Top 25 Lobbying Shops Bring In $227.5 Million

As that commie pinko Harry Truman said, “The people don’t want a phony Democrat. If it’s a choice between a genuine Republican, and a Republican in Democratic clothing, the people will choose the genuine article, every time; that is, they will take a Republican before they will a phony Democrat, and I don’t want any phony Democratic candidates in this campaign.”

Duh.

The MSM, republicans and a lot of really really stupid democrats are just going to sell the massacre as being the result of “liberal overreach” so they can claim a “mandate” to remove the public spending parts of the HCR , and cut some taxes of course. Thats why, keep beating this drum!

Those numbers for Perriello in Virginia are sobering.

I wonder how many more like him are out there.

Guess we’ll find out for sure in November, won’t we?

The people in Congress must be the dumbest on the planet. Apparently they don’t read the polls and just try to bully or bluff their way through. Americans spoke very plainly about what they wanted before the election and were ignored. And still the Dems don’t learn. Sad.

Get a full public option before November and it might be a different story…..Work hard to lose Max Baucus when his time comes AND LIEBERMAN…BLANCHE LINCOLN IS DONE…GOOD RIDDANCE …**BUY NOTHING FROM NEBRASKA WHILE NELSON HAS A SEAT IN THE SENATE**

“The democrats had the White House and majorities in both houses of congress that were unprecedented in recent memory. Instead of even trying to do what the public elected them to do in 2008, they turned their backs on that agenda and decided to act like republicans. They are finding out that if the public wants republicans to run the government, they’ll vote for republicans.”

and that, folks, is the most accurate and honest paragraph that we’re going to see, in the run-up to the mid-terms.

This all leaves us with the question:

Will Obama and the democrats be relieved to get their political asses handed to them in 14 weeks?

Yes because they are incompetent with the reigns and are only good at whining about the OTHER guys holding the reigns.

They all need a [edited by mod.] and to be stuffed into lockers sporting atomic wedgies.

At this point (and long before this actually) it seems more and more like Dems simply don’t want to be Democrats anymore. Why Ben Nelson continues to have that ‘D’ next to his name is one of life’s little mysteries; same could be said for almost all of ‘em.

A waste of time.

To me it exemplifies the Kabuki show that passes for a phony govt long sold out to the corporations who are really running the show. But until more citizens – esp Democrats – are willing to wake up and smell the coffee and figure out that the Democrats are NOT willing to represent the voters anymore… well, then it’ll just be more of the same old, same old.

Elected pols are mostly disgusting sleazes selling themselves to the highest bidder. Let the buyer beware.

Citizens really need to wake up, but as long as voters are eagerly distracted by the latest gossip, b.s. and so forth… well, WYSIWYG.

LOL I hate to tell you but every poll I have seen still shows more people disapprove of so called health care “reform” than approve of it.
But then in Obama land, down is up and right is left.

How many times does it have to be demonstrated to be patently false until the Rahm Emanuel strategy of Democrats pretending to be Republican is no longer the conventional wisdom? To the best of my knowledge, that strategy has never worked yet the establishment Democrats are addicted to it. Like a bunch of self destructive crack heads, even the sure knowledge that they are hurting themselves isn’t enough to get them to change their behavior.

Yep, I am so enthralled that insurance companies can’t use pre-existing conditions to keep me from buying their lousy product that I didn’t notice that I still will never be able to afford it, and that in addition I will be fined $900 that I can’t afford. Kiss my ass, O.

Fuck ‘em.

Tom Perriello was/is a public option supporter in a state that tends to the right.

Killing Perriello politically in Virginia by killing the public option after he voted for it (against his Governor’s wishes) in the House bill was stupid – Obama Dems cutting their own throat in terms of ability to get progressive legislation that is not a corporate welfare check just to honor a deal made 6 months before the House vote with the insurance industry. Dis-honest and did-honorable – a liar in the primary and a liar in the general election and a liar now (he said he supported the public option after the deal with the ins. co’s was written in concrete).

Given Obama sleeps and eats politics – the loss of a house majority must have been his plan – better to get elected in 2012 no doubt

Sounds great. And what is Jane proposing for a legislative agenda for the new Republican Congress once they’re in office?

Yep! I can’t afford to run my air conditioner in Central Texas. How the hell am I going to be able to afford this crappy product that is still administered by people whose sworn duty it is to cut costs by, among other things, denying coverage? Take me to prison. At least I’ll get basic care there.

we have been very concerned about Republicans picking up House seats this in November

I was concerned until the health care “reform” bill passed. Now, with each new legislative disaster, I’m less concerned. What Tom Perriello’s case makes clear is that there are just too many stupid, corrupt Democrats in office right now. They might as well be Republicans.

