A victory for outrageously hilarious memes

[Prism]

I'm not sure which current meme is my favorite.

The bill is not perfect - Using the word "perfect" anywhere near this bill is an obscenity. That's like saying the weather isn't perfect because of that hurricane that just blew through. But the human destruction aside, the warm breeze attending it is rather lovely. 90% good, 10% bad is not perfect. A couple good things embedded in a failed structure is "Not entirely evil." It is not "Not perfect."

We'll fix it later! - Who will fix it later? The largest majority in forty years couldn't get it even passingly right. Basic liberal reforms were tossed out the minute Lieberman and Baucus sneezed. We're almost certain to see that majority shrink in the near future with no guarantee of that kind of power again any time soon. Who is going to fix this? The politicians who muffed it from Day One? The Republicans when they're back in power? And who is going to support all this fixing? The same people, like those on this board, who apologized for all the watering down, who fought the Left tooth and nail when we demanded stronger reforms, who villainized anything and anyone that stood in the way of a political victory? Are we supposed to trust the support of those who were not just kind of wrong, but Totally Wrong when the Left said way back in August "Guys, they're getting ready to shed the public option. Help us!" and they responded with "You just hate the President! Left-baggers! Arrrrgh!" We're supposed to trust those elements to fix this later? Sad to say, our backs are running out of knife space.

This is just a step. To where, exactly? Is anyone bothering to peer up the staircase to see where it leads? Is that bottom step so glitteringly fascinating that the direction isn't even a vague concern when compared to the slightest shuffling movement? Because from my vantage point, when you ensure health care will continue to be at the mercy of private interests for the next generation or two, the path I see is to continued privatization, continued existence of corporations between citizens and care, continued enforcement by government that the people contribute to corporate profit even when it won't guarantee care, and anyone who cannot or will not go along with this scheme will have the IRS all over them. What kind of step is that? Forward or smack dab into a huge steaming pile?

Those are just three memes. There are so many more. I'm sure others can add to them. But right now, they're the three things I see repeated over and over. I'm observing them with increasing wonder at just how hard that reality denial must be to have the kind of fortitude that allows people to mouth them after all that has passed, all that they've done, all that they've defended.

"C'mon guys, I know we beat the crap out of you with a baseball bat, but accept this promise of a light hug in the future. What, you won't take it? I bet you're a bitter Republican."

Some people are addicted to abuse, and some people are addicted to abusing. Who'd have thought both elements would be so prominent in a liberal party?

[eridani]

1. There will be no fixes

Any amendment to improve the bill bill go straight in the trash with HR 676. The excuse will be "We already DID health care."

[kestrel91316]

11. .....especially with you and your friends working to oppose such.

[eridani]

89. I'm working to oppose fixes just because I use common sense?

What is your basis for believing that any amendment that actually is a fix woun't be turned down on the grounds that we already DID health care? I intend to keep trying, but I expect to have as much effect as I did when demanding over and over that we had to at least have the public option that 82% of the public wanted.

[trumad]

2. Mods...

Can we have a separate forum for the peats and repeats?

[graywarrior]

8. Seriously

At some point, the broken record gets thrown out

[HughMoran]

Tell me about it

[Lilith Velkor]

3. "It's just like car insurance!"

That one has been trotted out yet again.

[EFerrari]

4. Hilarious across the spectrum. Let's not neglect the RW.

Death panels, Socialism, Fascism, Government in my health care, killing babies with mythical funding.

I know I'm forgetting some good ones.

[Warren DeMontague]

9. I think 'being beaten with a baseball bat' is a pretty funny, ridiculous meme.

This is not 'being beaten with a baseball bat'.

[EFerrari]

13. I wouldn't go that far but being promised representation, transparency,

participation, no mandates and some type of public option and being lied to repeatedly about all of those things WHILE being insulted out of the White House for a year was not a loving hug, was it?

[Warren DeMontague]

38. Here's what I think happened. And while I think the passage of the bill is a marginal step forward

I am by no means a "cheerleader".

