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
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Why the ObamaCare Ruling Stinks [View all]truth2power
(8,219 posts)92. I agree. The real test would come with a second term....
I'm not holding my breath, though.
I'm currently reading "Predator Nation: Corporate Criminals, Political Corruption, and the Hijacking of America" by Charles Ferguson, who won an Academy Award for his film, "Inside Job".
Most everyone here applauded that pick, so Mr. Ferguson has some bona fides, in that respect.
On pages 300-308 in a section titled, "Mr. Obama's Wall Street Government", Freguson lists, by name and history one after another of Pres. Obama's appointments, virtually all of them with ties to the financial sector and/or Wall Street. Ferguson says:
The first troubling sign was his personnel appointments. Not a single critic or voice of reform got a job--Not Simon Johnson, Nouriel roubini, Paul Krugman, Sheila Bair, Joseph Stiglitz, Jeffrey Sachs, Robert Gnaizda, Brooksly Born, Senator Carl Levin, none of them.
Later, Ferguson says:
That the control of the oligarchy became even greater during the Bush administration goes without saying.
But what is perhaps most revealing is that Obama continued in Bush's footsteps, even though he had an unprecedented opportunity to change course. How to explain this?
But what is perhaps most revealing is that Obama continued in Bush's footsteps, even though he had an unprecedented opportunity to change course. How to explain this?
Indeed, how does one explain this?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
96 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
well yes, the problem with the ACA is that it continues the same corrupt medical insurance system,
NoMoreWarNow
Jun 2012
#1
Let me add another bit of logic (reality) to this. To get to the Presidency, you have to sleep with
Dustlawyer
Jun 2012
#65
"too much urinating" is also a common symptom from a urinary tract infection.
MichaelMcGuire
Jun 2012
#58
If enough people pay the tax, I wonder if that can become the public option.
freedom fighter jh
Jun 2012
#52
But Social Security didn't start by requiring people to start a private account
Lydia Leftcoast
Jun 2012
#60
it'll evolve, all right. but for whose benefit? already capital is lining up to "evolve" it.
HiPointDem
Jul 2012
#94
The repugs will make sure that the IRS can't hire new agents, so its a Win ,Win for
bahrbearian
Jun 2012
#27
And that translates into "I have health insurance and still can't afford health care".
Arkansas Granny
Jun 2012
#53
Don't get your hopes up. The last time the Republicans gutted funding for the IRS
TrollBuster9090
Jun 2012
#55
Can always count on the Repugs to protect the Rich, while screwing the poor,
bahrbearian
Jun 2012
#67
The title of your Op/Ed should really be "Traditional Western Medicine is SUB-OPTIMAL." Not "Why
TrollBuster9090
Jun 2012
#43
Rome was not built in a day. Subsequent legislation can lead to negotiated
ProgressiveEconomist
Jun 2012
#78