posted by Betsmeier
I keeping asking that if we all know what’s going on then why are some of the Democrats falling into a trap of believing the Republicans, or is it just a matter of campaign funds. I don’t know which but I think it’s time that the public lets the Dems know that we want the Public Option. No more playing games with the Republicans, they are doing nothing but delay, delay, delay.
Sept. 24, 2009 | “I can’t tell you how many foreign leaders who are heads of center-right governments say to me, I don’t understand why people would call you socialist. In my country, you’d be considered a conservative.” — President Obama, Sept. 20, 2009
There have always been two basic arguments for health insurance reform: one based in morality, the other self-interest. For a documented 45,000 persons to die prematurely in America each year because they can’t afford proper care is a national disgrace. Almost everybody apart from “conservatives” whose moral imagination is limited to judging other people’s sex lives understands that.
The current cruel, wasteful system is indefensible. Surely that’s why almost three-quarters of physicians polled by the New England Journal of Medicine favor genuine reform. About 63 percent of doctors surveyed nationwide support a public option; 10 percent would prefer a single-payer system, basically Medicare for everybody.
For all the hullabaloo, it appears alarmist rhetoric hasn’t scared ordinary people as much as it has cable TV anchors. A Bloomberg poll asked which right-wing objections people found legitimate, and which were “scare tactics.” Basically, voters rejected GOP rhetoric almost 2-to-1. About 63 percent think Sarah Palin’s “death panels” are a distortion, versus 30 percent who fear them. It’s 61 to 33 percent on the claim that health reform means government-paid abortions, 58 to 37 percent on the false claim that illegal aliens will get subsidized insurance, etc.
posted by Betsmeier
This is a feel good story. But the first part of it is a sad story. The player that made the noble gestures shows us that our teenagers are still good kids. I just thought that this was a good story to post because it’s such an unselfish story. Okay, so they were way ahead, still it shows the kind of kids that we have today.
Thamail Morgan took the kickoff and headed up the field.
He was at the 20 … 30 … 40
He had been avoiding, dodging or just simply running through tacklers on the way. Football always had come easily for Morgan. This game was no different. By the time he hit midfield, only open space was ahead of him. The two-time Arkansas all-state selection was headed for a touchdown.
40 … 30 … 20
He glanced at the clock and saw the final seconds ticking away. He realized his team, Cave City, was on the way to a victory over Yellville-Summit, comfortably ahead, 34-16. He also realized two other things: This wasn’t an ordinary game. And he wasn’t the same Thamail Morgan.
When he reached the 2, he stopped. He took a few steps back and took a knee at the 5-yard line.
posted by betsmeier
At last Orly’s client realizes that she’s being used by a crazy person. It certainly took her long enough. But the way I read it, she did originally try and get out of going to Iraq because she didn’t believe that Obama was born in the US. Now she’s upset because Orly filed a stay on her behalf. Oh the soap opera continues. 🙂
Bad news for Orly Taitz, the indefatigable birther attorney. On September 17, she filed a motion of consideration on behalf of her client Capt. Connie Rhodes, asking for her deployment to be delayed. It was, typically for Taitz, overheated and incoherent: “[T]his court ignores some of the soundest and most carefully researched and professionally assembled and presented evidence, collated and substantiated by a former agent of England’s Fabled ‘Scotland Yard.’”
Taitz’s motion was dismissed in an exasperated decision by Judge Clay Land that should definitely be read in full–I’ve provided an excerpt after the jump. (Erick Erickson of RedState is a fan of the dismissal.)
But the twist today comes from Capt. Rhodes herself. She has sent a letter to Judge Clay Land, blasting Taitz for filing the motion to stay her deployment without even asking her.
posted by betsmeier
I think this article written by Bob Herbert says it much better then Jimmy Carter said it. As he said, who needed Jimmy Carter to remind us that racism still exists.
Did we really need Jimmy Carter to tell us that racism is one of the driving forces behind the relentless and often scurrilous attacks on President Obama? We didn’t know that? As John McEnroe might say, “You can’t be serious.”
