Dennis Kucinich: The Public Option Is Dead.

Email from Kucinich received today:



Why didn't we fight to elect this man President? Why did we allow the media and the tyranny of public opinion to successfully label him "unelectable" and make our choices for us? Maybe it's true that he could not have won, but shouldn't we have fought for him anyway? Fought for ourselves? Wouldn't it at least have sent a message that the left is willing to stand up, make our voices heard, and demand representation?

Oh well, we didn't. We all fell in line and got behind the media-approved "frontrunners" eventually. And this is what we got for our trouble. Democrats control both the White House and Congress and they refuse to give us even a public option, much less single-payer. Would Kucinich have let this happen?

defeatist attitude. It's not dead. There's not even a final bill.

He just sent a viral message that it's dead. There's not even a final bill.

he knows something that you/we dont?

have not mobilized yet.

Obama's saying The public option, whether we get it or not, is only a sliver was a pretty strong message, too. That was the POTUS, not one lil ole Congressman, saying we may not get it, but not to worry because it isn't important anyway.

Negative AND dishonest.

Just to be clear.

statement that I quoted (almost his exact words. Just didn't feel like googling, so I did not use quote marks) negative and dishonest.

That doesn't make him negative or dishonest as a person, maybe backed into a corner on this issue. None of us is 100% truthful on every occasion when we are in that state, even if something as big as a Presidency is not at stake.

never change.

Fuck, I hardly post here these days and I certainly don't remember you - I guess it's I who struck a nerve with you.

I was curious, so I searched the archive with me as the author and "kucinich" in the subject/message - I haven't posted in a DK thread since last November. The fact that you have that burned in your memory kinda makes you an obsessive creep.

avatar is hard to miss.

Maybe if you look beyond the cheerleading to the substance you'll see that too.

yet. He predicted the bailouts, he predicted the war funding, he was called a defeatist then too, but he was proven right in the end. He also revealed what all of them had denied for so long, that the Iraq war was about control of the world's resources. If it had not been for Kucinich we would not have known about the clause requiring the Iraqis to basically sign over their oil to multi-national corporations and he was threatened with censure for telling the public that truth, including by members of his own party.

I believe him. I also believe that the reason there has been no push-back to the campaign by the right against Healthcare reform, is not accidental. It is deliberate. The right is doing the work of the Healthcare industry and by default, of those Dems who are also bought and paid for. And sadly, I believe that the WH is part of it all.

There is no way that any president as intelligent as Obama, would have allowed the right to frame the issue the way they have, unless his heart wasn't in the fight to begin with. He had so much political capital and control of all three branches of govt. Anyone who still believes they ever intended to represent the people if it meant that the healthcare industry would lose profits, hasn't been paying attention.

We are on our own except for a few Democrats in the House and Senate. Kucinich does not lie. But someone has been lying.

maybe he's a pawn always has been, maybe he's not ... guess we'll see after this vote.

Why aren't YOU president, with your super-powers of heightened senses and future-predicting?

than you or I do? It's not his first dance and he does not usually steer his constituents wrong.

"Maybe it's true that he could not have won, but shouldn't we have fought for him anyway? Fought for ourselves? Wouldn't it at least have sent a message that the left is willing to stand up, make our voices heard, and demand representation?"

Loud voices is not how the score is kept..."DEMAND"...you might want to start a little more locally before you hitch your wagon to a horse headed off a cliff...

That kind of thinking is the whole problem with Democrats these days. We politely ask Republicans, the media, and everybody else to please, please, give us a few crumbs. Not what we actually want, of course, but some watered down compromise that won't bother the opposition too much. The opposition knows this, of course, and thinks to themselves "if they are so unwilling to stand up for themselves, why give them anything at all?" And that's why we don't even get the compromise.

Change must be demanded and fought for. That's just the way it is.

but that is WAY too radical in this country.

See Manufacturing of consent and all that

People in this country are so thoroughly enslaved and controlled, it's ridiculous.

there were three attempts at that during the Bush years (not that most people know that) so perhaps people are starting to wake up.

Been watching The Century of Self, recommended by another DU'er... fits right there with other things I have read on the subject... including the End of Overeating by Kessler.

I don't know if I have any hope any more and my best choice is to just do what I need to do to scratch a living... change... under the incredible forces we fight, and the willingness of people to believe (or is that need) but not willing to work for it... since that is way too radical... right now I am thinking, something will finally give. When it does, it won't be pretty, or for that matter controllable.

a very big country in terms of square miles. The few remaining employed would blend in with those standing on unemployment lines that go around the block.

percent, which is what would be required to get anybody's attention, eighty would be even better.

for the record even in the worst depressed areas, counting the non counted, we are talking of unemployment in the 20s, and those are few and far between.

So no, that would fall into one of the many excuses as to why this does not happen.

Now let's speak plainly, the reason why this will not happen is that only the looney left would call form something AS RADICAL as a strike, let alone a national one. Yes, that is the frame and that is the frame people believe.

usually. Maybe bc no one gets what I am doing when I am not literal, so I stick with literal and intense.)

Anyhoo, it doesn't happen, in part, because that is not our tradition. And, we are not organized for it. Our unions don't get together and plan and call them, as the unions in Europe do. In part, we are indeed a sprawling country. It's not like the residents of Paris or Marseille "taking to the streets." Most of us would take to our lawns or to our farms. In part, many Americans are too damn apathetic and lazy. Only a very small percentage of eligible voters vote in the Presidential, let alone in other elections.

That said, we demonstrated against the war in Vietnam with some impact. But, that was because of the draft. Everyone had a son, daughter, neice, nephew, grandchild, lover, etc in the war or vulnerable to the draft. And also because the news covered it every morning, noon and night, instead of pretending for 7 years that it wasn't happening.

Bet you wish you had settled for humor and hyperbole instead of my more thoughtful side.;-)

PS. The Republicans can get their peeps out bc of organizations like the one Armey runs, the church network and the gun lobbies. Dems really need to get better organized and prepared.

and done very often

The last national one was 1952

Americans have been trained to think that these ahem, marches and demonstrations and strikes are commie inspired. But they were very much part of the tool box for the unions.

I wish people realized this.