So, this November, I’m not voting Democratic, at least not at the national level. If there were Democratic challengers, I’d vote for them, figuring that more progressive is always better, but in my case they’re the incumbents. Until we progressives show that we’re willing to take our votes elsewhere, these Democrats will continue to treat us as they do. They only respect power, and only care about the people who can give it to them or take it away. Progressives who aren’t willing to do that make themselves irrelevant.

Maybe you should try reading the post.

Tom Perriello’s district is just north of here and he supported health care reform consistently and publicly. And until recently most opinion gave him props for being straightforward with his constituents about his position. So I don’t think that he was pushed into anything by Obama and Pelosi.

And your polling results are very interesting. Why is it that 33% of pro-choice voters are supporting the pro-life candidate? That indicates to me that pro-choice country club Republicans are voting Republican rather than pro-choice. And why if his position on Stupak is driving the voter sentiment is there such a large gender gap in Perriello’s favor.

Looking at the data, Hurt starts out with a base of 39% of total voters who are conservative. These are not likely to swing to Perriello. But Hurt has 12% of total voters who are moderate and 4% of total voters who are liberal. That is an upside for Perriello of 16% of voters that could be persuaded to change from Hurt to Perriello, which if I have calculated is potential swing of 32 points. Swing from Clark could add at most 1% to that. And these are the folks who say they are likely voters. Extensive canvassing and get-out-the-vote efforts can turn out folks who are now unlikely voters, and those will more likely go to Perriello than Hurt.

There are Congressional Districts in which I think your analysis is correct, but I don’t think that Perriello’s is one of them. Perriello’s margin was close in 2008 against an incumbent. It will be close again. The folks who want a real Republican voted for one in 2008. They were outvoted slightly by those who did not want to continue with that Republican (Virgil Goode). And as best I can tell from this end of his district, abortion is not a salient issue this year. That might be different closer to Charlottesville.

obama rejected Dr. Dean’s advice on health care.

I encourage Dr Dean to primary obama, so we have a real progressive to chose.

obama’s republican plan to retake house then lose to Jeb , the good boy bush, is on track.

I doubt Dr. Dean would have been guided by a two timing, duel citizen like rahm, who doesn’t have complete loyalty to our great country.

We can correct this stupid Whitehouse crew in 2012 or lose.

Obama, Rahm, David Axelrod, Robert Gibbs, Valerie Jarrette, must all be jumping for joy. The trojan horse they call Barrack Obama has done a wonderful job destroying the progress of the progressive base.

Progressives must wrap their heads around the idea that Obama is a puppet develop by the elites to keep progressives out of power. (remember the so call liberal media, that is owned by rich conservative republicans protect Obama daily)

The biggest clue or give away to Obama being a trojan horse, was how he ignored the only issue in the USA for the last 24 months JOBS!

The gullible and stupid dems who followed Obama deserved their fate, most will probably end up with jobs at Well Point, Blue Cross, etc. (it is hard to believe that they are all idiots, some got paid off)

Obama record speaks for itself

1 Obama supports the individual mandate
2 Obama does not support the public option
3 Obama does not support drug importation
4 Obama appoints a well point execuitve to adminster their Health Care program
5. Obama passes the Bob Dole health care plan
6. Obama supports taxing Union Health Care Plans (Clinton gave Unions NAFTA)
7. Obama does not appoint Dawn Johnsen
8. Obama is currently working on a plan to cut social security
9. They say the stock market doesn’t lie, everytime Obama passes something the industry in questions stock rise. this is very interesting?
10. Obama supports Blanche Lincoln, (the new york times bashes Halter the day of the election) Obama bashes Unions for supporting Halter

how many progressives still think Obama is a democrat?

The tea party is a complete illusion, it is a corporate muyth, the idea is to get some un-informed americans to scream and shout that Obama is a socialist, with no proof what so ever! (you have to give the elites credit they are great at population control and deception)

SUN TZU says it best ALL WAR IS BASE ON DECEPTION!

the elites used a simple trick to keep the majority of americans confused we develop a crowd of mis-informed americans to shout daily that Obama is a socialist, because we know the left will see threw our deception and call OBAMA REAGAN.

The elites ordered the media outlets they control to make the Tea Party folks seem like a movement trying to stop the Obama socialistic policies.

This deception by the elites keeps progressives at bay!

the key to Obama success is the Media, they all call him a Progressive, and most know he is a Republican in Democratic clothing at best.

They also know the tea party is not a movement. What about Obama screams socialist?

Good point, Jane – all votes should be cast on how the polls read… So to all my gay friends out there – forget about marriage and other equity proposals – we know how THAT polls… and civil liberties over saftey from terrorism – let’s look at the polls. Republicans and the right – combined with efforts from the far left, damned HCR before a single vote was cast. As it happens, the legislation is more popular today than when it was first passed – but Jane is right – it’s not popular legislation. Don’t forget, the SAME people who hate HCR also think Obama is a socialist.. and Jane – what percentage of Americans believe in angels? And what percentage are unaware of our VP’s name?

