Jane Hamsher: 'Why I Went on Fox and Friends'

[seafan]

Jane Hamsher writes on December 22, 2009:

I notice there is a diary up on Daily Kos attacking me for going on Fox & Friends. Unsurprisingly, it doesn’t say what I actually said:

In 2000, the Republicans passed Medicare Part D, and it had no negotiation for prescription drug prices. And then in 2006, when the Democrats took over Congress, the first thing they did was say “hey, we’re going to roll that back, we’re going to allow for prescription drug prices to be passed. But now that they actually have the chance, they’re not doing it. And you’ve got people like Jeff Sessions on the floor of the Senate saying this is criminal, this deal is criminal, but he didn’t vote for it in 2000 or 2006 when he had the chance. So we’re sort of looking at a situation where people on the right, people on the left, are looking at the Senate, and they’re saying “nobody’s there representing us. Nobody’s representing the people.” It’s just a matter of who’s in power and who’s taking PhRMA’s money.

I stand by that message, and I think it’s important for both people on the left and people on the right to hear. There’s a difference between helping to recruit Democratic viewers to Fox that they don’t have, and bringing a message about PhRMA that divides Republican viewers from the party leadership by pointing out the hypocrisy of their talking points.

If there are those who don’t want any criticism of PhRMA out there and have written things in the past that have been consistently in line with PhRMA’s propaganda, I think it’s fair to ask what their obsession is with shutting down the messenger.

I went on Ed Shultz last night, and Fox deliberately today after yesterday’s hubub. It scares the bejesus out of the DC establishment of both parties to think that the left and right might align against the corporate interests that dominate the massive giveaways that keep happening no matter who’s in power.

Good. They should be scared.

(Video at link)

(emphasis added)



It occurred to me in another thread that what Jane is saying in her last paragraph is exactly true:


The teabaggers' revolt is based on the fear of government taking over the private sector.

The progressives' revolt is based on the fear of the private (corporate) sector taking over the government.



The fusion of corporate economic power and the government is called fascism. We're there.



And now, the chances of a combined revolt against Corporate led by these two groups is climbing exponentially.



And, it is because that the one thing both groups are acutely aware of is that with what is going down right now in The D. C. Establishment, regular people are getting nothing but the shaft.


On that critical fact, they agree.


Look out.



Thank you, Jane.

[dflprincess]

1. Thom Hartmann has often said that if we could

speak calmly and rationally to the Teabaggers, we'd get a number of them to see things just differently enough that we might bring them to our side.

[CreekDog]

10. doesn't work

i've been trying calmly and intelligently for years.

sometimes you can get them nodding their heads, but then they just go back to thinking Jesus hates socialism.

seriously, i was in conservative churches for years. there's a small chance with some antiwar people, but the people that you need to talk to in order to convince aren't convincable.

[SharonAnn]

14. You can't reason someone out of something they weren't reasoned into.

[Zoeisright]

18. +1

Reason is a foreign concept to those people.

[zeemike]

41. There are un-convince-able righties for sure.

But making this work is about the convince-able, and every time you see them shaking there head you know it is working.

The real convincing thing to them will be that the rich are taking advantage of them, and telling them to eat cake.

[tnlefty]

12. I've heard Thom say that, but the teabaggers in my neck of the

woods carry confederate flags, along with US flags, are accolytes of Palin and Ron Paul, Milton Friedman, and they don't want to listen to reason. Some of them are affiliated with the League of the South:scared: They aren't interested in reason and won't accept that the corporate overloads they worship are the problem.

I need to look for allies elsewhere.

[dflprincess]

16. He doesn't say all of them

and maybe not even most of them. I have an acquaintence that I've been slowly wearing down - of course it probably doesn't hurt that he recently developed some health problems and his employer sponsored health plan has such lousy deductibles he's paying a ton out of pocket. The fun part is - he's still working for United Health Group.

[laughingliberal]

61. I have one of those, too

Not sure he's becoming a liberal but he's not all about the Fox talking points 24/7 any more, either. You start with what you agree on. We don't want the government bailing out the wealthy and they don't either. Letting him know that we, on the left, are just as pissed off about the bank bailouts as they are is a starting point. He is starting to take note of the fact that my anger right now is at my party for continuing to prop up the wealthy while the people suffer. It's been a short step to illustrate to him how the tax cuts and other Republican policies through the years have been robbing the poor and working class to benefit the wealthy. We concede Obama is guilty of it, and emphasize, just the same as Bush and the Republicans. Jane's appearance on Fox to point out this HCR bill is another example of corporate welfare just as Medicare part D was is exactly the correct tactic. It is important people on both sides see that the Republicans and the Democrats, both, are standing up for the elite ruling class. I love my new talking point for them. They have been so brainwashed to believe it is the illegal immigrants who have drained our resources. I just tell them that problem will take care of itself. If we continue to funnel the money to the top and unemployment stays high they will be leaving in droves. I, innocently, remark that this is brilliant. They come here for the jobs and the corporate meltdown has destroyed all the jobs which is going to force them back to Mexico. It is not long til a little glimmer of that gets through. Another thing to let them know (because most of them don't) is that the S & L bailout cost more than all the social programs in the history of social programs at that time. They get a little dumbfounded at that. Then I say, "Yes, more than all the social programs in this country for the entire history of social programs in this country." A few rudimentary facts of economics like how the economy can't move if the masses have no money to spend are helpful. Using the talking point about our tax structure being designed to punish work is very effective. This is the best foot in the door to argue against tax cuts for the rich. It absolutely knocks down the Fox talking point about punishing success. Let them know this is a case of the people who work hard every day shouldering the bulk of the tax burden so the wealthy can shirk their share of the responsibility for the keeping the nation going. The trickle down thing is easily dispelled now. Agree with them that providing money for people to invest was a great idea but that we gave them big tax cuts that took money out of their pockets and they did not invest it. That the wealthy have acted irresponsibly, taken their tax breaks and given nothing back. Let them know people who work hard every day and shoulder a huge tax burden do their part. Say to them that we go out and spend our money on things we need like food and clothes and transportation and it would help the economy more if Americans had a little change to go buy a few little extras.

Now, none of this will work if we scream back and refuse to concede where our party is complicit in the robbing of the people. Our party is complicit. We can argue degrees but for the purpose of establishing common ground that is a distraction. Once every one gets on the page that it has been the transfer of the wealth to the top then we can start to discuss solutions. But it will get us nowhere to keep seeing this as a sporting event and cheering our team on for doing the same things. We can point out a few things Obama has done that we like only after we come clean about the fact that the sellout to corporate America is the problem in both parties.

[MisterP]

25. quite right--though regular Joes and schlubs also watch Faux nt

[TheWraith]

32. Hartman is nuts, then. You can't reason with an unreasonable person.

The teabaggers live in their own separate bizzaro world.

[stopbush]

117. He is nuts. Ever read that conspiracy book he co-authored about the JFK killing?

The guy's nuts.