And I have big problems with some -a lot- of the process- so here's my analysis of what went down:

Single Payer (which most of us support) was never on the table. Single Payer was never going to BE on the table. This is not because Barack Obama hates the idea of a single payer system. I suspect that there are plenty of people in the Dem. leadership who are just as smart as we are, and understand that a SPHC system makes the most sense, would be cheapest, would serve the public most effectively, etc.

Now, a lot of people have asked "why didn't we start bargaining from Single Payer, at least?" Good question. From a negotiation standpoint, that would have made sense. But I think several things were going on. Remember, I'm just calling it like I see it, I'm not saying I think it's right. First off, the corporate poo-bahs in the Insurance Industry (hereafter referred to as "II") aren't stupid, either. They knew Bush was a fuckup. They knew the political wheel was going to turn, and big. They sunk a tremendous amount of money into the DNC from 2006 on. We know this. This is a fact. And anyone who thinks it's just Obama, that if, say, Hillary was in the WH, things would be somewhat different- I think they're wrong. As Michael Moore noted in "Sicko", she was on the receiving end of a huge amt of II $. This also ties into the question of mandates, as I will elaborate in a minute.

Like it or not, the insurance industry was making damn sure that they had the Democratic Party's attention over the past several years. And the Democrats calling the plays, like Rahm, were determined to not repeat the mistakes (or "mistakes") of Bill Clinton on this. How does this relate to Single Payer? I suspect the thinking was, that if Single Payer was even mentioned, the fear was that the II would drop a big harry and louise nuclear bomb on the process, like they did in 1993, but, shit, I dunno, maybe even worse.

So as others have theorized, I suspect they cut a deal. No Single Payer and probably no Public Option. But the public option was held out there to "keep them honest", but not in the way Obama promised us- it was there as the looming threat if the II went back on their deal and started trying to kill reform.

Now. As for mandates. Assuming this thing was NOT going to get rid of the II, and assuming that any reasonable bill was going to end denials on pre-existing conditions, yeah, for sure there was going to be a mandate. This is true no matter who promised there wouldn't be one, that candidate being (if I recall) Hillary, not Obama, during the primaries. Like I said, if she was Prez it would be the same deal. She'd be dancing with them who brung her, same as Obama.

Certainly, this is all sort of a bleak picture, you may wonder why I'm on the 'side' of supporting the thing. Here's why. In the midst of the battle over stuff like the public option, Obama did manage to get some rather significant stuff through. Stuff that, had they been the core of the fight, would have attracted a lot more attention and heat. Stuff like the medicaid expansion.

So, we're stuck with a not-so-great bill, put there through a decidedly unsavory process.. but one that nevertheless IS going to mean a radical and much needed improvement in the way the II does business in this country. In return, they get new customers and we don't get to get rid of them. That's the bargain.

You're right, it's not a hug, but it's not a beating with a baseball bat, either. :shrug:

[EFerrari]

43. I agree completely that whoever the Democratic president was

they'd be in the same position. That's clear, anyway.

And, I think you're right about how SP and PO went down, and also about the trade off re the mandate.

Having said that, there's at least three different things going on. One, the nutwing Republican part of all of this. Two, what the insurance companies will try to get away with. And three, the clear signalling from the Obama White House that the left is on its own. Every time some dumb statement surfaces that dings the left, it's much harder to keep helping out with the nutwing attacks because at that point, we're fending off the right wing AND the White House.

That needs to stop, for a whole lot of reasons.

[laughingliberal]

59. +1000 nt

[Art_from_Ark]

82. If the Democratic President had been an experienced fighter

who didn't surround himself with dingbats, things could have been different. I think that if LBJ had had this opportunity, he could have made more of it.

[laughingliberal]

73. It's likely your assessment is correct

I certainly like that better than thinking the left was sold out on PO for the promise of big campaign donations which trumped help for people.

Mandates were always going to be a given whether Hillary or Obama. Although, it stings a bit that I opposed long time friends here in our caucuses by throwing in with Obama instead of Hillary and it was, specifically, because of her support for mandates and his support for a public option. So, I have a nice dose of crow waiting for me.

But, is there any explanation for his insistence on an excise tax on comprehensive coverage? Was it part of the deal to make sure he sold out every liberal constituency known? For what reason was this a sticking point for him? I'm asking because I'd really like to know.