I’m not sure Obama sleeps and eats electoral politics these days. That seems to be one of the lesser chores delegated to the political staff – Rahm, Axelrod, Plouffe, Gibbs, and of course Tim Kaine.

I would guess that Obama sleeps and eats global politics. That seems to be a presidential affliction once in office.

“Will Obama and the democrats be relieved to get their political asses handed to them in 14 weeks?”

Given that – “Instead of even trying to do what the public elected them to do in 2008, they turned their backs on that agenda and decided to act like republicans.” – maybe the real question should be, why should we care either way? Wake me when my choice is something other than Democrats who vote like Republicans or actual Republicans.

I would so volunteer and vote for Howard Dean. He can say “yeah!” all he wants…

Between HIR and SS, it’s like Obama and Democrats are going for the Ballad of Narayama. Obama should change his last name to Ubasute.

It would be largely what the current Republican congress’ legislative agenda: give and give and give to corporations while making noises as if they are doing something for the “little guy”. Gut and cut the social safety net (like the current Republican congress is set on doing AFTER the election, interestingly).

Nah, the ultimate result of the REAL Rethuglicans taking over from the wannabe Rethuglicans will be…MORE of the same. No matter what, the REAL Rethuglicans get what they want whether the wannabe Republicans or REAL Republicans are in control.

“How many times does it have to be demonstrated to be patently false until the Rahm Emanuel strategy of Democrats pretending to be Republican is no longer the conventional wisdom? To the best of my knowledge, that strategy has never worked yet the establishment Democrats are addicted to it.”

It worked for Clinton (when Rahm was there), but not for the Democrats in general when they lost control of Congress. Clinton’s popularity went way up, when he had the Republicans to use as a foil. The Congressional Democrats are going to have to understand that what is going for Obama is necessarilly good for them.

All of this has occurred because Obama and the Dems ‘took their eye off the ball’ and chose to focus on HCR instead of jobs and the economy. They trusted the ‘experts’, quickly passed the ‘stimulus’ bill thinking the problem was solved. Afterall, ‘all the economists’, ‘all the experts’ agreed with Obama’s solution, and they had the charts to prove it!

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2010/07/the-scariest-unemployment-graph-ive-seen-yet/60086/

Enacting such seeping legislation during a time of such economic uncertainty was a serious miscalculation.

The financial market meltdown changed everything, yet progressives were unswayed in their belief that their assumed ‘mandate’ would survive the economic crisis. It has not.

Slow but steady wins the race. Haste makes waste. Choose the axiom of your choice, but Obama could have got everything and more from the GOP if he had not been in such a hurry.

I don’t think the house dems were as much influenced by the dccc as they were by the lobbyists and health care industry that probably has at least some of them backstopped with a million dollar a year job should they lose their re-elections. It will be very interesting to see how many of the “losers” are rewarded with a high paying job in the private sector for their loyal corporate service. And how quickly.

Z

The problem for the dumb bastards is that they were promised lobbyist riches and given Team Obama’s assurances that the wonders of bending the cost curve via a mandate on health insurance would be successfully sold to most Americans via the bully pulpit. They saw the dollar signs in potential contributions and believed that wishing sows ears into silk purses would lead to success. For the polls that show a disappointment with health insurance reform, this is nothing compared to how things will play when it actually kicks in with a series of newly bent cost curves. Some of the DLC, faux liberals, might even be happy to be out of the public limelight at that point.

Even now those that think saying something is good is the same thing as being good are busy beating up on Feingold for refusing to be bullied on the financial bill. Watching some of the dumb bastards get hammered on the health care vote means learning nothing at all except how to continue blaming those that don’t fall in line.

Who smeared Dr Dean’s shout out to a “scream” ?

Google Howard Dean and what come up are three pictures of an involved Dr. Dean looking like a maniac and the titling it the “scream”.

This is what has to be corrected.

LOL, I can’t afford to run my a/c in Central Florida! Not as hot here but with the humidity anything leather or cloth gets mold on it, I have everything leather in a closet with Damp-Rid, I can’t afford the $150 per month extra for a/c. Someone explain how insurance works to us again, spreading risk etc etc. we’re really in the mood to be patronized. Oops, we’re not on HP, much more aware of what it means to be poor here, nevermind…

Beware the thread hijacker.

Blue Texan’s regularly scheduled post is ready: Right-Wingers Compare Shirley Sherrod to Rush Limbaugh and Trent Lott

I love going to the homes of northerners who moved here with their leather furniture. Guess they never visited during the summer.

To be titled, “Context for We but NOT for Thee.”

OOOOh be very scared. I might make sense!

Refuse to get insurance, suck up the “penalty” and immediately deduct it (by NOT paying) that amount in your income taxes. That is, TAX PROTEST. People do it to refuse to pay their portion of war taxes as a protest against war spending (I’d do it myself but the wife will not permit it). Hell, I’d like to see the tea party movement switch over to tax protesting by NOT paying that part of their taxes that funds the Dept of dur Faderland Security, the wars, congressional pay and pensions and healthcare. Piss on ‘em (DC) and let THEM pay for their bullshit themselves.