“There is an inherent feeling among many in this country that an African-American should not be president,” said Mr. Carter. I guess he was aiming his remarks at those who contended when Mr. Obama was elected that we had achieved some Pollyannaish postracial society. But it’s hard to imagine, after all the madness and vitriol of the past few months, that anyone still believes that.
read more here
posted by BetsMeier
I must say that this article is very interesting and of course to my liking. But what he has to say about the demographics really makes a lot of sense. It also makes sense when he mentions that conservative parents didn’t want their children to see the President speak about education because “young Americans” strongly support the President.
Author, blogger, and community activist
You sort of knew it was coming, right? The media talking heads are dusting off the 1994 playbook. You remember the story quite well: a young president and his party are soundly defeated in the midterm elections. It really sounds good, but it ain’t gonna happen this time.
It’s hard for many people to believe this when many pundits are salivating over the remote possibility that the wheels will come off President Obama’s ambitious agenda. Yes, some of the talking heads are hoping for an Obama implosion and for the Republicans to take back control of congress to create the drama and intrigue of divided government. But I just don’t believe it’s in the cards.
Read more@ Huffpost
posted by betsam37
With everything that has been transpiring in the United States these days, I thought this was an excellent article to post. A friend of mine who lives in SLC emailed it to me today:.
By Leonard Pitts Jr.
The Miami Herald
I don’t know about anyone else, but I believe that there needs to be a bill written that it will be against the law to carry any sort of firearm anywhere near where the President will be speaking, or even anywhere near where he’s going to be. I don’t care if the state law there says they can carry an unconcealed weapon. Good grief, we’ve had one President assassinated, his brother a Senator, MLK the great civil rights leader, and even President Reagan was shot. My thought is “what is this world coming to.”
I don’t know who coined the term “culture war” to describe our political divisions, but I’m reasonably sure he or she intended it only as a figure of speech.
It feels like something else in light of a new report from the Intelligence Project of the Southern Poverty Law Center, which monitors extremist groups. “Terror From the Right” is a listing of bombers, killers, would-be assassins and insurrectionists motivated by anger over abortion, gays, taxes, blacks, Muslims and illegal immigrants.
Which raises an obvious question: What about terror from the left? The SPLC’s Mark Potok says left-wing terror essentially means eco-terrorists, e.g., animal rights extremists. The death toll from their work, he says, is zero.
By contrast, Timothy McVeigh killed 168 people because he was angry at the government, brothers Matthew and Tyler Williams shot two men to death for being gay, James Kopp killed Dr. Barnett Slepian for being an abortion provider, and dozens of other men have been indicted for dozens of other plots to kill thousands of other people with whom they had political disagreements.
read article: Here
posted by BetsMeier
I couldn’t help myself people. Palin has every right to write an op-ed, and WSJ has every right to print it. But I don’t think she gets it, once a lie, always a lie.
from Marc Ambinder, Atlantic Monthly
But Palin’s existence in this debate does not (a) lend her voice any credibility and, beyond that, even if you believe that her experience as a state governor does give her at least a modicum of credibility, it does not follow that, because her voice is credible, it ought to be influential. Newt Gingrich is influential by rights; he’s done the work, come up with original ideas, and been in the trenches. (Replacing Medicare with vouchers…not new or remotely plausible, even if GOPers do well in the next two elections. Quoting Ronald Reagan talking about that type of proposal…not new. Etc.)
The media — by which I mean the cable news networks, primarily — will determine whether Palin’s view on health care becomes influential. There are many Republican, conservative health care spokespeople who have earned the right to speak for their party’s principals, and, truth be told, can recite the talking points (complete with Ronald Reagan quote) better than Palin and her writer can. They’re the ones who should be offended if Palin’s op-ed becomes the voice of the opposition tomorrow, because Palin isn’t seen by most Americans as a particularly trenchent analyst of policy. Indeed, the reason why Palin’s team wants to get her pieces in publications like the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal is that, in this next phase of her political career, Mrs. Palin has to burnish her policy skills. And the Journal is all too willing to lend some space to this project, because plenty of people will see the piece.
read the article here