[piratefish08]

51. Never happen. Teabaggers are fueled by emotion, NOT facts and reason.

[yui]

58. Agreed.

Indeed they are, sort of like the he-can-do-nothing-wrong-don't-you-dare-criticize-him supporters of the President on DU. ;-)

[shadowknows69]

64. Hell, if you can change one mind.

I support Jane Hamsher.

[peace frog]

112. +1000

[jmowreader]

75. I think Hartmann's wrong on this one

There used to be two kinds of conservatives: those who are in the movement for fiscal reasons, and those who are in it for social reasons.

The fiscal conservatives are the ones who want lower taxes and reduced government spending. Some of them don't mind government spending so long as the government isn't feeding poor people or anything like that. Bombs are fine with them.

Social conservatives also hate taxes--tell me who DOESN'T hate taxes; it's been a while since I heard someone saying "y'know, what we really need here is a good tax hike"--but they want their increased spending for things like religious education and throwing abortion doctors in prison.

Now we have teabaggers. They just don't like the government. For some reason, though, they're madly in love with The Troops--apparently not realizing that The Troops are in fact employed by the federal government. They love police officers and firefighters too, and those folks also work for the government. Teabaggers work counter to their own interests because Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity tell them black is white, up is down and a Big Mac Extra Value Meal with a side dish of a Quarter Pounder every week is a massive increase in their standard of living.*

The only way you'll ever please those people is to shut down every part of the government but the prison-industrial complex and the army, turn all education over to the Baptist Church and criminalize abortion. The most effective way to deal with them is to grab the zoom ring of the news camera and rack it out to the wide-angle setting so people can see the "biggest tea party rally ever organized" has a hundred people at it. We managed to put several hundred thousand people in the streets of DC (or did we actually get a million people? I know it was a lot) asking Shrub not to invade Iraq, and we're the marginal fringe. The teabaggers put a thousand people in the streets of DC protesting President Obama's tax plan, and they're the mainstream. Shit doesn't make sense, folks.

* Someone who earns $30,000 per year makes $625 per week. If we cut this person's tax rate by 10 percent, he will receive an extra $9.38 in his weekly pay envelope--enough to purchase one Big Mac Extra Value Meal and a Quarter Pounder.

[Cali_Democrat]

87. ROFL. Fat chance. n/t

[Cosmocat]

91. There is a guy I bump into at the gym ...

been talking calmly and rationally with him for years ... He is a card carrying teabaggers, been to rallies here and down in DC ...

Not even the FIRST bit or reason has sunk in ...

Three years of me going with the, "We both see problems, we are just going at it differnetly," and and FOREVER trying to find common ground ... And, seriously, he just quotes Rush Limbaugh and speaks FOR ME ... You just have total and complete faith in government, you just want government to run everything, you just hate rich people ...

I am not near ultra liberal, I am a left leaning moderate, and I fully concede points, I recognize faults ...

But, this guy can't remember what I say by the time my words echo in his head ...

He isn't even talking to ME ... Years of TRYING to reason with him, and I am just the "liberal" he has been programmed to think I am. Seriously, he does not even have the first clue what my positions are, even after telling him dozens of times.

Again, these people have been completely programmed to not only know what they should think, but to define liberals in complete, and there is no unwinding either of these things.

I love Hartmann, I am reading a book of his right now, but these people are L O S T to society, there is not getting them back ...

[stopbush]

108. He's wrong.

[BrklynLiberal]

118. That assumes there may be a core of rationality within them. I have my doubts.

It would be akin to trying to have an intelligent conversation with a cement block.

EDIT: My apologies to cement blocks.

[NatlAnthem]

120. Try calling them tea party folks not teabaggers

Surely you people can't be so obtuse as to think you can win anyone over by calling them a filthy name?

As for having similar goals, you may have a point. Conservatives see little value in government intervention of any kind so that people are left alone to struggle, thrive and pursue happiness. Government should be small in size and impact. I think you would find a majority of folks who also don't like corporations acting as controlling agents too, like insurance companies, cable companies, etc.

The difference is also that conservatives see freedom in choices, not in centralized control of choice. Remove barriers so insurance companies can compete for your business. An insurance exchange is a great idea, with enough regulation for full disclosures of coverage and easy access. An exchange that only provides choices Health and Human Services agrees to? Forget it.

Putting real power back in the hands of those investing in corporations is awesome conservative stuff. Stockholders are the real owners, both in terms of control and responsibility.

Controlling pay for folks doing their best to get a return to those stockholders? Bad idea. Almost as bad as not allowing stockholders to feel the pain and loss of their stock value. If people realized that 401k stock portfolio they have has responsibility and liability associated with it, they might take it seriously.

But you will never win support from tea party activists without coming to grips that government mandates and power centralization are the answer. Creating the environment that lets people choose to move to place you want them, now there is power. Grow jobs, build American wealth, then guide people to be generous out of nobility, and keep the corruptocrats out of the trough ... that would be a dream conservative tea party folks could get behind.

But I would bet most of you are too far down the idealogical path to be so open minded. And it is a shame.

[butterfly77]

130. Their TEABAGGERS...

[mzmolly]

2. Has Jane questioned why Fox News wanted to hear from her?

:hi:

[mcablue]

5. Do you have any opinions regarding Hamsher's comments on Fox?

As a critical-thinking (I assume) human being, can you tell us whether you think her views are favorable to conservatives or not?

[mzmolly]

8. Yes, I believe she's misleading

people. Intentional or not? I don't know.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=85131&mesg_id=85131

[seafan]

7. I'd REALLY like to know the answer to that too. Fox viewers need badly to hear from her.

:hi: backatcha, mzmolly.

[mzmolly]

9. Thanks

SF. :pals:

[KittyWampus]

19. No, her main concern is getting herself attention.

[roguevalley]

34. I don't believe that. Jane is good people.

[rudy23]

77. The ad hominems only push people further to her side. nt

[PM Martin]

3. True.

[Barack_America]

4. Honestly, if someone has the guts to go Fox and speak the truth...

I say more power to them. As long as they don't compromise to make nice, of course.

[girl gone mad]

6. She's exactly right.

"It scares the bejesus out of the DC establishment of both parties to think that the left and right might align against the corporate interests that dominate the massive giveaways that keep happening no matter who’s in power."

Obama has consistently promoted bipartisanship and compromise. He has appointed over a dozen Republicans to his administration. He let Lieberman off the hook and supported his chairmanship after Lieberman endorsed McCain.

The administration cannot now tell progressives that they are traitors for reaching out to Republicans to achieve shared goals and expect to be taken seriously.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

[amborin]

29. very well-stated! totally agree!

[chimpymustgo]

52. This notion of a left/right revolt is being discussed now on Morning Joe. People get ready.

[slipslidingaway]

11. knr nt

[tnlefty]

13. K & R!

Thanks for posting!

[Canuckistanian]

15. The problem isn't about bringing Democrats to Fox

It's about making Fox go away.

They'll never change. They'll always be the official voice of the GOP.

If Democrats had an official voice, then I'd say, let Fox stay. As things are, Fox is an unfair advantage.

