i hate politics as a sporting event. isn’t that what football, baseball, etc are for? i want to learn and to think… and most importantly, i want representatives who care about doing the right thing for the people they represent and the country.

informed and engaged citizenry? just my opinion, but no wonder most people are turned off of politics.

McGovern couldn’t stop framing everything he said in Democrat vs. Republican, our side vs. your side terms (and of course as “historic” just like his telephone town hall blather you reported on), even as he asserted that such polarization is unfortunate and should cease…

dday instead thoroughly approved:

http://news.firedoglake.com/2009/11/06/jim-mcgovern-sets-them-up-knocks-them-down-in-the-rules-committee/

I thought Frank Pallone of NJ did a far more effective job of rebutting the half-truths and points of Rep. Foxx, for example, than did McGovern – Pallone stuck to the substance, instead of turning it into a game of us v. them. McGovern clearly has long experience and a pretty good grasp of the facts as a result, but his presentation was just a Party pitch, in essence, rather than a speech designed to appeal to or sway uninformed, non-Party-blinded observers.

“not for how hard he hits for for how unsubtle he is in doing it. i’m ok with all that — even if his opinions are different than mine. it’s the dishonestly i have zero tolerance for. we rightly call out our political enemies when they say something untrue and we should do the same for our political allies. if it was an honest mistake, they will appreciate the correction and refrain from similar in the future. but if it wasn’t an honest mistake, then they are not my political ally. misundertandings, mistakes. etc happen all the time and are not a big deal. dishonest attempts to mislead are poison to political discourse.”

“Louise Slaughter (D-NY), Chair of the Rules Committee, says as an aside that the Republican amendment will be allowed, and that there will be ample time for debate.”

A I heard it, what Slaughter actually said, rather defensively, in response to Joe Barton’s request for enough floor debate time for all 435 Representatives to “debate” (I think Barton used the more-apt word “speak” about) – if they choose – this far-reaching legislation (which won’t even be brought to the floor until the Party is sure it will pass), is “there will more debate than usual.” Which would basically mean more than the hour or two, divvied up in 2-3 minute increments, among a small minority of House members, which is the “usual” Majority Party/Rules Committee practice. [And yes, Slaughter indicated that a floor vote on one Republican substitute amendment will be allowed.]

Slaughter also told Dreier that the vote on the rule (if not on the bill) will take place tomorrow, Saturday, at a time to be determined by Steny Hoyer.

Quick Aside for selise: I note that your Rep., Jim McGovern, is apparently second in (Democratic) seniority on the Rules Committee behind Slaughter. I got a good look at/listen to McGovern during his commentary, and I can see why he’s the rubberstamp on the committee he is: Pure Party Man, and a rather simple-minded cheerleader type for his “team” – probably no matter whether it’s politics or sports – the credit for a win is the thing, substance following somewhere behind, as expediency allows (despite his supposedly “progressive” credentials). He couldn’t stop framing everything he said in Democrat vs. Republican, our side vs. your side terms (and of course as “historic” just like his telephone town hall blather you reported on), even as he asserted that such polarization is unfortunate and should cease… Thoroughly indoctrinated. Blah.

only worse.

YET “They cleared one hurdle Friday when liberals supporting a government-run Medicare-for-all system withdrew their demand for a floor vote.”

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/06/house-health-bill-obama-m_n_348208.html&cp

Now if that and the tabling of the Kucinich Amendment and the Eshoo amendment still being in the bill doesn’t tell everyone how fucked up this legislation is, I don’t know what to think.

Call your Representative and tell them to vote NO until it’s changed to allow for a floor vote on single payer and Kuchinch’s amendment is restored and Eshoo’s removed.

And BTW, Jane is also opposed to the bill as it is written.

The Reason for the Anger and Intractability of the Debate Over Health Care Reform in the United States:

One side is lying; the other side is not telling the truth.

*

Or to put it another way: One side is pretending that a wildly reactionary plan to further enrich rapacious corporations is really hardcore, gutbucket socialism from the Bolshevik trenches, while the other side is pretending that its “reform” is not really a wildly reactionary plan to further enrich rapacious corporations but something that will somehow, in some way, be good for some people at some point way down the line.

*

One often finds that dealing in such utter unreality makes it somewhat difficult to achieve workable solutions to real-life problems.