I gave up on people knowing their own history a while ago though. Americans don't remember last week, how do I want them to remember fifty years ago...

And no, that is not hyperbole, that is reality and no joke.

But tradition, file it in the excuse round filing cabinet.

There are far more in there than people think possible.

And some have some reality to them (fear about losing a job, and if enough people strike that is much less of a risk), and some are just hyperbole.

In the end it is the same result and the manufacturing of consent is complete now.

of most people still young enough to be physically able to picket." But, I gave you other reasons, chief among them being, IMO, lack of organization and apathy/laziness. I guess that can also be put lack of organization and lack of inspiration. Unions don't seem to have firebrands anymore.


You know, on October 19th in NYC is a memorial service for the woman who originally spearheaded the single payer movement. (Yeah, she died recently.) I would love to see it followed by a huge public vigil by people from all over the country for single payer and/or a strong public option.

If that were to happen, how many of those who talk so big on DU would you guess would go? Two, maybe? Five?

this has been done on purpose

As to your last question.

The three national strikes, attempts mind you, during the Bush years, had me, and a few more idiots.

I know.

I am willing to bet that the participants either were not born in the US, or are not fully history phobic...

So yes, you are correct, but it is more complex than just the memory. Americans don't have a memory, and that has been done on purpose. But we remember myth very well, and that is also on purpose.

Was it through a union, or did you get the info via media or word of mouth? Thanks.

That's important to me bc, as I posted elsewhere, the Republicans have all these organizations, like Armey's, the NRA and many of the churches, not to mention Fox, Limbaugh and talk radio. They can mobilize their peeps within a few days. We don't have any of those infrastructures on our side and we don't build our own, either.

and no, it wasn't the Unions, or for that matter ANSWER

The last one was pushed at the Mike Malloy show.

And you hit on the other major problem, the left (truly center) is not organized. The ultra right is very well organized, with many organizations and shadows of organizations that can be tied directly to the corporate interested.

Perhaps what is going on right now will wake the left, (which is center in any other country), will learn how to finally organize.

I am not sure if I have any hope of that changing, but perhaps those first abortive attempts are actually a start of something. I don't know, and I hope they are.

the Gates Foundation. (He doesn't believe in passing ANY money to family. Weird.) I thought he and Soros should have bought a TV station for liberal broadcasting. Now, I had no particular right to be miffed, but I was anyway.

The Coors family, to mention a well known one, will fund Heritage to the hilt, but our side, does not.

And heritage is connected to many of the grass roots (hilarity to follow)

Hell 60+ is part of this chain, for example...

I could not prove it, but Free Republic probably gets grants to stay on, as their fund raisers are not that good.

If I won the lottery, it would take that, I might go ahead and do some media... but that would take buying a lottery ticket.

:-)

They seem to work better and don't seem to require the involvement of as many people.

I'm thinking about people dropping out of the for-profit system eg. Many people are healthy and are paying thousands a year for coverage they do not use. I'm not talking about asking people who are sick, who need the care. But millions are not and if enough of them declared their intention to cancel their policies if there is no public option (I prefer single payer if possible) I think that might get their attention.

Meantime they could put the money they saved into a savings account and if they needed to go to a doctor they could pay for the visit or, they could do what two of my friends are doing to get dental care, go to Europe where the care is way cheaper and the quality of care excellent.


Money, our money, is what they want to keep these leeches in business. Seems to me it's the one weapon we have to use against them. Congress will not take away their money, but we can do it if we have the will to do so. I do not have coverage as I refuse to enrich these criminals.

People have risked their lives in the past for far less reason than what is now at stake. Thousands are losing their lives each year in this country. I think that's worth risking not getting sick for as long as it takes to make them understand we will not take no for an answer. If we really are committed to winning this battle, sacrifices do have to be made, and this would not be much of a sacrifice compared to what it might accomplish imo.

who gets into an accident. Even a broken leg can wipe a savings account in a whiff.

That is due to the cost of care, which is part of the problem.

When my dad fell and broke his hip (he has no insurance, his was canceled way back in the day... and since he is not in the US)... the cost of the Ambulance alone, not an advanced life support rig, a basic rig... was 1500 dollars, for a mile and a half. And it got impressive from there.

The idea though has merit, for other reasons, and that is money talks. but apparently a better option were the calls they got from pissed off constituents, and they seem to have gotten a spine transplant at the local office, where their staffers went, boss the masses are pissed. I don't know if the surgery will be successful yet, but time will tell

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/8/18/767460/-BREAKING:-CNN-reporting-Dems-going-it-ALONE-on-health-care!

I know the cost to people who are in his position as I have been close to people who have found themselves in the same situation, at least one with a terminal illness. It was through those people that I actually became aware of the draconian system here when I saw a friend being turned down for medicaid (he worked, but couldn't get a private policy because of a pre-condition and was too 'rich' for medicaid).

That experience which was just a few years ago, taught me about the US healthcare system. That, and the comment from one of the nurses after she told me my friend was turned down for coverage and it dawned on me that here in the US there were people who would be refused treatment because they did not have insurance. I asked her 'but what happens to people who cannot pay for care'? and she said, 'they die'! I was horrified at her apparent acceptance of this, what I considered, crime. I remember I started to cry and she simply said 'I know, it's awful, I'm sorry'.

If there was a boycott and obviously there would be situations like your dad's, I would hope they would be treated and then billed later. Also, it might be possible to set up a fund with the saved money to help people who might need it. I would hope it would not take too long as they started to lose millions of dollars before they began to compromise.

As for the link you provided, if only that were true, but considering the source, I would be very surprised if it were. I know that may come as a surprise, but I am not alone by any means in being cautious about that particular source. Nothing at all to do with you btw.

Otoh, maybe they have responded to the anger of their base and the prospect of losing seats, although I am willing to bet that the source you linked to will ban anyone who follows through on that threat in 2010 should it come to that.

I trust Kucinich as he has a record of revealing the truth about what is really going on in Congress. This time I hope he's wrong. And if he is, I do think we ought to be prepared for a fierce battle to push them to do what is right and was just trying to think of what could be done, as I know they do not care one bit what we think and they KNOW we will vote for them no matter what they do. At least that is how it has been, and as a former member of the site you linked to, I can attest to the fact that they will lead the way to continue that practice, voting for the worst excuses for Democrats 'because we need a majority'. And I could not disagree with that more than I do, as it has been a failed strategy as we have seen over and over again.