[TomCADem]

17. The Problem Is That Going On Fox Allows Liberals To Be Used As Tools

Fox never gives liberals a platform to articulate views that they broadly agree on. Instead, Fox focuses on disagreements, and liberals who appear on Fox are allowing themselves to used as pawns. If you are looking for a platform, check out the Ed Show, Maddow or KO who have no problem giving the President grief. But appearing on Fox is like appearing on a 24/7 RNC commercial.

[sabrina 1]

24. Then you're preaching to the choir. What Hamsher is saying

is that we need a new strategy. I have always advocated that Dems stay away from Fox, but they haven't.

It's interesting to see the vitriol against her, yet she very likely caused some people to think beyond party politics and about what is best for the country.

I disagree with those who say you cannot change the minds of teabaggers. I have done that so it is possible. Just weeks ago on a board I sometimes post on, which is pretty much dominated by the right, all repeating the propaganda they hear on Fox and talk radio, I was able to reach two people simply by being patient, realizing that they were not bad people, just badly informed and not attacking them. It started out with the usual 'you're a leftie' etc. but we have an advantage over them. They don't have facts. Sometimes people's eyes can be opened, especially regarding an issue as important as this, by presenting them with facts.


The divisions in this country were orchestrated by the far right. I have not given up on my friends on the right. Many of them are decent people but they are being told lies. Telling them the truth and being able to back it up goes a long way towards uniting Americans. And Jane H. is right, that is what the PTBs fear the most, that Americans will stop fighting among themselves and unite against them. The whole purpose of the rightwing noise machine was to divide America.

This issue affects everyone. It transcends party politics except for those who make their living from politics. But ordinary people want a decent healthcare system and most of them do not like the Private Insurance Cos. People will always differ on issues even within parties, but there are some issues, like this one, where Americans in general can find common ground.

[TomCADem]

26. Jane Could Go On CNN, PBS, NPR, etc. But Fox?

If a Democrat or liberal goes on Fox, then they are more likely than not being used as a tool. Look at Geraldine Ferraro. Its making a deal with the Devil for a liberal to go on Fox.

Also, of all the Fox shows, Fox and Friends? At minimum, try to get on the more newsy segments of Fox News, but Fox and Friends is just a shade less extreme than Beck and Hannity.

[sabrina 1]

27. She has been on other networks. And do you feel the same way

about Obama or any of the other Democrats who are on Fox all the time? I remember Obama on the Bill O'Reilly Show. Bill O'Reilly? Couldn't he have, at a minimum, tried to get on more newsy segemtns of Fox News? Anyhow, I felt he should not have dignified the O'Reilly Show with an interview, but people like you pointed out that he was reaching their huge audience. The same people now, are saying the opposite. And, when O'Reilly trashed bloggers and asked him if he agreed with them, he did not stand up for those who were supporting him back then. He waffled.

Jane did not waffle, she said what she would have said regardless of what show she was on. It seems pretty hypocritical to me to be slamming her got going on Fox, when Obama was given a pass. I remember well the same argument over all the candidates going on Fox, and the same people arguing FOR IT back then, are now arguing against it.

Hillary Clinton went to a party hosted for her by Rupert Murdoch. Again, I never saw the vitriol against her that is now directed at Hamsher. In fact, those of us who did object to her and Obama cavorting with Murdoch, were told we were not 'pragmatic' enough to understand the importance of reaching out to all Americans.

So, I'm not inclined to take this 'outrage' too seriously. And I bet if I had the time to go through some of the comments when Obama appeared on O'Reilly, I would find some of the same people who are attacking Hamsher now, defending Obama then.

The reason sadly, is partisan politics. Losing sight of the issues and taking sides on fringe issues out of loyalty, not to the country's concerns, but to a politician or party.

The fact is, she is right. And she is a fighter and that's what we so badly need. Regardless of my own personal feelings about her, and I've had many differences with her, at this moment in time, I will set that aside because I don't see too many others fighting hard, putting themselves out there, particularly our elected officials and the online keyboard warriors. I also take it as a sign that the DLC, who she exposed when they contacted liberal bloggers, including her, and told them to STFU and leave the Blue Dogs alone, are afraid of her, enough to send out their operatives to go after her. She could have complied, others, sadly did. I'm glad at least someone resisted trading their principles for being on the 'inside'.

[TomCADem]

30. Absolutely

I feel the same way about other Democrats appearing on Fox. I really don't see the point. Now, you reference President Obama, and the irony is that the Obama administration has gotten heat for freezing out Fox News, but I do say screw Fox News.

Finally, if you absolutely have to appear on Fox, try to stay on what Fox defines as news. Stick with Hume or Sheppard.

[KoKo]

96. +1

[sendero]

47. + 10000000000000000

Well said.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

43. Then someone needs to tell this guy

[orwell]

20. Jane is delusional...n/t

[ellie]

57. She is very delusional

[bertman]

21. Since I personally know several former right-wingers who are now liberals, I want to

point out that awareness and a change of heart about matters political often come incrementally. My friends tell me that it was the little bits and pieces of FACTS that their liberal friends kept shoving at them that FINALLY added up to an epiphany.

Ed Schultz is one of the few former right-wingers I know (other than myself) who apparently had his epiphany due to one incident--having his wife, Wendy, take him to a homeless shelter where he met REAL homeless Americans and got to talk to them about why they were homeless.

This very scary narrative about liberals being traitors for going on Fox is just fucking narrow-minded insanity. It is very disturbing to see that attitude be so prevalent on DU.

Folks, the only thing that is going to really change this country is when the working-class right and the left sides of the political spectrum realize they are being SCREWED by the corporate interest and they begin working together to bust up the cartels. Just exactly what Jane said.

Wake up, people. The right wingers are not our enemies. They are our friends and family members who are misguided and misinformed. Many of them are very good and compassionate people who listen to the wrong voices on their radios and TeeVees. They need to be educated. Jane was making the effort.

Rec.

[slipslidingaway]

28. Exactly !!! ...

"...Folks, the only thing that is going to really change this country is when the working-class right and the left sides of the political spectrum realize they are being SCREWED by the corporate interest and they begin working together to bust up the cartels. Just exactly what Jane said..."

[sabrina 1]

33. Agreed. I have many friends and family members who are

Republicans. We used to not even discuss politics as it was just impossible without huge fights breaking out and people not speaking to each for weeks at a time. Now, I've noticed a change, not just in them, but in me too. They are disillusioned with the Right and no longer feel the need to defend them. I am less enthusiastic about Democrats and don't feel the need to defend them at the expense of my family and friends. When they fight for me, maybe I'll do so again.

But since this started happening, we can actually talk about politics again. And, I am so happy that we can even agree on some things. There are some issues we will never agree on, like abortion eg. But on the economy, the wars and torture eg, I can't believe it, but they do agree with me now.

They want a good health care system also and I know they would support a Medicare for All program. That is familiar to them, so not as scary as a 'Single Payer' system which the right has defined as a 'commie' program. But Medicare is untouchable. They all have elderly relatives so they like it.

Jane Hamsher is right about one thing. Those who run this country benefit when the people are divided. And what scares them the most is that all the work they put into dividing the country, through their talk radio radicals and Fox eg, is beginning to lose effect.