And, did he have to go on FOX of all places and brag about beating us?

As for our fellow DUers who refused to see what we saw in August, I already see the same memes setting up for the battle about gutting SS. We see signs it's coming and, just today, I was told, "there's no evidence of that." What's the story going to be when it comes down and how will we justify it if we do see a Democratic president get behind it? Are we destined to be insulted any time we try to point out problems with the administration's policies? What if someone had been able to sound an alarm when Clinton's team was supporting the repeal of Glass Steagall? And what if people had listened and that had not happened? Does it not behoove us to look ahead and attempt to move our party when we see them on the wrong road?

[Prism]

25. Sigh, socialism

They really just mean liberalism, but if they can make even basic liberalism practically synonymous with communism - and get the politicians to flee from it accordingly - then they've done their jobs.

On HCR, the RW did their job. Oh, the Republicans lost to be certain. There is a silver lining in there somewhere, or at least a bit of schadenfreude to enjoy. But we lost too, because our politicians once against listened to RW fear tactics and reacted accordingly.

[EFerrari]

27. Agreed. Pantsing the Republicans is not the same thing as winning

on health care reform.

[jonnyblitz]

5. "Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good."

that one got old real fast.

[EFerrari]

6. We have to pass the NOW to save thousands of lives

who won't be covered for four years. lol

[pecwae]

88. That's one I've never heard

although it's a rewrite of the other tired, fear based memes.

[Warren DeMontague]

7. Medicaid: Expanded. Medicare: Expanded. Subsidies for low income health insurance.

No denial of coverage for pre-existing conditions.

Yes, it is a step, and a big one. Is it everything? No.

But is it 'being beaten with a baseball bat'? :eyes: No.

I understand that some people here apparently honestly thought, until yesterday, that the entire health insurance industry was going to be eliminated by this summer, or that somehow we would have universal health coverage for everyone except some brilliant 20something 'rebels' who think the height of oppression is being forced to have health insurance :shrug: .. but the truth of the matter is, this is an improvement. Not the best, but better than the status quo.

And the situation would have been much, much worse had we done nothing.

[Raineyb]

12. So you'll be volunteering to be in the ghetto that is the high-risk pool?

Since apparently you think there's nothing to be concerned about there you won't have any problems subjecting yourself to its whims. Right?

[Warren DeMontague]

18. A high risk pool is better than a pool of people who can't get insurance at all.

The bill is not perfect, but it IS a step in the right direction. Better than doing nothing.

[Raineyb]

21. A high risk pool doesn't change the status quo one whit. It'll still be highly expensive

insurance that has co-pays and deductibles which cover almost nothing. THAT is what a high risk pool is NOW. But YOU don't have to worry about that I suppose so screw the rest of us. Right?

[Warren DeMontague]

22. Right. That's what I'm all about. Screwing the rest of us.

Wow. Someone can't fucking disagree with you for five seconds before you start flinging shit and personal insults, eh?

I happen to have a close relative with CP. A "pre-existing condition". I'm well aware of how fucked up the current system is.

Had this bill gone down in flames, that would NOT have improved anyone's situation. Not one bit. All it would have done is paint the Democratic Party as the party of abject failure. We would NOT see any improvement on this issue in our lifetimes, unless you count "tort reform" under a GOP congress as a potential improvement. Or maybe "health savings accounts", remember those?

Like I said. Before. This bill is not perfect. It is not everything I wanted. I support a Single Payer system. But it is an improvement. It expands medicaid, for instance. That is big.

And that's my opinion on it, and it's not going to change no matter how many little temper tantrums you throw at me, making all kinds of ass-hat assumptions about who I am and what I've experienced pertaining to this issue. :hi:

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Prism]

23. False dichotomy

This is a false choice, an A or Z characterization of what could have been. There is a large difference between "Destroy the insurance companies!" and "Don't make us slaves to them." The latter is not the former. I would love single-payer, but from the beginning I knew the likelihood of it was very slim. If we had to make insurance the cornerstone of reform, I could have easily gone along with something similar to the Dutch model. It would not have been perfect, but it would be that true first step down the path to UHC.