Those dumb bastards.

The best hypothesis I’ve read about the Ds is that they don’t care if they get elected. If they don’t they get cushy lobbyist jobs (so if they win they get lobbyist donations next time; if they lose they get lobbyist jobs; what’s the downside?). Furthermore, if the Ds lose this time, they’ll get elected the next time as the voters throw the other bastards out.

What makes you so sure I was referring to you?

Amendment to the Constitution: No lawmaker may take a job as a lobbyist, nor work for any organization, private or public, that they ever legislated for or over while in office for a span of NO LESS than 10 years after leaving office.

Get that throw-away amendment passed so the greedy f*cks in Congress can’t simply dick with a law and still make out like bandits. Amendments that clearly and succinctly state what they mean cannot be sidestepped or gamed.

Clearly no one that posts on FDL nor most of the commenters want to see the Rs take over. The problem is that if the majority of Ds are simply acting as surrogates for conservative policy they cannot easily be thwarted because the Rs will sit back and enjoy the self-immolation. Just as the same proposals for health care reform were easily fought down when Clinton was in office, if the current focus is to implement compromises so that the Rs don’t have to then there is no reason to support their efforts.

:)

Sounds great. And what is Jane proposing for a legislative agenda for the new Republican Congress once they’re in office?

Shouldn’t have to change much from the current Dem congress. Except more Jeezus wheezing.

xoxo

the “no pre-existing” had a “fraud” loophole put in at Obama’s request – so they can claim fraud.

A bit like the “good faith” clause that companies used to get around the no non-payment on death if a suicide clause that went into effect 2 years after a life policy was issued – most Courts through it out, but many upheld the idea that there was no meeting of the minds due to lack of good faith so no contract so no suicide clause to worry about.

So I don’t think the insurance companies are regulated by the Federal gov in any real way other than laws on the books for lawyers in ins companies to fight about with lawyers in the Federal government – or that you have any new protections to be enforced by regulation – indeed try to name the federal office that will regulate insurance – regulate rather than talk to state offices – regulate and respond to complaints – indeed as far as I know there isn’t one – we have “joint” responsibility and no complaint process that I can see. But regulations, with no complaint process, are being issued:

(from a posting to the Pennsylvania Labor and Employment Blog by a lawyer named Eric N. Athey) The Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Labor and Internal Revenue Service are all charged with issuing regulations to implement the Act. Since May, these agencies have issued a steady stream of interim regulations regarding a number of the Act’s requirements. Most recently, on June 22, 2010, the agencies jointly issued interim regulations to implement what have been referred to as the “Patient’s Bill of Rights” provisions of PPACA, with the following provision to take effect in plan years beginning on or after September 23, 2010- Preexisting Condition Exclusions – PPACA prohibits a group health plan from imposing any preexisting condition exclusion (“PCE”) on any individual under the age of 19. The age limit is eliminated for plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2014. In the interim, HIPAA’s current PCE rules apply. The interim regulations accept the HIPAA definition of a preexisting condition as a health condition or illness that was present before an individual’s effective date of coverage in the health plan, regardless of whether any medical advice was recommended or received before that date. A PCE is any limitation or exclusion of benefits (including a denial of coverage) that applies to an individual due to the individual’s health status before the effective date of coverage under the health plan. A benefit limitation or exclusion is not a PCE, however, if it applies regardless of when the condition arose relative to the effective regardless of when the condition arose relative to the effective date of coverage.

Lifetime and Annual Dollar Limits on Essential Health Benefits
PPACA generally prohibits group health plans from imposing lifetime or annual limits on the dollar value of “essential health benefits,” except that “restricted annual limits” on essential health benefits are allowed for plan years beginning before January 1, 2014. These rules do not prohibit a complete exclusion of benefits for any particular condition and are only applicable to essential health benefits. Group health plans may continue to impose lifetime and annual limitations on nonessential health benefits. The interim regulations define “essential health benefits” by cross-referencing the definition in the statute and the applicable (and hopefully soon to be issued) regulations. Until such regulations are issued, the agencies will take into account any good faith efforts to comply with a reasonable interpretation of the term.

With respect to plan years beginning prior to January 1, 2014, the interim regulations adopt a three-year phase-in for restricted annual limits on essential health benefits. The annual limit on any individual on the dollar amount of essential health benefits may not be less than:

* $750,000 for plan years beginning on or after September 23, 2010 but before September 23, 2011;
* $1.25 million for plan years beginning on or after September 23, 2011 but before September 23, 2012;
* $2 million for plan years beginning on or after September 23, 2012 but before September 23, 2013.