This may be a perfect time to start approaching them. Look at what is happening on Little Green Footballs, eg. I never thought I'd see the day they would detach themselves from the far right. Things are shifting in this country and people are breaking away from the partisan radicals and looking for reasonable solutions.

[bertman]

67. Thanks for weighing in with those thoughts, Sabrina 1. I hope your experience is going

to be the wave of the future. You are doing the right thing by trying to encourage discussion. It's not easy when the chasm is so wide.

If you want some good information that may help you with some of the Pro-Compulsory Pregnancy types, there is an excellent OP that is up and running now. I bookmarked it to send to my family members who cannot envision any situation that might require they have an abortion (or one of their children might have one).

[sabrina 1]

89. Thanks, I have always tried to at least have discussions with

people I disagree with. It was a lot harder a few years ago, in my experience. I spent a lot of time on rightwing boards during the Bush administration and there simply was no way to get through to them back then. But over time, I noticed them changing and after they get used to a 'leftie' in their midst, their attitude changes also and they don't see you as an enemy anymore, although still 'delusional' one of their favorite words!

Still, persistence and always being ready to provide back-up for what you say, eventually does get some respect from them and helps shatter the image that's been painted for them of what a 'liberal' is. And most important imo, no matter how some of them may use personal attacks as a weapon, I never did that. Just stuck to the issues, and even teased them sometimes (which they actually liked). Breaking down some of those barriers at least opens the door slightly. But it takes time as many have been completely indoctrinated and it's hard for them to let go of the 'truths' they've believed for so long.

Not many on the left agreed with me either when I continued to go those boards. Most thought it was a waste of time. But what good is it to talk only to those who agree with you? That's something I did agree with Obama about. That 'we are all Americans'. However, I think he was a bit too optimistic about some issues not needing any special attention anymore. As a goal, I loved that idea, that everyone is equal. But we're clearly not there yet and from history it's obvious that even getting to where we are right now took a lot of work, and a lot more needs to be done.

I haven't seen the OP you mentioned regarding abortion. That is one of the most difficult issues to talk about with the right so mostly I gave up on that and tried to stick to what was possible to discuss. I would like to read it though so if you have a link, that would be great.

[bertman]

126. Here's the link:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7297810

Merry HOHO.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

129. I've actually had a productive discussion about abortion with an anti-choicer.

Got her to see the reason for supporting safe, legal abortion. She is a nurse, and an artist. So, I don't know how "hard-line" she is, but it was a rewarding moment for me.

I'd love to know what the right-leaning blog you're talking about is (PM me if you feel comfortable sharing that), because I'd like to see how you explain facts they need to know. I think the enormity of the disinformation overwhelms me and makes it tough to be plain and simple. That leaves me feeling angry and frustrated.

[Blue_In_AK]

22. I see some wisdom in this.

Ordinary people from the right and the left do have a common enemy, the corporate state. I think we on our side know who the enemy is, but the people on the right really don't. They have a right to be angry, but their anger is misplaced. If a progressive like Jane can go on Fox and change a viewer's mind even just a little, she's done a good thing.

[ipaint]

23. Good for her.

It's not just teabaggers that watch fox. It's on everywhere. In car repair shops, doctors and dentist offices etc. Lots of people at home switch around the news stations and settle on fox temporarily, they aren't all right wing nutjobs. Doesn't the military limit the choice to fox in iraq and elsewhere.

Get the message out there.

[leftstreet]

31. 'left and right might align against the corporate interests'

Which is exactly what needs to happen

K&R

[mmonk]

35. That is the situation we find ourselves in.

The question is after the revolt, what do we want? Our values or the anti-government anti-tax groupies? We're blowing it. Jane is fully aware of that. And we are at the point where the corporate interests have already taken over and even meagar safety nets are in dire danger in this country, even in severe recession.

[democracy1st]

36. K & R

[FrenchieCat]

37. Yeah.....let's "get together" with some fucked up crazy ass racists

and talk some sense into them!

But I know dumbshit when I read it,
and what is being discussed in this thread
is some dumbass shit.

And I'm not at all surprised with those in this thread who would rather
lay down with a Teabagger and try to make nice with them,
then to support a Democratic President.

FUCK.THEM.RACIST.ASS.PIECES.OF.SHIT!
dumbass Teabaggers Unite!
I can't wait!

[kayla9170]

40. I have watched and enjoyed your posts here on DU

Thanks for this statement!!

[FrenchieCat]

42. It needed to be said.

Racists assholes that would parade around with Barack Obama as Hitler
for nothing he has done are racist assholes and nothing else.
To even want to believe that they could be turned around,
is about as bad as I have read here. Folks that believe that this is even worth discussing,
should have talked to Bush while he was President and tried and turned his ass around.
He would be smirking even harder than he did for 8 fucked up lousy ass worthless years!

[euphoria12leo]

44. You're on a roll

and doing just fine.

:hi:

[bjb]

84. Thank you

Frenchiecat for speaking for me.

[Bluenorthwest]

53. Yeah, Obama only 'gets together' with fucked up homophobes!

Fuck the Donnie McClurkin bigot crowd and all who stand with them. Warren, the government of Uganda, and all the genocide loving hate bags that attack my family while standing on Obama's own platfrom.
You defended Obama's 'making nice' with invective spewing bigots of the very worst kind. Your huffing and puffing were noted then, and now, compared and contrasted. You had some interesting notions as to why Obama used Donnie. Bona fides you called it. Ummmm hmmmmm.
Do you have just the double standards or are there three or four sets of standards in your world?

[RetroLounge]

62. +1

RL

[Jamastiene]

71. Thank you for pointing that out.

Then: "Lying down" with Warren was "reaching out."

Now: trying to fight the corruption in our government is RACIST!!!!

FFS

[Starry Messenger]

74. It's practically all the same people.

Nearly every single person who said smile and shut up about Rick Warren, too. They're all up in arms here even though Jane is proposing bipartisanship with bigots, same as Obama. Gee, I thought they knew what they were voting for.

[fascisthunter]

81. awesome response

[Forkboy]

95. FC is a joke.

[Duncan Grant]

101. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

:applause:

[gaspee]

104. ooh let me guess!

Who ignored is that's calling a longtime Progressive activist a racist who must be destroyed but Obama just reaches out to bigots for our own good! Is it the abbreviation of a "Golden State"? No? Wait one more --- that Gallic Neko who constantly posts how GLBT'er are nothing but Obama hating racists who demand ponies and posits that our "pet issues (like our very lives) lose elections for real democrats... it's got to be number two...

Damn - downthread someone comfirms my guess. And quel surprise, I'm right!

[CBR]

60. Thanks Frenchie. It is truly vile. nt

[Jamastiene]

72. It's only a two minute prayer.

How do you think the GLBT community felt when Obama "got together" with McClurkin and Warren?

[FLAprogressive]

78. She was defending it.....

...it's what she does.

[FrenchieCat]

83. You and yours and Hamster can get together with whomever you want.......

because at the end of the day, I don't give a shit.

What I won't do is throw a hissy fit day in, day out
in every single post I make.