Thank you for your response and I really hope this time, they are listening ~ and I hope your dad recovered. How awful for your family to have to deal with that as well as the results of the accident itself. Something has to change, one way or the other ~ :-)

it was a good chunk of money but they could afford it.

As to the rest... yes I am not even hopeful, and has little to do with the source.

We have been played so many times that I expect not to work, vote, or give money to any dem or republican. In my mind they are the same thing at this point.

And at the risk of drawing the usual suspects, yes Nader was right. And Kennedy was also right, those who prevent peaceful change ensure the violent kind.

This will only get that toxic brew that is the US getting even more toxic.

As I like to say to people, when they say, TRUST US, well trust is a two way street, and it has to be earned.

As to the threats of 2010, they don't deliver... I guarantee the GOP will recapture at least one chamber, if not both. And at this point, it does not matter. They are proving that.

that he had to spend his savings to cover the cost. Had he lived in a country where healthcare is considered a right, he would not have had that worry to begin with.

I'm with you on 2010. I went along, most reluctantly especially in 2006 after the betrayal of 12 Dems on the MCA vote right before the election. I was persuaded as we all were, that if we could just win a majority even with bad Dems, we could change things. Well, that didn't happen but again in 2008, despite serious reservations, as there were troubling signs, I went along once again. Bush, the worst thing that happened to this country, was the best thing that happened to Dems. But that is not a factor anymore. We went all the way until we finally got to what we wanted and still, the progressive wing of the party is being ignored. I have come to the conclusion that progressives are not welcome in the current version of the Democratic Party. Not much point in staying where you are not welcome.

As for Nader, I never understood the vitriol. I had a suspicion he was right but wanted to believe otherwise. He just arrived at his pov sooner.

I definitely will not be listening to the operatives that seem to take over so-called Democratic blogs each election cycle anymore. Unless things begin to change but it doesn't look good right now. We'll see, meantime there does need to be a plan as supporting anyone with an 'R' after their name is just not an option. I hope Dems wake up or one year from now we will be facing a similar situation to what Clinton faced in 1994, there's just no doubt about that. They always forget that in the end, if they lose the base they seem to despise so much, they lose control of Congress.

Tradition is for conservatives, literally.

But I agree that the labor movement *does* have a tradition of strikes - it's just been erased from public memory by the Reagan legacy.

the war against labor literally started in 1935...

it will not finish until they destroy every Union and repeal every labor law.

It will not finish until they bring slavery back.

So the war is still on.

But that is my own, admittedly so, very radical view.

You could say I have been quite radicalized over the years...

:-)

It would turn in our favor, but that needs the level of commitment we have not seen in decades.

fore he fired every last one of the strikers.

at the town halls, please.

We should never imagine that these rotten "town halls" haven't had an impact. They have. I knew they would as soon as I heard of them.

The opposition beats us time and time again because they get out and raise their voices. They know how the process of twisting and spinning public perception works. They know that people do not listen, have never listened, and perhaps will never listen to rational arguments, facts, evidence, and data. What they DO listen to is projection of confidence, aggressiveness, self-assurance, feel-good nationalism, and other such ploys.

That's what we have to learn how to fight against. And we can't do it by trying the same old tactic of engaging them rationally and hoping everyone will "see the light." You can't engage irrational people rationally. It doesn't work.

Damn, we used to know how to organize. The bosses were all Republican and the union organizers were all Democrats (or maybe Socialist, if you back furher, but shhh.) And they got places unionized on no $$, just through smarts and determination. People spilled their blood to join unnions.

Why did we give up organizing and fighting and content ourselves with raising money over the internet? Because Democrats voted for Nixon and Reagan?

And where is Abbie Hoffman when you need him most? Still dead, I suppose. Anyone have Ayers; address in Chicago? I think I may be ready for Palin around with terrorists myself.

40 years of relentless pummeling in the media has left many Democrats shell-shocked. Stockholm syndrome sets in and they begin to identify with the oppressor. This is no longer the Democratic party of FDR and LBJ. Poverty threads go down in flames even on DU. The rhetoric of class division has been successfully installed on both sides of the aisle, and that's why Americans are the only people anywhere who worry about what something like health care reform might cost the rich rather than demanding it for the benefit of the majority.

Think of the police shooting those who struck against Rockefeller (J.D., that is). Democrats were at their best when the opposition had all the money and power.

Maybe it was losing the Solid South to the Republicans. When you had the whole South, plus most of the rest of the East in your pocket reliably, election after election, you could afford to be a "real" Democrat. Then we because of reproductive choice, churchgoers, minorities or not; and minorities had been another 100% reliable bloc, at least African Americans and Puerto Rican Americans, maybe Mexican Americans, too, after RFK, anyway.

There was also a time when all ethnics--Jews, Italians, Irish, whatever, voted Democratic. Almost without exception, Republicans were the party of the rich WASP's with no conscience. So, they got the South (IMO, because of the Civil Rights Act), and they chipped away at the rest of our constituencies. or maybe, as they got more affluent, thanks to their parents' unions and Democratic votes enabling them to graduate high school and beyond, they became "tax bracket Republicans.

And we did not wake up soon enough, And now, our base is not enough. We have to hope and pray to make some independents blue instead of red.

Or maybe, as my mother in law would say, "It's just a combination of everything,"

Back when Democrats knew how to fight and sacrifice for the benefit of the American people, LBJ knowingly gave up the entire South when he pushed civil rights through. A solidly Democratic region went Republican overnight. It's cost us a hell of a lot, but wasn't it worth it?

That's the kind of courage we need to have on health care.

Sometimes I say we lost the South because of the Civil Rights Act (which JFK and RFK had in the works before the assassination). Sometimes I don't, so I don't stir the Confederacy crowd or their sock puppets.

Chicago, no less.

now than he did on the campaign trail, though, I fear.

Why divide us through emails and cry "failure".

Is he running for 2012?

This shit isn't helpful, Dennis.

Fuck him, we need his support now - not his pandering.