The interim regulations also include special rules relating to account-based plans such as FSAs, HSAs, HRAs and Archer MSAs. There is also a special transitional rule and written notice requirement with respect to any individual who lost coverage because he or she reached the lifetime limit on benefits whereby the individual must be advised that the lifetime limit no longer applies and that the individual (if still eligible) has a 30-day period in which to enroll.

Rescissions of Coverage
The new interim regulations clarify PPACA’s prohibition against “rescissions” of health coverage. A rescission is defined in the regulations as “a cancellation or discontinuation of coverage that has a retroactive effect.” Group health plans and health insurance issuers may not rescind coverage once an individual is covered by the plan unless “the individual makes an intentional misrepresentation of material fact, prohibited by the terms of the plan or coverage.” This prohibition does not restrict plans from canceling coverage on a prospective basis. In addition, plans may terminate coverage retroactively to the extent termination is attributable to a failure to pay the required contribution toward the cost of coverage on a timely basis.

Choice of Health Care Professional
Any plan that requires participants or beneficiaries to designate a primary care provider (“PCP”) may do so only if the participants or beneficiaries are given the option to “designate any participating primary care provider who is available to accept the participant or beneficiary.” Plans must provide a written notice to each participant regarding the plan’s terms governing designation of a PCP. The notice must be included in a summary plan description or similar document which explains the plan’s benefits. The interim regulations provide model language that plans may use to satisfy this requirement.

Limits on Pre-Authorization
Under PPACA, plans may not require authorization or referral by the plan, health insurance issuer or any person (including a PCP) for a female participant or beneficiary to obtain coverage for obstetrical or gynecological care from an OB/GYN specialist; however, the specialist may be required to adhere to plan rules regarding “referrals and obtaining prior authorization and providing services pursuant to a treatment plan (if any) approved by the plan…”

Similarly, the new interim regulations require that emergency services must be covered “without the need for any prior authorization determination, even if the emergency services are provided on an out-of-network basis…” In addition, plans are prohibited from imposing any administrative requirement, limitation on coverage or cost-sharing requirement for out-of-network emergency services that would not otherwise apply if the services were rendered in-network. However, a participant may be required to pay the difference between an out-of-network provider’s charges and the lower charge that would apply if the services were rendered in-network.

Leather furniture in northern states aren’t much fun in the winter either. Only works in those climatically controlled new homes. Our multi-century brick house would teach them almost as much by freezing their posteriors come February.

LOL, and being from a place like Maine they view it as a moral weakness to run the a/c, and then react like they are infested with smallpox when the mold shows up in July.

If Obama doesn’t switch and turn Republican in 2012, he’ll have to face Jeb Bush or lose before that in the primaries. How could Jeb Bush lose? If Obama does switch, he has a better chance of being the candidate again since big and smart money love him more than life itself. Who will the Democrats nominate? Hillary?

Don’t forget: had the SCOTUS decided for Gore in 2000, Joe Lieberman would most likely be POTUS today.

Or if Ohio’s 2004 votes had been challenged, John Edwards would – I can’t finish the sentence….

I apologize for having no links to provide, and for any inconvenience I may have caused.

I belong to the group that doesn’t care whether Democrats or Republicans win in November. It is going to be a corporatist agenda either way. The Republicans are more irritating and crazy, true. But the Democrats are even worse policy-wise. Look what they did to choice in the healthcare bill. Could the Republicans make as substantial attack on Social Security as Obama is doing with his cat food commission? Could the Republicans have gotten away with cutting $400 billion from Medicare over ten years the way the Democrats did in the healthcare bill?

(I’d do it myself but the wife will not permit it).

That is why such a measure would not work. Many share your wife’s concerns.

Finding common cause would be an option but has been discounted by many as the Tea Party, as we know, is filled with RACISTS! Progressives walked right into the mousetrap and lost their power and influence to shape the debate and the bill itself.

If we’re going to be a reality based community, shouldn’t we talk about ‘the secret government’ being outlined in the WashPo this week (not that we needed to read that) as being the entity that is truly calling the shots? There probably are carrots and large sticks keeping all of our current office holders toeing the line we see enacted. What to do about it? Keep your eyes open, your money in your pocket, your time spent with family and friends instead of knocking on doors, and don’t get rolled by all the bullshit.

I agree. It’s a classic case of “Tails I win, heads you lose.”

If you think of the congress as really one very symbiotic combo, seeing a few, of ” esteemed democrats,” fall on their swords, ” makes good sense. Republicans now are a characture of some kind in their intransigence and solid unification of obstenacy.

It seems to jump at one how easily they commit hari kari. The program is job one, now it is only needed to maintain the most thin kabuki, not one argument or serious disagreement in years.

That the penned reps, allow the party to cover, complete snakes, as in blue dogs, says they ain’t S.

SUN TZU says it best ALL WAR IS BASE ON DECEPTION!

the elites used a simple trick to keep the majority of americans confused we develop a crowd of mis-informed americans to shout daily that Obama is a socialist, because we know the left will see threw our deception and call OBAMA REAGAN.