So go lay down with the Teabaggers,
if that's what you consider progress.
More power to you.
Hope it helps you get your agenda through.

[Forkboy]

94. "What I won't do is throw a hissy fit day in, day out in every single post I make."

:rofl:

[frylock]

113. double-plus roffle..

i mean, W. T. mother-effing F!!!

[sabrina 1]

86. But that was 'reaching out' wasn't it?

I have seen some of the same commenters who fiercely defended Obama for his alliances with people like McClurkin suddenly flip-flop now. All it says is that the issues are secondary to the individual politician they support. Which makes their opinions irrelevant.

Obama didn't back down from those alliances either, no matter how angry his supporters were. Interestingly though, he did back away from the Rev. Wright and from Acorn and Van Jones when the RIGHT attacked those alliances. Clearly he listens more to the radical, racists on the right and so far, has not stood up to them at all, while admonishing the left, Conyers, Dean and the base. So the ranting of Rush Limbaugh, Fox and Hannity et al got Obama's attention.

Maybe Jane Hamsher will at least get his attention now as he apparently watches Fox and has been influenced by them. He rarely if ever responds to the concerns of the left. If for no other reason that to get his attention, I'm glad she went Fox.

The Democratic Party is moving further and further to the right. Those who want people like Jane Hamsher to STFU, are unwittingly (or maybe not in some cases) helping that to happen.

[butterfly77]

131. Thank you...

yeah,those RACIST,PUMA,PIECES OF SHIT!

[burning rain]

38. One may dislike the Hamster...

but there's no denying the crony- capitalist character of the Senate health care bill she's attacking.

[Kahuna]

39. I never liked her. She always came across to me as self-important...like

she is the leader of the "progressive movement" and whatever she says, goes. Like she's the freakin' Bible or something. By going on faux to criticize the president, she also confirms my impression of her that she is self-serving too. As long as she gets face time so that she can be one little peanut in the gallery, is all she's interested in.

[avaistheone1]

66. She is important. Jane Hamsher is a leading voice and fundraiser for progressives.

I think Hamsher is wise to speak to all media venues she has can manage time for. Everyone should have the information Jane shares.
It's up to the viewers what they want to do with it.

It is interesting how various Democrats try to silence her given she is one of the most effective and knowledgeable progressives on today's scene. Being under Jane Hamsher's spotlight isn't helpful to either Democrats or Republicans who are busy being corporate shills, rather than taking care of the people's business.

Trying to kill this messenger Jane Hamsher isn't going to work for Democrats.

[Kahuna]

128. Does that mean she gets to set the rules. If her heart was in the right place..

she wouldn't be damanding anything in return.

[Generator]

93. We have so few voices from the left

So very few. It's so insulting that you and others actually think she's doing it to be "popular" to get on t.v. That is so fucking insulting. Is that what Markos Daily Kos is doing it for too? He's against the bill. Is that why Howard Dean does it-to be popular? No, he's hated by the beltway. He now says pass the bill. I am not against him because I don't agree with him. I believe he believes what he believes. She has been taking on Lieberman which is more than anyone can say of Obama.

Your post is superficial. Jane Hamsher had breast cancer and the health insurance nightmare become a reality to her. She's doing it because she believes in what she's doing and wants to save lives. What do you believe in besides Obama? Seriously,. Who are you people that the second others have a little bit of publicity to criticize your great leader that suddenly all the voices on the left are the enemy?

Firedoglake was a light in the darkness for many years under Bush. And all you can do is trash the light.

[Kahuna]

127. She was never a voice for me. I am vindicated. nt

[WeDidIt]

45. She did it because she's a hypocritical asshole. n/t

[Major Hogwash]

46. She was on Ed Schultz and she did a great job.

The people whining about her at DU have never been on tv, so it's just a case of sour grapes for them I think.

[H2O Man]

48. Recommended.

Food for thought. I appreciate that you posted this.

[Major Hogwash]

49. Jane should have done an impression of Bill O' Reilly - "fuck it, we'll do it live then" and ripped

her microphone off.

LoL

[berni_mccoy]

50. The Enemy of My Enemy...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7304990

[pmorlan1]

54. Jane is Right on Target

It's really funny to read some of the emotionally based comments knocking Jane for going on Fox and telling the truth. These people have their panties in a wad about how you just can't talk to right wingers - they don't listen to reason, yada, yada, yada. LOL It just goes to show you that there are emotional, unreasonable people who don't listen on both sides of the aisle. LOL

I agree that our corporate masters are absolutely terrified that there will be people on the left who join with people on the right to take back our country. Do we agree on everything? Hell no, but some of us on the Left and Right do recognize when we're being played to help enrich the few. It's a real pity that there are so many on the Left and Right who still don't get it and continue to remain blindly loyal to political Parties that work against their own interests.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

55. K&R good stuff

[pleah]

56. K&R

[still_one]

59. The problem isn't the message, it is giving that message on a network whose only objective

is to destroy any progressive and liberal view in the country

[dgibby]

105. I have friends who think Attila the Hun was too progressive.

The ONLY channel they EVER watch is Fox. When they aren't watching Fox, they're listening to Rush.
She has stage III breast cancer. If Jane can reach them by taking her message to Fox, then it's worth it.

It's not easy to reach the far right, but consider this. Someone, somewhere, was able to turn around Francis Shaffer, perhaps one of the most virulent radical right, fundie ministers alive today. That man made Jerry Falwell et al look like rank amatures. But today, because someone took the time to try, Francis Shaffer is now working AGAINST the very movement he and his father started. If he can be turned around, anything is possible!

[Kermitt Gribble]

63. Jane is exactly right on this.

The US Govt is no longer a govt of the People. The only way the People will get it back is to unite on this one issue, which is The Issue. The PTB have divided us as a distraction to complete their corporate takeover. We will never see eye to eye with the teabaggers on most issues, but it is critical that we unite on this issue.

K&R!

[phasma ex machina]

69. +1 "The PTB have divided us as a distraction to complete their corporate takeover."

Divide et impera AKA "divide and conquer."

[dgibby]

106. What's that saying?

Something about a house divided? You are exactly right. It's all smoke and mirrors.

[shadowknows69]

65. The media is split as much as our country.

If we can even get a seed of truth through the stupidity barrier it's worth it.

[seafan]

68. Fox's whole mission is to foster ignorance in its viewers. Jane just opened a truth window.

I'll bet more than a few light bulbs switched on when she pointed out that the real problem for regular working people on both the left AND the right is that our wealth has been stolen from us, funneled to the corporate wealth-hoarders at the top, and that those same people are running our dysfunctional government with no regard for the people whatsoever.

This corporate corruption is entrenched in BOTH PARTIES.


For more than the past half a century, the vastly wealthy in this country have seized increasing control of governmental power, while inciting division among the people by pitting groups of people against each other and feeding fear and hatred, while the top greed mongers carry off the loot, unwatched.


Now is the time for the millions of people of this country to unite against these bloodsuckers and destroy their power.