The "or nothing" dichotomy is what politicians set down for us. It's a threat, a piece of blackmail. "It's crumbs or nothing, guys. You decide."

Why do we keep being ok with that? And on an issue as important as health? Health care is a civil right. Why do we repeatedly allow politicians to deny people their civil rights? Why are we so complacent about this? Our rhetoric and our behavior aren't just dissimilar, they're leagues apart in what we say we want and the scraps we decide to accept at the end of the day.

If health insurance were synonymous with basic affordable, accessible care like it is in the Dutch model, I honestly don't think you'd see the discontent over this. But as long as we're compelled to buy insurance with no guarantee of the care we need, then putting that on people isn't just deeply wrong, it's deeply corrupt.

[Warren DeMontague]

24. *

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2115035520100322?type=marketsNews

[Prism]

32. What isn't in that article

Details, the massive loopholes you could drive a convoy of mac trucks straight through, the fines incentive that will make it cheaper for insurance companies to accept a fine rather than pay-out for care.

We've been through all these lists. You're not providing anything any of us haven't seen a hundred times. The bill is passed, the talking points unnecessary. Now that the bill is said and done, why can't we have an honest conversation about what is really in the thing, rather than the bits and pieces the politicians and lobbyist are marking with highlighter?

[Zhade]

57. As has been shown again and again, the II will simply raise rates.

Coverage you can't afford to use is exactly as useful as coverage you've been denied.

Guess that part won't sink in until the II starts raising the rates. Oh, wait...

As for your last part, it's literally impossible for you to know that.

[Warren DeMontague]

68. At least we're having a conversation, instead of flinging shit at each other.

I know you, I know you and I want the same thing here. I'm sure of it.

If I post what I understand about the bill, I'll be accused of 'parroting talking points' (guess that check from the DLC should be coming, and day now... but here's what I've got on the bill:

Also this year, health-insurance plans must pay at least 80 percent of their revenue in benefits (85 percent for large-group plans), or, if they don't, give rebates to customers starting in 2011.

Limits on annual and lifetime coverage amounts will be banned this year, and coverage for children won't be able to be denied because of a pre-existing medical condition. The ban on pre-existing condition denial doesn't apply to adults until 2014.

There's also qualifications in the mandate about not going over a percentage of income, and I believe there are additional limitations on what insurers in the exchanges can charge.

[Zhade]

71. Heck, I'm not even sure I've ever discussed this with you.

I don't post as often as I used to -- in large part due to the sheer pointlessness of it.

"The ban on pre-existing condition denial doesn't apply to adults until 2014."

Gee. If only the dying uninsured could wait four more years.

[Warren DeMontague]

77. I agree, That's fucked up.

Okay, I don't know if you and I agree. I support a Single Payer System. That's my goal, that's been my ideal, that's always been what I think make the most sense for this country. I've never said otherwise.

I'm assuming your opinions are similar, maybe they aren't.

[Zhade]

80. Of course I support SP! My best friends don't have insurance.

One of them almost died this year because they don't have it. Of course, she won't be helped by this either. I'm wholly unconvinced this will help in any way -- unless it's by angering so many people they demand real reform.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

10. Lipstick sales are up and being applied lavishly by the apologists. K&R

But, pandering to lobbyists is now considered an art form and a thing of beauty when our guys do it.

[Warren DeMontague]

16. Yeah, that's what I'm up to. Apologizing.

Maybe I'm apologizing for my relative, who has cerebral palsy. You know, one of those 'pre-existing conditions'.


There's nothing here to 'apologize' for. Are the people pissing and moaning about the 'fascism of being forced to buy insurance' really all running around with none, now? ...really?

I am not happy that there was no Public Option. I'm not happy about everything in this bill. I will continue to work for reform.

But this IS a step in the right direction. We just passed a massive expansion of medicaid in this thing- surely everyone can agree that THAT is an improvement, right?