The elites ordered the media outlets they control to make the Tea Party folks seem like a movement trying to stop the Obama socialistic policies.

This deception by the elites keeps progressives at bay!

the key to Obama success is the Media, they all call him a Progressive, and most know he is a Republican in Democratic clothing at best.

They also know the tea party is not a movement. What about Obama screams socialist?

I believe you’re absolutely right.

O and his lackeys seem hell bent on making everyone buy that shit product, by the time it rolls around I’m sure they will have all the angles worked out, but I expect to find a number of fellow Thoreaus with me in the joint to commiserate with, it should be fun.

Utter nonsense. The New Deal was the most sweeping legislation in the country’s history. It worked. The problem with HCR was that it was clearly designed to help the industries that were contributing to the Democrats’ campaign funds.

So, please, go back to reading David Brooks. You clearly haven’t learned anything in all the time you’ve been here.

The cat food commission run by people that despise SS is even more obvious than the corporate heath insurance protection act or the financial non-reform. You’re exactly right, the Ds defend the policies because they can’t go against the administration. At least the Ds would sometimes make a token attempt to disagree with Bush from time-to-time.

Agreed.

I wish the Dems would grow a spine already and once again be the people’s party. They’re puppets and liars just like Republicans. It’s aggravating, and that’s why so many people are voting for people who aren’t connected to Washington. I saw this video that expresses my sentiments perfectly: http://www.itsasickness.com/lounge/adam-mordecai-obsessed-democrats-spine.

At least if the Democrats lose, they may finally realize that screwing their base isn’t a winning strategy. Failing that, at least they won’t be running things anymore. They might have to start acting like the opposition, though how they can credibly do that at this point is beyond me.

Shit, they never acted like the opposition with Shrub in office, why should they start if they get whacked in November?

Yet I must note, respectfully, that you are against my idea of using third parties to send a message to those cretinous fools, or if properly organized, win (although probably not here in FL, but I don’t care if we had a voice in the Congress.)

They did as long as they didn’t have any actual power to oppose what Little Bush was doing. Hence the term “acting like”. Once they had control of Congress, they went along most, if not all, of the time.

Slightly OT:
Barack Obama: “No more taxpayer funded bailouts of Wall Street Institutions”
Guess there goes ZIRP, primary dealers, market makers and host of other goodies. AIG, Fannie and Freddie won’t be seeing another dollar and tax breaks are a thing of the past. Happy days are here again.

Perriello voted for the bank bailout, climate change legislation and the health care bill. Voting for Stupak was not enough to pull his ass out of the fire.

So is there any reason to lament the fact that he’ll lose in November?

BTW, Jane, I had an interesting discussion with the daughter of some friends last night over Obama. She graduated from an East Coast women’s college in 2009, looked for a job in Boston for several months, and has now returned home to LA, again looking for work without success.

Her parents are good friends of mine, and all of us [including our 4 college kids] were big Obama supporters in 2008. Now even her parents have soured on him, but less than Yours Truly.

After we discussed “not voting for Dems in 2010,” we asked the Recent Graduate for her thoughts. She berated us “adults” for our abandonment of Obama, and pulled out the biggest laundry list of “excuses” — I swear, she must have the DNC on speed-dial. Among them:

*Obama inherited a horrible situation from Bush; you’re being too impatient to expect him to turn it around;

*If Obama “acted [or spoke] forcefully,” he’d be characterized as the “Angry Negro” and drive voters away;

*He’s done a lot; you’re just not appreciative

Well, those were the highlights, anyway.

I was thinking of writing a diary about this, just to illustrate what we’re up against. However, my son assures me that such blind faith in Obama by “the young” is not as wide-spread as Young Miss would suggest.

While she was touting the “now I can be on my parents’ health insurance,” I was thinking, “wait until this avowed feminist finds out that, once she leaves the comfort of her parents’ coverage, there’s no coverage of abortions in the high risk pools.” And a few other things.

I’m not against anybody who has a chance of winning. I’m not adverse to marking a protest vote either but putting somebody in a position to be a spoiler is not in my best interests. The Senate race is a great example. Voting for either Meek or Greene means Rubio has a better chance of winning because neither of them has a snowball’s chance in hell.

Oh, Margaret, you can really turn a phrase.

Thank you for providing a laugh amid the tears and head-banging [mine, that is].

Back to work.

Namaste

No violence advocacy, please.

Not to mention that the bill itself fails. Just look at the oil spill tax (what was supposed to pay for spills after Valdez) compared to how much the Gulf is going to cost. This is also a tacit admission that Obama is keeping TBTF – so people will get bank tax passed onto them for something that will ineffective and not solve the root of the problem. Rather than putting taxes to pay for future bailouts, just get rid of the reason for doing future bailouts.

Dear Tarheel; if he sleeps and eats global politics, then why is he escalating in Bush’s (now, his) war in Afghanistan?