[laughingliberal]

70. Exactly! There is common ground. It starts there

My response in #61, above, is about this. First, the populist rage against the bank bailouts is the perfect ground on which to meet. Neither party is innocent in this. The next step is to show how this pattern of channeling the money to the top has been a pattern for 30 years and has left us broke, it gets easier. Acknowledging where we were complicit is necessary. Everyone hate NAFTA. It is undeniable a president of our party supported it and signed it. Leave off, for the moment, the fact that Bush would have, too. There are myriad examples most people are aware of that can be demonstrated where both parties are doing this. The rage people feel right now needs to be rechanneled towards the top. It can be done but it will not be done if our side refuses to acknowledge it as wrong when our president is complicit. We can argue degrees of damage once some meeting ground is established. This is what they fear. That the right and the left will, one day, come together and realize who's robbing us. Jane is right. There is no better example to show this than the one she used about how the Republicans fashioned Medicare part D and how the Democrats are protecting it in their HCR bill.

[phasma ex machina]

73. "It scares ... the DC establishment of both parties to think that the left and right might align

against the corporate interests that dominate the massive giveaways that keep happening no matter who’s in power."

Amen!

The 'net enables all of the world's little people to coordinate political attacks for the very first time in history. Truly historic.

[rudy23]

76. Jane's got the exact right idea. Educate your friends who are willing to listen.

You can start by talking about how you're upset with Obama, too.

Then talk about how the corporate wing of each party trashes the idealistic wing, then blames it on the corporate wing of the OTHER party.

Every is receptive to that message b/c unless you're in the top 1%, you're pretty upset with Obama AND Bush right now.

[bjb]

85. Disagree

I can't compete with Fox and Limbaugh. I gave up trying just to keep peace in the family.

[glitch]

79. Very brave. Quite a few people who have attempted to unite anti-corporatists on the left and right

have had early deaths, and not just in the 1960s.

Jane Hamsher, I salute you.

[fascisthunter]

80. DC's divide and conquer is no longer working

the wealthy elite since starting this war against the majority should be very worried, because we are not stopping, no mercy.

[inna]

82. KR+69

[dreamnightwind]

88. And thank you, seafan, for your post

I seriously can't believe some of the attacks I've read on Jane both here and on DKos. Way off the mark. Dividers not uniters.

We all have our reasons for how we feel about the right wing in this country, and those feelings won't go away anytime soon. But it's undeniable that the left-right division is cultivated and exaggerated by the corporate forces whose supremacy depends on the left and right fighting each other rather than a left-right coalition rising up against the real immediate problem that has completely taken over both parties and is quite rapidly destroying this country and the wealth of 99% of its citizens.

My family is mostly right-wingers. I often feel that I have no family because of this. I imagine it's the same for many on here. We're at a critical time where we absolutely have to get past this. It's a process of healing our families, on both a family level and a national level.

We're in survival mode now, we have to make huge changes just to insure that we'll have employment opportunities, housing, health care, and food. The wedge issues need to wait for better times.

There's a very large dragon running amuck, a beast of no nation, consuming everything in its path, while we fight each other. Our future literally depends on putting the dragon back in its cage, and it's obvious that it's too heavy of a lift for just the left or just the Democratic party.

And there's no reason to limit our outreach to the US right-wing. The whole world is up against this problem, and there are many allies out there who have the same interests when it comes to reeling in corporate power.

[Phx_Dem]

90. You scare no one Jane. Go ahead and align with right, just go away!

[stopbush]

110. Agree. She's a sell-out, and in record time.

Aligning with the teabaggers.

Aligning with Norquist.

Going on Fox.

Hey, Jane, don't forget to say Hi to Krauthammer and Kristol for us!! Make sure ya give 'em a big :loveya:...because you're doing their work for them.

[Vidar]

92. K&R.

[quiet.american]

97. Almost laughing too hard to post. 'DU'ers for Teabaggers' now? WTF?

Here's the first problem:

"The teabaggers' revolt is based on the fear of government taking over the private sector."

Why legitimize these horrid, horrid people?

No, it's not. It's based on:

1) Sarah Palin didn't win
2) A Democrat won
3) A black Democrat won
4) FAUX-News-fed pablum and outright lies
5) Gullibility
6) Astro-turf
7) Blaming Obama for crap Bush did
8) Birthers
9) He's-an-Arab'ers
10)"Pro-lifers" who have no problem carrying "Bury Obamacare with Kennedy" signs less than a week after Ted Kennedy's passing.

When one is so far left that you want to join with these kinds of people, count me out.

[Major Hogwash]

98. General Wesley Clark was a paid analyst on Fox for almost 2 years. Still laughing?

Taking the message "to the people" includes all the people we can get to hear us.

[ClarkUSA]

99. He never ever advocated killing Dem legislation and standing with the wingnut base.

Quite the opposite.

[ClarkUSA]

100. That's pretty much describes this OP. Pathetic, isn't it?

Bitter is as bitter does.

[valerief]

102. Bravo, Jane! nt

[ClarkUSA]

103. Jane Hamsher: 'Why I'm teaming up with Grover Norquist' (not a joke, unfortunately)

Hamster is a joke, however. She's jumped the shark bigtime:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=90512&mesg_id=90512

But it gets her notoriety, plenty of website hits (thus higher ad $$), and makes her as much of an attention whore as Arianna
Huffington, so all's good for her, right?

[Cali_Democrat]

107. Hamster is a disgrace.

Siding with the likes of Grover Norquist?

[ClarkUSA]

109. Yup. She's on Faux News promoting killing HCR and now she's teaming up w/Grover Norquist.

What's also a disgrace are the number of alleged "progressives" who cheer her every utterance as if she's credible.

[LTMidnight]

111. Some of you people not only have lost your damn minds....

...but are selling out your own so-called principles to protect Jane Hamsher.


This blog entry by Steve M. at no more mister nice blogs expresses what I feel pretty much.

http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2009/12/no-jane-question-is-why-did-they-book.html

The only thing I disagree with is Steve M.'S assumption that Jane made an innocent naive mistake in making her appearance. I've also read her "explanation" for going.

For this, I call BS.

Ms. Hamsher is incapable of the level of stupidity necessary to believe Fox News in general, much less Fox and Friends, invited her with the intent of having a genuine debate with her on the Health Care issue.

She knew what was going to happen, and she went regardless.

Some may question why. To me that doesn't matter. What matters here is that she compromised her "principles" to suit her cause.

I've always believe the principles of an ideologue is worth less than nothing, because that can change whenever it's convenient. And this proves it.

But the message to those supporting her in this decision is this.

Where are your principles?

I was lead to believe that it was "Obamabots" like me who, as Bill Maher like to say, put "People over Principle". I encourage those who have been a supporter of Ms. Hamsher and following her lead up to this point to engage in some soul searching. Is this the kind of crap that you really think progressives should be about?

[SanchoPanza]

114. So let me get this straight...

The Senate passes a bill that is leaps and bounds beyond the status quo. But because it only accomplishes 80% of what Hamsher says she wants (assuming she even knows what the hell it is she wants, which is debatable), the Senate, and Obama by extension, are selling out progressives. Because a bill that puts insurance companies on the hook for covering people, while offering a toothless individual mandate that will allow people to walk away from them (and into an expanded Medicaid or a non-profit alternative) is the same as corporate servitude.