:rofl:

everyday, you think the corporate media is going to give him much time?

during the primaries, even if he had time at all!

I remember on the 5th anniversary week of the IWR vote he had Edwards on at least once, think it was twice, to discuss the vote.

:puke:

The person who called them on the lies, nowhere to be found in the media.

Other Democrats get media time everyday, but the plan they are pushing will not provide real competition for the insurance companies.

5-10 million in the public plan by 2019

:(

The Kucinich campaign was an absolutely clear demonstration of the blatant control that the corporatocracy has over us and our nation.

FFS, ABC photo-shopped him off the stage in their coverage of the Chicago debate. He went right into Obama's backyard and blew him, and all the other candidates, away. In the following debate, George Stephanopolis didn't give him a question until well after most of the television audience had gone back to watching American Idol (38 min. into the hour), and Dennis commented on it at the time. The list goes on and on, we were given a choice of which brand of vanilla we were going to be allowed to vote "for".

The ruling parasites have decreed that he and any others that stand up for us will not be heard from, period.



"Forget the politicians. The politicians are put there to give you the idea that you have freedom of choice . . . you don’t. You have no choice. You have owners. They own you. They own everything. They own all the important land. They own, and control the corporations. They’ve long since bought, and paid for the Senate, the Congress, the state houses, the city halls, they got the judges in their back pockets and they own all the big media companies, so they control just about all of the news and information you get to hear. They got you by the balls. They spend billions of dollars every year lobbying . . . lobbying, to get what they want . . . Well, we know what they want. They want more for themselves and less for everybody else, but I’ll tell you what they don’t want . . . they don’t want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking. They don’t want well informed, well educated people capable of critical thinking. They’re not interested in that . . . that doesn’t help them. That’s against their interests. That’s right. They don’t want people who are smart enough to sit around a kitchen table and think about how badly they’re getting fucked by a system that threw them overboard 30 fuckin' years ago. They don’t want that. You know what they want? They want obedient workers . . . Obedient workers, people who are just smart enough to run the machines and do the paperwork. And just dumb enough to passively accept all these increasingly shittier jobs with the lower pay, the longer hours, the reduced benefits, the end of overtime and vanishing pension that disappears the minute you go to collect it, and now they’re coming for your Social Security money. They want your fuckin' retirement money. They want it back so they can give it to their criminal friends on Wall Street, and you know something? They’ll get it . . . they’ll get it all from you sooner or later cause they own this fuckin' place. It’s a big club and you ain't in it. You and I are not in The Big Club. By the way, it’s the same big club they use to beat you over the head with all day long when they tell you what to believe. All day long beating you over the head with their media telling you what to believe, what to think and what to buy. The table has tilted folks. The game is rigged and nobody seems to notice. Nobody seems to care. Good honest hard-working people . . . white collar, blue collar it doesn’t matter what color shirt you have on. Good honest hard-working people continue, these are people of modest means . . . continue to elect these rich cocksuckers who don’t give a fuck about you. They don’t give a fuck about you . . . they don’t give a fuck about you. They don’t care about you at all . . . at all . . . at all, and nobody seems to notice. Nobody seems to care. That’s what the owners count on. The fact that Americans will probably remain willfully ignorant of the big red, white and blue dick that’s being jammed up their assholes everyday, because the owners of this country know the truth. It’s called the American Dream cause you have to be asleep to believe it..."

days. And before they showed it over and over and over, they prefaced with questions and/or innuendos about his sanity.

It is right out there for everyone to see in example after example, yet we will not acknowledge what stands before us. I'm deciding whether or not to continue a conversation with another brainwashed cheerleader for the U.S. monetary system. He made his money exploiting the fixed game and refuses to see that the game was and is fixed.

Do you continue, or just walk away?

for making the corporate status quo uncomfortable, which is very good, but on the other, it also reduces him to an ideologue howling from the margins.

Real work needs to be done on this legislation and he's no doing it, IMO.

My point on Kucinich stands.

Gave a good presentation. Ed gave him a good amount of time.

plan within a plan within a plan.

Ready and willing to roll over and give away the farm at the drop of a hat. Bought and paid for.

They were elected to fight for Democratic values, and they don't. I'd call that quitting of the worst kind.

What does that say about DK? And you?

He's saying the public option is dead, and he's probably right.

You really think Kucinich isn't going to go on fighting for REAL health care reform every day as he has for years?

That's the problem. He's losing it.

so some of us ( alot of us? Perhaps) can call the liars out to their faces and shit-can the bullshit that is being sold to us ! watered down public option is the bullshit..

5-10 million only to get coverage in 10 years and anyone here calls that reform?????????

Where are the people I used to post with that were the truthtellers at DU??????? oh yeah , many have been run off..or they are called names, or intimidated by fellow DU'ers.

You think DK is a quitter??..how about so many here that have been so willing to swallow bullshit as their daily meal..and do tell us how many will be so helped by this crap that is dished out as a public option?

And how many here today are those getting paid $6-15 $$ and hour to sell this bullshit on message boards and blogs..

I can not be sold pig shit as gold..

and this is pig shit that we are being told on a daily basis to be so thankful for!

Pig shit is pig shit , no matter how you try to dress it up!


Single Payer is ..health care reform..

this public option crap ..is crap..unless it has teeth and unless it negotiates costs of medical care, and coverage care and Pharma costs.and allows cheaper drugs to be brought into this country from cheeper distributors...hell most of it is made here and shipped to other countries at a very inexpensive price through negotiations!

And spare me if you want to dispute what I am saying..because I lived in Canada for 22 years..I know what real health care reform is! And I know what affordable drugs are as well! I could only wish my country cared about it's people as much!

:)

"DLC types"

Holy fucking shit, we haven't heard that whining "blame them" assault to our intelligence often enough here.

Got no argument? Repeat the same shit - just like good ol' repukes.

Else he's a quitter, just like Palin.

persuade folks that a public option is not important--just a sliver--then maybe we can talk about quitting.

Why on earth should he retract his statement? He made it for a reason, maybe more than one reason.

He made his statement because he's being a dick.

DK is usually smart, but he made a big mistake here IMO. Fortunately it wont make much of a noise outside of DU.

