more parlous by shutting the government down to overturn what in any stable political environment would have been a settled law?
. . . What are the probable long-run consequences of shutting the US Government down over Obamacare? Do the Congressional Republicans care? Do they care what kind of damage they are doing to the ability of Congress to legislate effectively on all kinds of matters? The damage they are doing to the economic stability of the United States? This kind of brinksmanship might — might — have been defensible during the Obamacare fight, but today? I can’t see it. I can’t see any good coming out of this, at least any good that stands to outweigh the bad. . . . there’s no doubt in my mind who is responsible for the government shutting down: the GOP.
. . . Divided government used to work—it created the Marshall Plan, civil rights legislation, and all the accomplishments of the Reagan era. Independent voters like me have traditionally voted for divided government in the hopes that it would restrain any one party’s impulse to ideologically over-reach by imposing common sense checks and balances. But divided government now looks like dysfunctional government. And despite the political security created by the rigged system of redistricting, Republicans may suddenly find the congressional midterms a referendum on their ability to get things done. The scorecard is ugly on that front, providing yet another reason for Democrats to accept a government shutdown, however painful.
. . . Republicans are realizing that the angry conservative populist forces they empowered to achieve power have turned on them and are now actively restricting their ability to be taken seriously as a governing force. When President Obama sees negotiating with Iran as a more reasonable option than negotiating with Republicans over the debt ceiling, we are through the looking glass. . . . It is pathetic that is has come to this: a great power that cannot agree on practical ways to keep its government functioning.
. . . The Republicans cannot govern. These people aren’t conservatives. They are radicals. What on earth would Russell Kirk say if he were alive to see this?
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/republicans-over-the-cliff/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=republicans-over-the-cliff
Profile Information
Member since: Wed Nov 23, 2005, 09:15 AMNumber of posts: 5,125