[Prism]

35. I have none

But, you know, I'm not overly worried about me. I'm still young and healthy (probably tempting the karmic fates with that one). I will deal with a mandate the same way I deal with my family as a gay man - maneuvering through the law and protecting my family as best I can when the government is imposing undue hardship thanks to the callous, cavalier attitude of the politicians and their supporters. I'm used to jumping through government hoops in order to get the basic things that everyone deserves. This will not be new to me.

I'm worried about people like my parents, who had what a lot of people considered excellent health insurance, but who were forced into bankruptcy once they had a serious illness. Their insurance was amazing, and people would always tell them how lucky they were to have it, but the care still cost and cost and cost. It nearly cost them everything. To this day, they're still barely hanging on through all the costs.

This is not acceptable. In this country, when you have insurance, you should be able to get care regardless of income. You should not have to choose between your health and your financial stability. That's the bottom line, and it's one we have not even begun to address. This bill practically side-stepped the issue, and we let it.

[Individualist]

19. Gotta catapult the propaganda, you know.

:thumbsup:

[kestrel91316]

14. You've made it abundantly clear that you supported the status quo.

But YOU LOST. GET OVER IT.

Suck THAT meme up!!!!

[Prism]

29. This bill is the status quo

It looked at a system where insurance is more important than care, where people can pay for insurance but not for treatment, and it enshrined it with the force of government for a generation.

Maybe we should be less concerned about winning and losing and more concerned about the well-being of the American people. It's the obsessions with winning or losing that directly lead to the watering down of the bill into the monstrosity we have today.

When a mindset like that wrecks reform, you should probably move past it.

[Zhade]

61. Spoken like a year-2000 republican.

"Get over it". Such substantive debate!

I can't WAIT to tell you guys again and again how wrong you were when this starts hurting the people you're deluded into believing it will help. It'll be just like the war, where everyone swore up and down Iraq had WMD, only to later come to me and admit how wrong they were... after hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis died.

That day is coming. Take it to the bank.

[Junkdrawer]

15. I bothered to peer up the staircase - It ain't pretty....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7982647

[lunatica]

17. This post is nothing but sanctimony

If you can't see what a first step could lead to you're lacking in even rudimentary imagination. I noticed you have no solutions, just spreading the bile with your puerile abusee/abuser analogy

[Prism]

33. We had a solution. It was scrapped early on.

This whole bill would have been much easier to swallow if it included a strong public option.

I don't need imagination when I'm far more concerned about reality. Oh, there are things I "hope" will happen. But hope is not a strategy, and hope should not be used as a vehicle to deny reality. It's pee, it isn't a light sprinkling. We need soap instead of dancing and whirling through the urine storm.

[ProSense]

20. A victory that happened without the help of the people still complaining. n/t

[bridgit]

26. yup...

[Mad_Dem_X]

28. Rec #5

"We'll fix it later! - Who will fix it later? The largest majority in forty years couldn't get it even passingly right. Basic liberal reforms were tossed out the minute Lieberman and Baucus sneezed. We're almost certain to see that majority shrink in the near future with no guarantee of that kind of power again any time soon. Who is going to fix this? The politicians who muffed it from Day One? The Republicans when they're back in power?"

My feelings exactly. WHEN are we going to "get it right" if we couldn't do it this time (with the majority)?

[ScreamingMeemie]

30. My favorite is "stop being selfish". Yes, it is now selfish to want the

the thing that we were supposedly working together for. Go team D!

[Prism]

36. I think what I enjoy most about that meme . . .

. . . is how, if you pay attention enough to get a rough knowledge of the posters, a lot of those "why are you so selfish?!" posters have money, insurance, and comfort. They just like the President a lot. Those crazy ass poor people, with the gall to ask politicians for help. Who do they think they are?

Mmm, coffee. I love latte.

[treestar]

31. So you just don't like anyone to argue with your point of view

that's the only point you've made here.

Anyone can do the opposite about how ridiculous the antis memes are.

[ScreamingMeemie]

37. It is ridiculous for the those with preexisting conditions to want a

credible fix? Well that explains a lot about the pro memes here.

[datasuspect]

39. why can't we all chip in and buy congress a yacht?

rich people need us. they need our money. they can't compete with the developing world and cannot sustain the large population of workers made obsolete since the late 1970s.

this is an end run. they need as much access to our money while they can still get it.