I think most of the globe would GTF out of there, yesterday.

I can’t get too choked up about a Perriello defeat after he voted for Stupak. But unlike Hugh, I do fear a sharp turn toward the right during a time of economic distress. It has a rather inglorious historical precedent.

I agree, however, in that I don’t care whether I’m getting ripped off by Democrats or Republicans. It’s the getting ripped off part that I don’t like, and it doesn’t get any better based on who’s doing it.

“How could Jeb Bush lose?”

I think a better question is how could he win?

“Bush” is still a four-letter-word to too many voters, for Jeb to have a chance.

That’s one of the reasons why Obama doubled John McCain’s electoral vote; a lot of people had come to understand just what Bush had done to us, and Obama sounded like the candidate most likely to mount a real salvage operation. In that, we were wrong, but the only “legacy” Jeb can inherit, is two bloody, useless, clusterfucks and one basket-case economy. That they have been sustained by the guy who succeeded his brother won’t erase the blood and bullshit on the Bush name.

PS I wish Hugh would do one of his famous lists to break up that “he’s doing all he can” memes. The stupid of that statement is just gobsmacking.

It would be:

What Obama campaigned on / What Obama actually did

With an emphasis on how Obama is actively working to do the EXACT OPPOSITE of what he said he wanted to do. The idea that he’s fighting for the right thing, but the big mean DC politicians are stopping him, is just complete ahistoric balderdash.

(Don’t mean to talk about you like you’re not here, Hugh, just responding to MM’s statement.)

Questions to Jane not related to this specific article:
Thank you for excellent clarity, reality focus and strong brave voice. 2 things that would help me enjoy this site even more:

1 When I click on your blue highlighted name under your article’s name
“By: Jane Hamsher Wednesday July 21, 2010 8:25 am”
I get mainly posts before Jan 2010 but not the articles I want that you have written this Spring and Summer.

2 The content here is better for me the the content of DailyKos but I really miss being able to tip comments I aggree with. I’m a physician and a PhD but somehow I find clicking a button to recc comments very motivating, addictive and rewarding.

Thank you again for your amazing work Jane.
PS If Jason who moderates here is the same who writes on OpenLeft well done also.

That would be a great list. Should be its own diary. Hugh, please consider it!

“Who will the democrats nominate, Hillary?”

If, early-to-mid 2012 (and maybe earlier) Obama’s numbers are in the 30′s, we just might have that chance. The way things are going, with every week that passes, I think the odds for her bailing out of State to have another go at him, inch up a little.

How much support she’d get for doing it, is a good question. A lot of formerly staunch Obama backers would hold it against her, if, after he did rehab on her by picking her to head State, she challenged him in 2012.
The repubs, of course, would be delighted to see that, and would quickly reprise their 2008 role of laying off her in the primaries, if she were to bedevil the democrats with another run.

Personally, I’m so pissed at Obama that I admit to mixed feelings on this. Hillary going after him again would be a kind of poetic injustice, after he rescued her from those years of support for Bush’s wars, and for losing a nomination that was practically hers TO lose, and from the fact that she was a junior Senator with no hunky committee clout, and for the way he larded his administration with all those Clinton retreads like Holder, etc. (When that was going on, I was like: “Look out!”…)
For me, it was the first evidence of just how wretchedly mistaken he could be on important decisions.

Prolly the bottom line is, that for Hillary to win the election, she’d have to peel off some “moderate” republican votes, and I think that’s only possible in a fantasy world. But she sho’ nuff tried it, in 2008. She went about the job of proving that she wasn’t a “librul”, with a vengeance; that’s why practically every progressive group, including the National Organization for Women, ditched her and went for Obama.
This time around, we’d know that she and Lieberman and AIPAC are locked into a perpetual three-wayer for Israel.
I think Preznint Clinton would be about as willing to attack Iran, or, to support Isreal’s doing it, as any republican that the GOP would choose.

Not good. But then, with a leadership vacuum the size of the Grand Canyon, courtesy of Mr. Centrist, things could get really screwy.

HUGH! It sounds like you have a homework assignment. (I hope you’ll do it for extra credit – I’d love to see this list and I’m pretty sure you probably all ready have one started.)

Yeah I figured Hugh probably has everything he needs, it’s just a matter of formatting.

In the trial that may yet ensnare the White House, Blago has 180′d on his oft-stated promise to take the stand in his own behalf:

http://apnews.myway.com//article/20100721/D9H3J3V00.html

As Obama took office, I was worried that Fitz’s net might catch Rahm.

Now, I’m worried that it won’t. :o)

No chance of the Kabuki theater closing until Obama is threatened by someone to his left.

Who will primary Obama? What are they doing now? How can I help?