"Health Insurance" instead of "Health Care", and quite frankly that's worrisome.

If you think about it, all along we have been talking about paying for health care, not about health care itself. The discussion has not been about which surgeries or medicines people have or whether they should see a surgeon or a nurse practitioner. Those are health care type issues. Medicare is not about health care per se, nor did instituting Medicare change health care itself. It's about cheap health insurance so people can afford health care. Medicaid did not change health care, either. Government just covered the cost of health care. Those things are more like insurance.

But, as I said, I don't care what it's called, as long as it includes a strong public option, if not single payer. Anything else, and I am not sure I can vote Democratic again.

that the public option was nothing but a sliver. Dennis will keep fighting and he will never vote for a bill that does not have a public option. Obama will keep fighting, but he will sign anything Congress passes and declare victory. At least that is the strong signal his "sliver" speech sent. I hope he changes his mind, maybe bc of things like the AFL-CIO threat.

But you already knew that.

to back up that claim. Posted to you that I had googled, but could not find it.

If you ever posted a link to a direct quote, I did not see it. So, for the fourth or fifth time, do you have a link to a direct quote from Obama saying what you claim he said in July?

But that was July. The other day, he left open the possibility of a bill without a public option. On that same thread, I did post a direct quote from Obama and a link. What he said a few days ago, after the town hall flaps and after getting a better idea of the current status of votes, is a lot mnore relevant now that what you claim he said in July.


BTW, even if it were true, which it isn't, what's the point of saying "But you knew that."

all cutting in saying Obama would accept less than a public option, they were saying he would accept a
co-op.. in fact they were breaking in at commercial time before the news saying it ..as a lead into the news hour!!!!!!!!!

wash, rinse and repeat..same bullshit every day!!

I feel like i am watching "Groundhog Day" ..the movie ........everything the same ..every day..

we'll never know why it has a public option. Netroots? AFL-CIO? Maddow? Dean (who really has been working tirelessly, including writing a whole damn book)? Congress Critters? Obama? All of the above?

Only if a bill with no public option gets to him will we know the story. Will he sign it or not?

I hope we never have to find out.

only Greg goes further!!!!! and exposes even more!!!!!!!

go read it before posting anymore of your silly talking points !

Obama on Drugs: 98% Cheney?
by Greg Palast
Thursday, August 13, 2009
For The Huffington Post


http://www.gregpalast.com/obama-on-drugs-98-cheney/




and Greg alerts to this :

ALERT

Now it's Let's Make a Deal with hospital lobbyists.
First, the President was caught with his principles down, cutting a scuzzy back-room deal with pharmaceutical lobbyist Billy Tauzin to limit drug price savings to just 2% over 10 years (see attached, "Obama on Drugs: 98% Cheney?"), the New York Times today reports that another deal was sealed by lobbyist Chip Kahn of the American Hospital Association.
Here are the numbers they don't want you to see: Hospitals will be allowed to hike their prices and revenues by six trillion dollars ($5,853 billion) over the next ten years, only $155 billion less than they had projected before the Obama "reform."
In all, the Obama back-room deal will "reduce" our $26 trillion total hospital bill over the next decade by
one-half of one percent.
Once again, the lobbyists got the gold mine, the public got the shaft.
Say it ain't so, Mr. President.

he would be President today.

I'm alerting this crap.

Snark needs no alert.

Besides, your disingenuous "Quitter" snark started it. You should know, DK will always take the more Principled stance. He has often voted against compromised legislation. Why would you expect anything different?

:shrug:

He quit, just like Palin.

I alerted the post because it's racist.

It's obvious to me and many others that Kucinich continues to fight for his constituents and the American people. Sometimes that means you have to stand against the Status Quo. If you can't grasp that, that's your problem.

As for the charge of racism, that's a big stretch and you know it. Maybe you just don't want that other poster around anymore and would like to see them off this board?

:shrug:

But that doesn't mean I have DK's face tattooed on my ass. DK fucked up with this letter IMO, he took his purity ball and went home. It does nothing to advance our cause.

As for the racist post, that's my opinion. I've seen the exact quote from RW'ers who claim Obama was elected because of Oprah. 2+2. Seems like the mods don't agree, that's cool. No big deal.

how did you know i had a DK tattoo on my ass?

:)

We're all opinionated here at DU. That's why i like it so much. I disagree that DK fucked up with this letter, but we'll call it a night and agree to disagree, yes?

Cheers.

a book or a brand of pj's, goes through the roof.

It makes no sense whatever to say he elected elected because a minority woman without those traits recommended him. That's not how Presidents ever got elected in this country. It's the size and malleability of her fan base, not her color.

If all you see when you think of Oprah is her skin color, and not her huge influence, maybe you should reflect on that.

As far as racism, I believe it's in the eye of the beholder in this case. We know Oprah is a very powerful voice for whomever she chooses to back. For God's sake she stuck the state of California with Arnold by letting him campaign as a guest on her program.

it's racist to say someone should have backed another candidate?

I know, I know... he attempted a quick switch when he wanted to be the Democratic Presidential nominee and had to woo the pro-choice groups. But, before that, he voted to restrict women's rights. So... he hasn't always taken the more "Principled stance". He quietly amassed an anti-choice voting record of Henry Hyde-like proportions.

You think he shouldn't have changed his mind?

Do you actually have a problem with this statement?

"I've had a journey on the issue . A year ago, before I became a candidate for President, I broke from a voting record that had not been pro-choice. After hearing from many women in my own life, and from women and men in my community and across the country, I began a more intensive dialogue on the issue. A lot of women opened their hearts to me. That dialogue led me to wholeheartedly support a woman's right to choose." - DK from 2002

I wish more politicians would give careful weight to important issues and be willing to change their minds. Being principled, rather than stubborn, allowed him to change his heart.



How about this statement from prior to his switch:

"I want to work to make abortions less necessary, which means sex education and birth control. I want to work to make sure that, when life is brought forward, we have prenatal care and postnatal care and childcare and universal health care and a living wage. "



I don't hate people because they're "pro-life". I try to help them understand the other side when i can. But i recognize it as a DEEPLY personal choice. Dennis had to work through it. I'll not fault him for that. Nor will i rescind my words regarding his Principles.


Ball. Your court.