[Uncle Joe]

40. The largest Democratic Majority in 40 years passed what basically the Republicans proposed in 1993.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x525331

We've come a long baby.

Thanks for the thread, Prism.

[Prism]

44. The first time I saw that

It totally blew me away. I guess it just goes to show, if you set the bar low enough, you too can be victorious.

[inna]

47. From what I recently read, the current "reform" is significantly to the right of Nixon.

Slightly to the right of Newt Gingrich, too. :shrug:

[Warren DeMontague]

53. So blame Carl Albert, then.

We should have done it in 1972. :shrug:

[Prism]

81. I'm honestly wondering about the process

It almost seems as if we've been watching a gradual, forty-year whittling down of various health proposals, poking and prodding and testing which ones will actually be allowed to pass. And this was it, literally almost the bottom of the barrel.

But why? How can this great victory be the same thing as a Republican proposal from the last Democratic administration? Were we really in an "Anything at all!" mindset and allowed everything to go accordingly? I wasn't in that frame of mind. I didn't think too many of my fellow Democrats were either. Certainly, political expedience will always play some role, but from where President Obama started ("I am determined to be the last!") and where we ended up ("C'mon, it's a first step!") seem so far apart. Were you standing in the middle of the two positions, you wouldn't be able to see either one for the distance.

Something went really, really wrong here, and I'm still trying to figure out what it was.

[Starry Messenger]

41. My favorite:

"Irresponsible young people need to buy this product and stop leaching off the rest of us responsible insurance buyers."

People just have no clue how many other people don't qualify for public assistance and for whom buying mandated insurance will gouge significant holes in their quality of life for NO GUARANTEE OF CARE. What fucking magic wand is helping the guy who makes $10 an hour?

[Prism]

45. The personal economic threads are always revealing

The $10 an hour threads really betrayed a staggering lack of knowledge of what it's like to be poor or working class in this country. Not only how little low income stretches, but even basic knowledge of the costs of things seemed to elude too many.

I guess, when you've money enough to pay for whatever, you need never bother about how much things cost.

[Warren DeMontague]

51. I know that straw men continue to be very cheap.

As are red herrings.

[Prism]

54. The "coloring book" meme is only my sixth favorite

It's actually a strange impulse. I know it's very much an internet thing, like on Something Awful forums. But seeing grown adults try to make their political points with pictures . . . it's a creepily child-like preoccupation. Almost clinical.

Not entirely sure what the PC version of the characterization would be, so let's just go with "I am a banana!"

[Warren DeMontague]

56. I like pictures.

So, fucking sue me. :shrug:

[Prism]

60. Alice in Wonderland was fantastic

Especially on 3D Imax. Great if you're highly into visual media.

But, no, I would not like to buy a monkey.

When you've an otter for sale, lemme know.

[Warren DeMontague]

75. Let me just tell you this. I spent the better part of my 20s working in a video store.

So if you want to bet, say, the Criterion Laserdisc (remember those?) of Citizen Kane that this particular DU'er doesn't know what it's like to scrape by on near-minimum wage levels, between rent and everything else, I'll take you up on that. And you'll lose.

Beyond that, I think most of us really do want the same end result regarding this issue. On that note, goodnight.

[Prism]

84. If people knew, they'd know the hardship even with subsidies

Just to be absolutely certain, before I originally responded to your subsidies comment, I ran $20,000 a year through the calculator.

It came out to a little less than $100 a month, post-subsidy. (The numbers I used were a 28 year-old single person making $20,000 without health insurance available through an employer. Under the Senate bill, premiums would cost $2,637 with a government subsidy of $1,484).

Now, in a former life, I worked as a financial adviser. Part of my job would be budgeting advice to clients. They would provide the monthly receipts, bills, etc, and I would comb through them looking for extra cash. When I began that job, I figured "Oh, I'm sure there's money somewhere. Everyone's wasteful to some degree. It's just a matter of finding that money and getting them to cut excess."