First, Jeb Bush is telegenic. I was at a new barber shop in 1988, I had just moved, and I asked the barber if she knew where the local voting precinct was. She didn’t know or care. Her girlfriend, also a 20-something, said that her dad was voting for Bush (GHW) because of Dan Quayle, because (and I quote) “He’s handsome in that Jack Kennedy way”. I’l leave the whole telegenic thing at that so I don’t piss off the moderator. Second, the Bush machine is second to none. I expect no refutation of that.

It’s dirty pool to put Hillary in the warmongers’ group, and to say she supported Bush’s wars. She was the US Senator from New York. The people who elected her (i.e., rescued her from shame and obscurity) were attacked. Remember? She was in an untenable position.

Hell. Telegenics matter. The Democrat with the telegenicest legs won. There must be polls that can document that.

First, Jeb Bush is named “Bush”. I don’t think he can change his name…not and get away with it. :o)

His brother and the bloody-handed idjits he assembled on us wrecked our economy and dragged us into two wars that are still going on, and which are costing us at least $4 billion a week.

Again, he got out of town and hung them around Barack Obama’s neck, where Obama seems unable or unwilling to divest himself of them, but that doesn’t change the fact that they were Bush’s creations, nemmind whatever idiocy Michael Steele is peddling. We just need to go after Mr. Centrist for sustaining them.

Of Hillary, you aint got a leg to stand on. She was still pimping Bush’s war, 5 years after 9-11, and I seriously doubt that geography had much of anything to do with it. In fact, I’d bet that by that time, a majority of the people in the state and city of New York were dead agin the wars, or, at the least, the one in Iraq.

When she finally bailed on it, it had nothing to do with any moral considerations; her campaign was tanking and the vote was ruining her politically, and she had no choice but to eat it…sorta/kinda.
Also, to try to slow Obama down, she happily crawled into bed with John Mcain, and here’s 1 minute and 12 seconds of her doing it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxDLKUeoJm0&feature=PlayList&p=DDF1EC1F443AEF25&playnext_from=PL&playnext=1&index=56

Political campaigns are never pretty, but in her desperation,Hillary uglied hers up until it wouldn’t whoa, and anyone trying to do their own rehab program on her, is going to be busier than a cat covering shit on a tin roof.

I don’t care about any of it, and I don’t mind if you have the Last Word. It’s just that last week, Miss Jane sent me a lovely thank-you email for my very generous $$$ contribution, and she implored me to show up here and participate in the discussions.

You misunderestimate heartland america that can’t remember what they ate two days ago.

And don’t forget most still vote on republican E-voting machines.

It does, indeed. I think, though, that the Republicans having power will always be scary. I’ve always found it a troubling thought. The question on my mind is “Are they scarier in 2010, when we might end up with divided government, or 2012, when they could win it all?”

I see a huge defeat in the Democrats’ future in 2012. They don’t have any redeeming qualities at the moment. Not being Republicans just isn’t going to be enough. They need to wise up, and I see no reason to believe that anything short of a defeat this year will accomplish that.

The Scott Brown victory didn’t do it.

The multiple primary challenges didn’t do it.

The precipitous drop in poll numbers hasn’t done it.

I’m not hanging my hat on this being a better time than 2012, but it sure looks like it. Either way, until these Democrats don’t have power anymore they’re going to be just about impossible to marginalize or deal with.

Here’s quickie OT. The grenades that Reagan furnished the Contras during his presidency are being used by the Mexican drug gangs, against the Mexican law enforcement agencies:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/16/AR2010071606252.html

What can we look forward to, given the scale and scope of the two clusterfucks in Afghanistan and Iraq?

Who said anything about your not showing up for discussions?

My 2c, you’re as welcome as can be, but your contributions don’t exempt you from dealing with the facts, and when you accuse me of playing “dirty pool” by pointing out Hillary’s years-long support for Bush’s savage idiocy, then I feel like I’m entitled to post a reply, and, to post a YouTube clip supporting that reply.

The question of which corporatist party rules the people’s house is of no concern to the folks who own Obama. And by extension, no concern of Obama’s. The days of two parties, vying for the affection of voters, are over. Now both parties are owned by and answer to the same Oligarchy.

Nader tried really hard to warn y’all about this. Now that one party rule is a fact of life, some people STILL can’t see it. I got my misanthropy from my mom. She used to shake her head and say “It’s a wonder we do as well as we do”.

tjbs, thanks for the reminder, but I think you shouldn’t forget that Barack Obama doubled John McCain’s electoral vote in 2008.

That’s a pretty good heartland ass-kicking. :o)

The short of it:

It’s accurate to say that we, the voters, did our part when we hired them, as the best choice. Then, it was up to Obama and the dems. I say they’ve funked the job, big time.

Now, let’s do our job again, and fire their “centrist” asses. I guarantee you, it’s the only thing that will help us the next time we win. Whenever that is.

Well, aside from a bruised ego they really don’t have a lot to lose.

All they gotta do when they lose an election is stroll down to K Street.
They’ll be swimming in cash without the headaches.
No more contending with the sweaty masses. It has got to be a relief.