I think he's a turd for yelling "it's dead!" when the party leadership is still very much on board.

Personal choice indeed, but that's the point - it's a CHOICE.

He supported Bush's reinstatement of the gag rule for recipients of US family planning funds abroad. He supported the Child Custody Protection Act, which prohibits anyone but a parent from taking a teenage girl across state lines for an abortion. He voted for the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, which makes it a crime, distinct from assault on a pregnant woman, to cause the injury or death of a fetus. He voted against funding research on RU-486. He voted for a ban on dilation and extraction (so-called partial-birth) abortions without a maternal health exception. He even voted against contraception coverage in health insurance plans for federal workers--a huge work force of some 2.6 million people (and yes, for many of them, Viagra is covered). Where reasonable constitutional objections could be raised--the lack of a health exception in partial-birth bans clearly violates Roe v. Wade, as the Supreme Court ruled in Stenberg v. Carhart--Kucinich did not raise them; where competing principles could be invoked--freedom of speech for foreign health organizations--he did not bring them up. He was a co-sponsor of the House bill outlawing all forms of human cloning, even for research purposes, and he opposes embryonic stem cell research. His anti-choice dedication has earned him a 95 percent position rating from the National Right to Life Committee, versus 10 percent from Planned Parenthood and 0 percent from NARAL.

He voted specifically against allowing Washington, DC, to fund abortions for poor women with nonfederal dollars and against permitting female soldiers and military dependents to have an abortion in overseas military facilities even if they paid for it themselves. Similarly, although Kucinich told me he was not in favor of "criminalizing" abortion, he voted for a partial-birth-abortion ban that included fines and up to two years in jail for doctors who performed them, except to save the woman's life. What's that, if not criminalization?



Yeah - I am VERY glad he changed tunes. But it doesn't change his voting record and it does demonstrate that he's not always the perfect progressive as many like to believe.

I'm taking my ball and going home now.

principles consistently and don't sell out or waver. So, if his principle at the time was anti-choice, he would have built an anti-choice voting record.

prerogative. If you consider http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6340205&mesg_id=6341204">this voting record "principled", that's on you. I, however, choose not to put him on a pedestal as being some hero for progressive values.

giving him air space on her program, which to many of her fans looked like an endorsement. So if you like anuses, stick your head up his. God knows we all are stuck with him to no good end. I'm going to take pictures of the anguish of the people in the streets already with his budget cuts because he was too stubborn to do the right thing and get taxes passed on the rich to ease the budget problems. I do believe he would not have won that fake special election if Oprah hadn't been there for him.

That seems to be the gist of what you're saying.

Oprah is very influential and no matter who she backs, they will do very well. So far she has promoted Arnold (bad) and Obama (good). Why can't she sprinkle her fairy dust on Dennis a guy who does his best to do good? Or is that comprehension beyond you?

leopards don't really change their spots...but keep trying to believe they do!

Oh and yes, many, many, many of us wrote Oprah and Tweety making sure they knew The gropenator was in on the private secret Enron energy meetings and rape of the State of California..but they ignored us...and still supported that piece of horeshit!

It's worse than quitting, actually. It's demanding your team forfeit because you didn't get to call the play.

option, will not vote for a bill that does not contain it and is still working for the public option. In which universe is that demanding forfeiture.

Meanwhile, Obama is saying, the public option "whether we get it or not" is not the be all and end all. It's only a "sliver. "

That's like saying, "I'm not at all sure I can get the public option. But I said I was staking my Presidency on health care reform. So, I am going to pass the bill, whether it has a public option or not and declare victory, whether the bill contains a public option or not. To save face--and to prepare my peeps for the worst--I'm going to say that the public option is almost meaningless, when it fact, it's the ball game."

That is very close to saying the public option is dead, but also dishonest in saying it is a sliver. Truth is, a bill without a public option is at least ten times worse than no bill at all. And Kucinich explains why in the OP.

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

legislation is that he's tone-deaf to imagine that his supportrs do not want it.

It does sound as if he's throwing in the towel before the game's over.

I would prefer that he roll his sleeves up and help push.

Evidently very few people in this country can handle the truth. That's why he can't get elected, imo. He doesn't promise pie in the sky by and by. He tells it like it is and it makes people uncomfortable.

more likely to get elected than those who express realism or pessimism

guess it's one of those 'duh' studies; still, they it was kind of interesting.

America will never elect a president who looks like Dennis Kucinich, not in a celebrity-obsessed television age.

That's why Feingold needs to run. Liberal, articulate, and he looks good doing it.

He doesn't get elected because the public senses that.

Completely and totally anti-woman until poof! he wanted to pretend to run for higher office and he became overnight completely pro-choice?

The public is often not good at determining who is best among several candidates with pretty much equivalent policies and voting records. But sniffing out the down and dishonest politician?

It always surprises me how good the voters are at it. Which is why the K-man gets so few votes.

find the post where Kucinich made a fool of himself, again.

The "Public Option" introduced by John Edwards,

The "Public Option" championed by Howard Dean,

The "Public Option" that was going to be a Publicly Owned Government Administered alternative open to all who choose it,

The "Public Option" that was going to "Keep the Insurance Companies Honest" and "Drive down the cost of Health Care",

THAT Public IS dead, and has been for a while.

The Democratic Party "leadership" killed THAT "Public Option" early in the game, and now only pay lip service to something they call a "Public Option" that really isn't available to "The Public".

facts.

It's garbage

that's why.

The idea that he had to find a foreigner who is young enough to be his daughter, with the accouterments to match was such a wrong move. Actually he lost me when he tried the first time for President and thought it a good time to look for a wife in the first place, and the way he went about it. He makes a mockery of himself a little too often.

That being said, I wish his platform was the one we were on.

You seem to assume he married her so he could become President.

I never said he married her to become President. I think you need to go back and read. I said he made a mockery of his first presidential bid by setting up a date contest for himself instead of focusing on his campaign. Then the person he choses is to say the least controversial. I think it displays a certain un-electability, in my opinion. But I have to admit, I always lose some respect for any man that marries well below his age. It's one of my bigoty qualities, I ain't perfect.

read again. I understood your post the first time I read it.