Then she teams up with Grover Norquist, the biggest corporate-sniffing douchebag since Ayn Rand shuffled off the mortal coil, and this is supposed to be an example of the grassroots fighting all the moneyed interests in Washington. And they do this how, exactly? By calling for Rahm Emanuel's resignation.

She's not even a talented demagogue.

[stopbush]

116. Bingo! One thing for sure, Jane sold out too quickly to ever consider a political run.

If you want to play at being a progressive, you've got to be able to keep your liberal bona fides in tact for at least the first two years or so that you get to make regular TV appearances. Jane went for the $ faster than Ted Stevens hiring an architect to design a bridge.

[Techn0Girl]

115. Jane is a Progressive Hero -

She speaks the truth - even when it may make her unpopular with some.
Unlike our current President apparently :(

We have a small time frame where it may be possible to make this awful Bill somewhat better.
Good on Jane for taking the pressure on the Democratic Corporatists up a notch.

[pmorlan1]

119. K & R

It's taken awhile but some people on both the left and right are starting to wise up. I just hope we can reclaim our country before the corporate Democrats and Republicans take it to the point of no return.

[NatlAnthem]

121. Open eyes and open minds

Yep, I am an interloper on your forums, and hopefully not a "troll".

Want some insight into how a tea party person thinks? A real conservative (as opposed to a social or religious conservative) looks at the situation like any other businessman or working stiff. Don't take my money, my lunch, or my tools and stay off my lawn.

I hear you guys making fun of Fox, but honestly they are succeeding because they plug into that ethos. Anyone with a wiff of sense can see that you can't provide massively more free health care without addressing the costs of care and not tax the hell out of wage earners in the future. Fox taps into that. And they also reflect what people know in their guts ... Medicare cost savings never happen.

So Fox just plays back what people already can figure for themselves. This bill stinks like a bucket of carp left under the bleachers from summer two-a-days. Most ordinary working stiffs are slammed by the economy already, and you want to cut off their heads and pour salt down their throats? And you wonder why Fox follows the thread?

And then there is the constant crises baloney. Normal people know its a load of hooey. People can see the climate is not changing, they can see the false statements made by Gore and the rest, and they can see in the Climategate letters that sure enough, scientists cooked the books (sorry pun) to keep the funding wagon train rolling. No surprise, the world ain't ending tomorrow, and even if it did, our puny efforts had little to do with it, and wouldn't stop it if we went back to the stone knives and no wheel.

Ordinary people can see and feel that politicians, Democrats and Republicans alike, are playing them. So the answer is to obstruct, vote em out, watch their every move. If the Democrats had wanted real change, they would have not continued to try and "play" people. But instead you get the same Bush crap in a new box.

Fox plays on that sentiment, and wins viewers from all constituencies. They actually do get the truth pretty good a lot of the time, and maybe some of that hurts. But I pity the Republicans if you guys ever figure it out and get on the Fox train. Be the party of real answers for real people, not just Hollywood ecotwits and urban elitist punks.

Kick Pelosi to the curb and OWN the real issues. Or follow your idiot leaders like sheep.

Me? I will watch MSNBC *and* Fox both, to hopefully get the whole picture, and I will vote for whichever candidates won't take my money, my lunch, or my tools ... and that will stay the hell off my lawn.

[chimpyisstillsatan]

122. just a week ago Ms. Hamsher attacked both

Hadassah Lieberman for her past associations/stances and the Komen foundation for their association with HL. I guess guilt by association is only good for the gander, eh Jane? Being a breast cancer survivor is no excuse for rank hypocrisy, Janie.

[saltpoint]

123. I'll give Bitter Jane full credit for her big-time artistry in film but in politics

she's is a bright orange horse's patoot.

Grover Norquist. F'n GROVER NORQUIST?

[seafan]

124. Fight on, Ms. Hamsher.

Republican Sen. Hatch cites liberal blogger in healthcare speech

By Tony Romm - 12/23/09 02:08 PM ET
The Hill

Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch (Utah) on Wednesday cited evidence opposing Democrats' healthcare bill from a rather unlikely source: liberal blogger Jane Hamsher of firedoglake.

While railing on Democrats' legislation, which Hatch this afternoon said was an example of "everything that is wrong with Washington today," the Utah Republican channeled Hamsher's latest critique of Democrats' proposed individual mandate.

"I can't think of a bigger giveaway for the insurance companies than the federal government ordering Americans to buy their insurance products," Hatch said on the floor, referencing a provision in the bill that would require Americans who decline insurance to pay a penalty.

"Jane Hamsher, publisher of the liberal blog 'firedoglake, said the following," Hatch continued. "Having to pay 2% of their income in annual fines for refusing to comply -- with the IRS acting as the collection agency -- just might wind up being the most widely hated legislation of the decade."

(((Orrin, what happened? You actually just made some sense.)))

The line was a direct quotation from a list of "10 reasons to kill the Senate bill" that Hamsher blasted to her supporters soon after Senate Democrats abandoned their plans for either a public option or a Medicare expansion.

A version of that list also appeared on Hamsher's firedoglake blog, to mixed reactions.

In any case, Hatch's decision to cite Hamsher is sure to earn him the liberal blogosphere's further scorn. While few of its most resonant voices have advocated against the bill or pined Democrats to drop it, almost all agree with her criticism that President Barack Obama and Democrats surrendered their healthcare bill's core principles to Senate moderates and Republicans.

Fight on, Ms. Hamsher.



Speaking of Roarin' Orrin, he and Dylan Ratigan went at it on December 9, 2009 about this health care debate. I transcribed the ~ 10-minute interview, because of a few things Hatch said that must be documented for later use.


Here is the video:


Sen. Orrin Hatch Discusses Deal on Health Care Reform Bill, with Dylan Ratigan on Morning Meeting, December 9, 2009



And here is the very close transcription of this interview:

Ratigan: Senator Hatch, your thoughts on playing with that Medicare age?


Hatch: What I’ve been saying since the beginning of the year that what it’s ultimately coming to is that they are pushing more and more people into Med/Medicaid—more people dependent on the federal government and what the almighty city of Washington decides is best for them… and, frankly, that’s what they are doing… to let people buy in at 55? You know who’s gonna buy in? It’s gonna be those who are really sick, who can’t get private health ins and that’s gonna raise the premiums for everybody who’s on Medicare---- and by the way, doctors now don’t want to take Medicare patients because they’re paying 20% less to doctors and 30% less to hospitals--- what happens if 50% of doctors aren’t willing to take these patients…. And what’s more, even more important,, they’re gonna change the control of it from HHS to the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), and OPM says they don’t have the facility to be able to manage a program like that.


Ratigan: What strikes me is the government’s (on both side of the aisle) efforts to create multiple classes of human beings in America for health care.. in other words, the type of health care that’s made available for somebody who works in congress is one type of health care---the type of health care that’s made available for somebody like me who has a big fancy job at GE and I get to be a TV host and carry on---that’s a pretty good health care plan—but if you’re a freelancer who lives in the San Francisco suburbs who’s 24 and there’s all these different types of people....
Why does the government keep trying to break them into different classes where some people get better care, some people get government subsidies, some people get no subsidies, some people maybe get access to crappy care, some people get no care.... why do they control flow of subsidies to control types of health care?


