Since the MSM and Pubs call every Democratic proposal "liberal" "big government" "left-wing" anyway

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

regardless of how moderate it really is, why don't we just go ahead and go for some REAL liberal, left-wing, big government legislation?

for example SINGLE PAYER UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE

I am tired of incrementalism in health care reform. People have lost their healthcare and their jobs and are literally at risk of DYING if we can't get our big, torpid, government asses moving forward towards REAL progress, not pretend progress.

[John Q. Citizen]

1. Word!

[liberal N proud]

2. I am tired of trying to pacify the conservative assholes

They will never stop attacking anything a Democrat proposes.

[ej510]

3. Repubocrat Ben Nelson would never support single payer health care.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

4. But my point is, he wouldn't support much of anything

unless it was just more of the same inch by inch incremental games we have been playing for years. Anything that would make any real difference would be too radical for these stuck in the past obstructionists. So, since he would object to almost anything, his objection has no real value. He is not persuadable.

[Armstead]

5. Personally I think we ought to embrace the idea of "liberal"

hell, that's what the underlying political dynamic has always been anyway, in various forms.

Conservatives are proud of what they are. That's one of the reasons they were able to take hold of power and keep it for so long.

Democrats started being scardy cats and for too long went along with the GOP attempts to marginalize liberalism.

Mebbe if we actually embraced the real choices that the ongoing tussle between liberalism and conservatism represent, we might actually get some things done.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

6. I completely agree.

I'm also tired of all those pundits who repeat over and over, we're a center right country when I think the evidence points to us trending leftward which we will continue to do as the economy worsens.

[zbdent]

7. hell, the MSM lets the ReRushicans claim that they were the reason

why the economy was great under Clinton, despite the fact that not one of them voted for the economic package which set the stage for it ... in fact, they said that the economy would suffer a fate that ... well, let's put it this way ... they were warning that Clinton's policies would cause what Bush's policies actually did ...

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

8. If a Democratic President has an economic success it's because he

inherited the unrecognized boom, not yet come to fruition, that was the result of the policies of his Republican predecessor.

If a Republican President presides over an economic bust, even after inheriting a surplus, it's due to an unrecognized recession that he inherited due to the policies of his Democratic predecessor.

It's always heads we win, tails they lose with the Republicans. They are borderline sociopaths. No one should be able to lie and twist facts so glibly.