None of us is perfect, though. Some morans act as though they are, but they aren't perfect, either. Just too dumb and cocky to know better.

Not genuises like me and thee. ;)

Obama is irrelevant to me now. Just another status-quo politician in Washington to be ignored while advocating for real change.

Dennis you are probably the ONLY dem I will still vote for.

The rest, I am done...

I will be seating the election out or not voting for candidates running on the duopoly party.

The charade is over.

Then again, if the party had its way, you are not a democrat either. So there.

And I expect the usual suspects to call him all kinds of names.

If there's not going to be a public option even though Democrats control the White House and Congress, then we know where we stand.

Time to forget about getting anything done through the mainstream.

so perhaps what this will do is wake up that little giant, and beggin the strugle anew.

Me... there has to be a different way to skin this cat.

Oh and lets not forget Kennedy...

“Those who make peaceful revolution ... and social change ultimately undermines those who seek to prevent it ..."

The days that we will have to chose sides are here.

The sides are wealth vs everyone else.

Wealth owns Washington on both sides of the aisle.

Marx got that one right, about class consciousness. He got a lot wrong, but that one, absolutely right.

Class has always been the issue. We are saturated with any number of distractions to hide this fact, while all the while the rich suck the lifeblood out of everything without opposition. The rich don't care what party or even what political system is in power, because they can buy off all of them. Until people understand this, we will get nothing but crumbs and usually not even that.

The rank and file republicans are blindly allegiant to their corporate masters, so it's not like you'll ever get them to side with the non-wealthy.

To hell with them. I'd just like to get Democrats to side with the non-wealthy once in a while. That would be a start.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4020931

Yes, yes they have, sweeney is walking it back

You try to figure this one out.

It's the same threat Howard Dean and most people supporting the public option have made: primary anyone who votes against the public option.

NO STRONG PO in the bill, I am done voting for the duopoly.

Get it?

Why do you think people are making this threat?

Do you really need a translation?

You SHOULD watch the TDS clip from last night for the short course on the clue as to why.

how the hell is that the same as Kucinich declaring the public option dead?

1.- Gibbs said today that they were looking at other ways of doing this including co-ops

2.- We have a supermajority in the senate but we cannot get more than 41 votes FOR IT.

Yes, it is dead, unless your political leaders decide to crack a few skulls... and that ain't gonna happen anytime soon. The Democratic party that would enforce that kind of discipline is in history books.

So yes, it is dead.

And since we have a WH, the Senate with a historic supermajority, and the House, and they cannot do it, well the charade is over.

Some of us suspected this all along, but now it is clear... it is them, the elites who work for the corporations, and us.., the people. They don't work for us. Not by a far shot.

Now if you chose to believe in this system, I can't stop you... nor will try. But the facts on the ground are pretty Grimm.

Yes, Kennedy was right, those who prevent peaceful change (which this would qualify as) ensure the violent kind. I fear for this country, in more ways than you can imagine, since this anger (and disapointment) will only add to a very toxic soup. So be it. That die is cast.

Oh and yes, I did tell my delegation as much. They don't have a strong PO in it, they can kiss my money, my work and my vote goodbye.

It's time to make a stand. As you said, the lines are drawn, and the die is cast. If Democrats control the entire government and refuse to pass a public option (which was a big compromise to begin with), then we know where we stand. We are not represented.

Unless we have an actual populist progressive on the ticket, I'll probably stay home in 2012 and do something more productive on voting day.

I mean there are local issues, and all that...

All the rest can apologize for the DLC takeover of this administration, but I'm done with them.

Kucinich is the one of the few that tell the truth, and ask for what the majority want.

The people that demonize him are nothig for than DLC Operatives, using the "He's Ugly" attack in order to dampen his message.

Well, I'm sick of the vacuuous, obedient charismatic lapdogs and want ethics, initiative and intellegence for now on. Kucinish fits the bit, and he has exposed the Democratic/ Blue Dog Duopoly for what they are.

Strike, Boycotts, Passive resistance are all fair game to starve these bastards into submission.

Gandhi was right.

C ya!

alas I did notice that you did not answer any of the facts presented.

I always find that of interest.

And it was principle that introduced us many years ago..I am rich for knowing this lady ( online) in many ways for many years!

You are 100% right Nadin..and yes many of us knew this whole damn thing was a charade!

But we were smeared and jeered for saying so!

I remember a very lonely many years ago as a Flight Attendant of the year in 2001 for one of the 9/11 Airlines for the New York Base ... telling the truth about 9/11 ..and being smeared and jeered as well..

What I have learned through the years is ..many can be bought out cheaply, many want to be fooled , and many are just too ignorant to see the light, even when the flashlight is directly on their eyelids!

I stand with you Nadin..as you stood by me telling the truth many years ago.

Oh and what I have also learned though out my lifetime ..truth will prevail..sometimes not on my timetable..but it will prevail..eventually!

No one quit. Not Dennis, not DUers, not Obama, not the AFL-CIO. We're all continuing the fight.

Some of us think no bill is much better than a bill without a strong public option, though. DK is one of those. So am I. And, for some of us, a stong public option is even the be all and end all of our support for Democrats. DK is not in that group. I might be. Not sure yet.

Do I think we'll get a public option or no bill at all? As things stand this second, I am not optimistic. I think we are going to get an insurance industry payday bill, with very little for patients. Could things that happened today and tomorrow and henceforth change that? Yes.

Meanwhile, no one quit.

Get involved sooner, to have influence on choosing candidates for primaries. Join your state party and be active in it, if that is not already the case. Then campaign hard for your favorite primary candidate.

If you don't see yourself doing that, then write in your candidates. Maybe even campaign beforehand for others to do the same.

In my mind, that sends a clearer message than staying home. Remember Perot's campaign about spending and the budget deficit? He made an unexpectedly large showing. Guess what Bill's priority was after he got into office? (Well, besides getting re-elected, that is.) So, people who voted for Perot did not just waste their vote. They sent a message.

Not voting could mean anything, including that you had the sniffles.

He has proved himself to be a liar and a corporate shill.

I want a Kucinich/Edwards ticket in 2012. Obama will not be re-nominated.

What can he deliver on? Absolutely nothing.

Why? Because he refuses to be honest with the American people.