Hatch: Well, with all these federal government programs, and this would be the most massive fed government program of all, you are reaching a point where there’s a level line where the middle and lower classes don’t have any chance to break through, which is always been one of the great benefits of being an American, you can break through and you can become wealthy yourself.. but they’re gonna have them in a lower middle class that literally has to depend on the federal government for everything and it creates greater constituents for Democrats—that’s what they’re after... they want a single payer system. That’s what they want. If they can get that right now....


Ratigan: So what’s wrong with that? If single payer is more efficient than a predatory monopoly, why not at least have that debate?


Hatch: You think for a minute that the single payer system run by the almighty federal government that has Medicare 38 trillion in unfunded liability… Medicaid going bankrupt in the next couple of years or at least insolvent, you think they are going to be able to have a better health care system than having the competition that can come from the private sector....?


Ratigan: Well no, no, hold on there… you are assuming competition, and it our government was crazy enough to break up the monopoly and provide ALL of us with MANY health care choices WHICH IT DOESN’T APPEAR WILLING TO DO, I personally would rather have single payer over a predatory monopoly, if 46 million uninsured----my first choice would be actual competition for good health care, but that seems to be off the table.


Hatch: Well that’s crazy Dylan. You know better than that. There’s no monopoly. (:eyes:) I have to admit, we need to reform our insurance industry in this country. But I can’t say it’s a monopoly, they can’t even sell insurance across state lines... if there’s a monopoly, it’s the federal government causing it. Now look, (Ratigan: IT IS!) ...if we open this up where people can really compete... where the federal government isn’t controlling every aspect of our lives, we have a much better chance of keeping costs down having doctors take these patients which they’re not gonna do, and just stop people from being on the government dole.... and Dylan, one other thing, you know, 50%, ...the lower 50% of our society don’t pay income taxes at all... 3%... 40% of them get money from the federal government... the goal of the Democrats is to push more and more people, so they will have 60% of people who depend upon the federal government .... it’s (a naturally big constituency).


----Crosstalk----


Ratigan: What strikes me is that you mentioned competition.... and yet the government right now has an antitrust exemption for the health insurance companies that’s anticompetitive. In addition to that, the health care reform plan makes everybody who’s on an employer-based system stay trapped inside of that system and protects the insurance companies from the real market competition.... in other words, fake competition is almost worse than being honest about the monopoly... so if we’re gonna have competition, then let’s actually have competition--- like, if Geico competes with Allstate for car insurance and anybody in America who wants to switch their car insurance can do this, and yet the government, whether it’s through antitrust exemptions or creating multiple classes of patient, who can’t compete, reduces the actual market force that should be brought to bear to make these guys compete for better health care... you and I also both know that.


Hatch: Well there is a competitive marketplace out there and it has it’s flaws... no question. WE could change that and we can get that to work, ...and I think we have a far better chance, an opportunity to have things work right for America if we don’t have the almighty federal government right here in Washington, DC running everything?? and see, that’s the problem with this program.. the Democrats believe that the central form of government is the only way to solve these problems. A lot of us believe, and I think you do too, that the best way to solve them is to create real competition in the private sector which is not dependent upon government…


Ratigan: I agree with you, but don’t those who believe in competition and choice make themselves vulnerable to those who would advocate for a full government takeover, because the current iteration is the government protecting insurance companies and others from competition, in other words, because the government enables in any competitive environment by either explicit intent or by accident, whatever it may be, and instead of releasing the force of competition, it now empowers the left to say LOOK… this thing is a predatory monopoly... the only solution is single payer, as opposed to somebody in the middle in the government saying, no, no, no, this is a predatory monopoly ---we will break it up and create choice for everybody, and then everybody compete for it.
Hatch: Well if you think a single payer system is better, if you think socialized medicine is better....


Ratigan: I’m not saying that.... I did not say that Senator...


---Crosstalk---


Hatch: Wait, wait, I know you didn’t say that. I don’t think you believe that. I don’t think anybody with brains would believe that. If you look at single payer systems throughout the rest of the world.... the fact of the matter is, we need to reform our system. Republicans want to do that. So you realize, Dylan, we have had zero opportunity to really participate in this other than to raise amendments on the floor, questions on the floor (:eyes:) ---the HELP committee did a bill, a totally Democrat bill, no Republican influence at all, then the House did its bill---totally Democrat bills I’m saying, the House did that bill, no input by Republicans, then we had the Reid bill done in the back rooms of the Capitol with the White House and very few Democrats and we Republicans would LOVE to participate in the health care reform effort... we’d LOVE to be able to make sure that we reform the insurance industry, we’d LOVE to make this more competitive, we’d LOVE to be able to not have the federal government have us all dependent on the federal government, and these bureaucrats back here in Washington, we’d LOVE to make a system that would be better, and we can do it if they would sit down with us, but NO, there is an arrogance of power. They have 60 votes in the Senate. They think they can do anything they want to do, and that’s what they are gonna try and do. And if they do, just think about it, you’re gonna have… , boy, they wanna move people who are 150% of poverty , to go into Medicaid. That would break the states. The states are 200 billion in the hole right now. Come on, most ... are just going crazy over this.



Ratigan: My last comment would be it is the fact that the government has empowered such a dysfunctional system that has made the debate become what it is, because you get a huge swing the other way as opposed to what we all really understand, which is empowering the buyers of anything, whether its buyers of hamburgers or buyers of health care, helps.


Hatch: You hit the nail on the head, the government has empowered a lousy system. We need to reform the system. We Republicans are willing to do that with decent honorable Democrats, but NO, there is an arrogance of power, they think they can do it without us, and we’re gonna wind up with the most godawful public plan in the end that you’ve ever dreamed possible.



Ratigan: I have more faith. I have more faith. Senator Wyden and… there’s enough folks down there that understand the basic imperative, to get us to even.... I’m hopeful, maybe I’m too new to this, Senator.


Hatch: Yeah, you are. Those Democrats..., and I don’t want you to be naïve, you’re one of my favorite people. But those Democrats, they will all vote for it in the end, don’t you worry... they love government over everything else.


Ratigan: That may be true, but the American people are very capable of exerting themselves when they have a lot at stake, and I believe there is a lot at stake here, and I believe Democrats and Republicans are vulnerable to screwing this up by virtue of how much is at stake on this particular matter. It’s an obvious problem.



Hatch: How are we Republicans vulnerable? We haven’t even been asked to participate other than... (I'm) just, just out of words, to be honest with you... you’ve seen every program that’s come up here and been done solely by Democrats without any Republican input---- we’ve got a lot of good ideas.


Ratigan: Listen, you and I will continue this conversation and I will talk with you soon.

Orrin, it's really time for you to go home.



(all bold type added)

[Avalux]

125. I want Jane to justify threatening Bernie Sanders.

She's may be a breast cancer survivor, but that doesn't make her an ally.