Except it wasn't that simple. Client after client proved they really were that pinched. When I object to mandates without a public option, I'm thinking of all those people who truly would be at a loss to come up with a new $100 a month. Many of them made more than $20k a year. And that was when I was living in the Midwest, where rent is often considerably cheaper than in many other places.

I grew up poor and working class. I've been self-supporting since I was 18, and I did the working through college thing, doing overnight stocking or gardening and landscaping or flipping burgers when nothing better presented itself. I remember how hard that was. Hell, I'm almost back to that point now thanks to the job market.

People simply cannot afford this stuff. Especially not in this economy. And the worst part, for me, is not only knowing people are going to have a hard time affording mandated insurance, but knowing that insurance is not care. If they can barely afford the insurance, what on earth are they going to do about co-pays, deductibles, out-of-pockets?

This wasn't the reform people needed. True reform doesn't make things harder for the people who need it. This bill makes it harder for millions of people who can ill-afford the added burden. It is anathema to every Democratic principle I hold. Political expedience or no, this is deeply wrong to me.

[Eric Condon]

83. More to the point, this bill is giving us that flank steak bullshit.

We want the London Broil.

[Starry Messenger]

86. I only just started making over $20,000 a year

It was like winning the lottery. The rest of my life has been scraping and getting by on low-wage art jobs. Even my parents had a hard time imagining how little money I was living on. I once got in a big fight with my father who thought it was impossible that I was only making $6.50 an hour at one job because it was too low to live on, therefore it should be an $11 an hour job. I had to show him my pay stubs. :crazy: Trying to fit an extra hundred dollars a month into my budget would have been ruin.

[Warren DeMontague]

50. Someone making $10 an hour is going to qualify for subsidies under this bill.

http://www.missoulian.com/article_f9c17230-363a-11df-aa5c-001cc4c002e0.html

Households earning up to 400 percent of the federal poverty level ($43,300 for a single person; $88,200 for a family of four) can get subsidies, with higher subsidies for those with lower income.

[Prism]

58. Psst. Subsidies don't pay for everything.

Which illustrates what I mean. Even with the subsidies, people who are already pinched are going to be wondering how they're going to scrape the extra money together.

If you knew what people who make $10/hr faced, how little that is, how barely it covers things, you wouldn't make these cavalier statements about subsidies. You're still imposing a hardship on people who can ill afford it.

[Warren DeMontague]

76. Cavalier?

Yes, well, it's hard to type while I'm asking the guy in the limo next to me for grey poupon, but rest assured I do know what people who make $10/hr face.

Let's see if we can get some hard numbers on exactly what kinds of subsidies we're talking about for someone making $20K a year, and then we can have a more rational discussion about it. Because I don't think either of us know.

[Zhade]

65. It's astonishing how prevalent the "fuck you, I got mine" attitude is here.

People too poor to afford insurance go to the emergency room TO NOT DIE, and assholes here bitch about it. Yeah, I'm sure that minimum-wage McDonald's employee wanted to get oil burns and "leech" off the magnanimous health care system we have in this country.

In short, to such people -- fuck you. You don't understand the poor, AND YOU CLEARLY DON'T WANT TO. It might give you pleasure to look down on the already downtrodden, but me? Your own selfishness makes me want to vomit.

[Starry Messenger]

87. I think we've been invaded by former Republicans

Some must have been smart enough to figure out that their bottom line improved under Clinton and switched. They burn for the justice of their healthy 401k.

[ibegurpard]

42. K&R

spot on

[dave29]

46. Some people are addicted to hate

!

[Prism]

49. I'm sayin!

But, I've just resigned myself to all the anti-gay types around here. After awhile, you almost don't notice them.

Well, no, you totally do, because they're usually pretty prominent posters and presidential boosters. But they don't bother you as much.

Oh wait, did you mean something else?

Yeah, I don't like various policies. Or, uhm, "hate" as you so privilegedly called it.

[dave29]

64. no one owns hate, and thanks for accusing me

of whatever. G'nite

[inna]

48. Awesome thread, thank you, Prism!

:yourock:

[Zhade]

52. I fucking LOVE the "fix it later" idiocy.

If it couldn't get done now, when Dems hold such power, it's going to get fixed later?