He is refusing to admit that forcing poor Americans into subsidized private health insurance will cost too much, be very unpopular among those who have to pay for it and is going to promote the popularity of Ron Paul.

Obama is not just letting us liberals down. He is letting every sane person in America down. He does not understand that to be a leader, you sometimes have to do things that open you to criticism from the rich and powerful. This is a matter of integrity. Apparently Obama does not have it. He is willing to trade long-term value for short-term compromise. This will not work, and it is one man's fault: Obama.

Obama refused to listen to John Edwards who said that you cannot negotiate with the health insurance companies. Say what you want about John Edwards. He was right on this point as he was right about the fundamental cause of our economic decline: "free" trade that is "free" only for capital and that simply allows capital to be "freely" taken out of the American economy and deposited in the economies of countries where living standards and labor are cheaper.

Obama's health care reform will result in a backlash against liberals that we will pay for dearly. You think the nut carrying a gun to the presidential town hall was a crazy exception. Think again. We cannot afford to pay for private health care insurance for virtually every American. We need single payer or a public plan.

This is far more disastrous than DUers realize -- far more.

You are going to get flamed, but try to consider it a mark of integrity. You told the truth and sometimes you have to pay for that.

Too bad our Democrats don't understand that, other than Kucinich and a few others.

Trust me on that one. I'm tiny and old, and if I have reason and truth and right on my side, I'll take on anybody. The only things (besides my spiritual life) that I am more dedicated to are being willing to change my mind if I am wrong and non-violence.

:rofl:

So keep laughing.

Good judgement. He has none.

who have been forgiven and their sins forgotten. But then, they shill for the corporate right. Guess that makes it OK. Only Edwards who does not shill for them, who fought them in his work as an attorney, cannot be forgiven. As for judgment, where is the judgment of a man who promised his wife he would quite smoking and then cheated on that promise? We are all human.

Edwards was right on healthcare. We need a public option. I would prefer Kucinich's single payer plan, but I know that cannot happen right away. Obama promised us Edwards' plan, but now is reneging on his promise. Better no health care "reform" than a health care giveaway to the greedy health care insurance corporations. I would not mind if they actually just gave the money to doctors, hospitals, etc. But they use money paid for health care to build themselves a fiefdom way beyond the dreams of medieval kings. What a horrible bunch. It's one thing to become filthy rich on producing cars or even pumping gasoline. At least you are taking a risk that means something. But enriching yourselves by denying health care to people -- that is the bottom of the pit from a moral point of view.

if we had. McCain/Gimmick would be doing such a bang up job on all fronts right about now. :sarcasm:

So, if we're not getting a public option and "reform" is going to be based on exclusively for-profit solutions, how is that better than what we would have under McSame?

we don't know what we will be getting because nothing has been finalized yet. Congress is on break and as far as I know they haven't come back to draft any final bills.

I don't know what the final bill will look like and will reserve judgment until one comes out. Until then, everything is just speculation.

Bushco,

followed Bushco's lead in every important court case,

be talking transparency while denying every important FOIA request,

be Palin around with, and pandering to, evangelicals,

be doing nothing about DOMA and DADT except saying it was up to Congress, while getting Gates and the Pentagon to say the military is not ready yet,

be keeping GITMO open]

Be still at war in the Middle East, especially in Afghanistan and escalating

On the bright side,

he'd probably be treating sick troops and vets better than Bush did

he might not be still torturing in Bagram since he was tortured himsef

And have no health care plan at all, rather than one that would provide a huge bonanza for insuers.

Of course, he's not as photogenic or as popular as Obama.

:rofl:

And disappeared.

Tell us something we didn't already know about you

:eyes:

Other than that your post, JDP, is unfortunately factual.

"We" supposedly own the Nation and deserve no less than what is standard in modern industrial societies as far as medical care and social safety nets.

So unfortunate about Edwards as Edward's rhetoric most adequately addressed the economy and social (and rural) issues.

DLC-oriented Democrats are not adverse to military adventurism, but war is negative for the vast majority of people and a waste of resources, time, lives, trust, and good will among nations.

We worry about a health care farce while military adventures are accelerated in Pakistan, Africa, and Latin/South America and ignored in the media. People carry weapons to political events while not many years ago there were enclosures for peaceful protesters of barbaric actions based upon lies. Lots of cognitive dissonance.

Fair and efficient health care is a simple fix: more and cheap med and associated schools, more doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals, personal and local health care, and Universal low cost health care with private options for those elite individuals and those medical professionals to make big bucks after paying their social debt for merit-based, cheap, and expanded opportunities for health education.

Not the same thing.

"Why didn't we fight to elect this man President? Why did we allow the media and the tyranny of public opinion to successfully label him "unelectable" and make our choices for us? Maybe it's true that he could not have won, but shouldn't we have fought for him anyway? Fought for ourselves? "

Because you would be attacked as "spoilers."

There would have to be something to "spoil." No public option means "reform" is a farce. So is "change we can believe in," at least in this case.

I don't have a problem spoiling baloney.

we've been Oscar Mayered.

He's a quitter and a complainer, and if he doesn't get his way he sabotages others who are trying to come up with solutions.

He gets on my nerves.

I'm not pleased with this move, there's not a good thing about it.
If he really cares he could be out there like Weiner, but apparently he's not up to it.

I am so sick of the DK worshipers who think there is no more perfect politician. There are other good ones who are far better politicians and leaders.

In this instance.

he seems to be succeeding.

He has devolved into a quitter and a whiner, just like Palin. Pathetic.

to keep fighing for the public option; i.e., the opposite of quitting. He was motivating and educating his peeps.

Please see also Reply 253.

It does have a public option in it.

It also regulates private insurance. Their minimum benefits offered, their loss ratio, no preexisting conditions and other issues would fall under a government panel's regulation.

This fight is just getting warmed up, which is why the big announcement about the nuclear option tonight.

We won't know what the outcome of this game is until the end of Sept at the earliest I think.

conditions, they are talking about dropping that, too. They've already dropped end of life counseling. Before that, they dropped single payer. Things are not going in the direction of the taxpayer, but the insurance companies will get aaabout 50 million new customers, just for starters, at taxpayer expense.