:rofl:

And people actually BELIEVE that shit?

[Warren DeMontague]

55. No. But sending it down in flames would have been worse.

It would not have accomplished anything except to hand the congress to the GOP in November, convince the American people that our party can't do anything, and people with Pre-existing conditions would continue to get fucked for another generation, if not longer.

Do I think we're going to see a massive move towards a public option in the next few months? Or a vote on one? No. Unfortunately.

But a slight improvement- and this bill represents a slight improvement- is better than maintaining the status quo on the basis of principle. I think.

[Zhade]

70. Another false dichotomy. Did Costco have a sale or something?

We had the votes for a public option. So we easily could have pushed for a vote on that, but it was removed. This "it was either this bill or nothing" argument is demonstrably false.

And I'm thinking you might be surprised at how angry people will be with the Dems come election time. Your theory could well prove true even after the passage of this non-reform bill.

The hilarious thing is, this cements the status quo while pretending not to. But you can't, or won't, see that.

[Warren DeMontague]

78. Here's what I think happened on the PO. And my typing it out doesn't mean I agree with it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7982534&mesg_id=7991141

There are small things that are good in this bill, but it's not perfect. Personally, I'm pissed that they dicked around for a year. I think it could have been played differently, we could have had the Public Option, and we sure as hell could have done it better.

I don't believe we'll "fix it later", but I DO happen to think it's better than doing nothing. A small step in the right direction, with a few good things that would have caused a holy hell fight had they been proposed separately (like the medicaid expansion).

[Prism]

63. It's very similar to the "saving lives" one

We need to save people RIGHT NOW.

Or 2014.

Whenever. Lives! *mumble*

Some restrictions may apply.

Please see fine print in Senate bill for detail.

I often just stare for awhile at that sort of thing before blinking and going "What?"

[Zhade]

74. I'm astounded by how gullible DUers are when it's THEIR guy fucking over the public.

Shit, you'd think being flat-out lied to ("I didn't run on a public option") would wake some people up, but I guess the allure of being a team player is too strong for some. Shame, really -- we could have actually gotten some reform out of this. Such opportunity utterly, utterly squandered.

[TexasObserver]

62. The bill is not perfect. This is just a step. We'll fix it later!

Not exciting and not fulfilling, but that is politics.

I felt the president led poorly and gave away too much, but I am mindful of our alternatives. We can either plausibly claim victory for health care reform and run on that for November, or we can have its corpse hung around our neck like the albatross hung from the neck of the fated sailor in Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner.

We have to proclaim victory, shift gears to issues on which we can be stronger, and revisit this in early 2011. Not satisfying, but politics rarely is.

[Prism]

66. I understand what you're saying

And I do understand the political nature of this. To be politically viable, the party could never allow this to go down in flames. Of the two evils, passage of phantom reform was the lesser.

But I blame the President who allowed it to get to that point in the first place, and a Senate that seems less a deliberative body than the personal fiefdoms of 100 corrupt, autonomous incompetents.

I also find it very difficult at this point to swallow this bill out of political necessity. I know very well that a major loss in November will result in the shelving of LGBT issues for the foreseeable future (well, shelved even more than now, at least). And yet . . . this bill is one of those things that is just so very bad, I'm not sure I can forgive the party this.

I'll vote in 2010. My representative is Barbara Lee, and she is very, very easy to vote for. But working or donating for this party? After they've just done this? I think I'm very done with them in that capacity. Done for a long time. Unless they do something spectacular - a possibility that grows dimmer with each passing day.

[TexasObserver]

72. Yeah, you're right on pretty much all accounts.

[Marr]

69. *edit*

[Marr]

67. I agree completely. But you know, when the party ends up losing

seats, and possibly even the presidency next time around, the same people who pushed for this crap bill will blame "the left" for failing to show up and cheer for it.

[Prism]

79. Meh, let them shoot themselves in the foot

Every time they scream about the Left, they lose another election. Mysteriously.

[upi402]

85. they cut off their nose to spite their face

if we can't primary out the DLCers I won't vote for mine here or donate to others. And that goes for the exec too. it's what i have done more often than not- vote for a corporatist Dem.