Goodness, gracious! I got an email from Tim Kaine, who is falling all over himself with delight:
Chatblu-
We did it. With House passage of health reform last weekend, we took a huge step toward providing affordable options to those without insurance, providing greater security for those who are already covered, and reducing costs for families and small businesses.
There have been many attempts in the last nearly 100 years, but Saturday’s vote was the first time a chamber of Congress succeeded in passing comprehensive health reform. As President Obama wrote after the vote, “This is history.”
But now we need to keep the pressure on — and one of the best ways to show our support is to fill local newspapers across the country with letters about why we need reform now.
Take a few minutes to write a letter to the editor in support of health reform.
Your letter can tell a personal story about why health reform matters to you and your family, or explain how important it is that our representatives stand with their constituents and not the special interests.
After the House vote, there are three big steps left, and it’s going to be a fight the whole way. Soon, the Senate will vote on its version of the bill, then there will be a round of negotiations to combine the two versions, and finally, each chamber will take a final vote.
It’s going to be an uphill battle, but my experiences as governor have taught me that moments like this weekend’s vote serve to motivate and spark action. When one chamber takes the first step, it encourages the other to quickly follow suit.
This is among the most critical issues facing our country today. I’m sure that years from now, we’ll all look back on this as one of the most important fights of our life.
Let’s make sure we give everything we can to keep the pressure on and win this thing:
Anything less than delirious with joy is simply unacceptable to Governor Kaine. In fact, however, the whole damned thing is unacceptable. I agree with both the Governor and the President: this is history, but they seem to feel that it’s in the sense of a historic benchmark, while I tend to believe that it is a return to the 1960’s. (Not that the 60’s were entirely bad –just the part about backstreet and do-it-yourself abortions.)
Of all the crap that’s wrong with the House Bill (including of course, chatblu’s immortal “Pap Smear Through The Ear”), I would say this is about dead last on my list of concerns.
A provision in the House health-care bill sets up a stark choice for Democrats between the interests of younger voters and older ones.
The bill would limit how much insurers can vary premiums based on the age of the person buying the policy. The narrower the range, the lower the premiums for older people, a help to those who currently pay some of the highest rates for insurance and often need coverage the most. But such a limitation tends to raise premiums for younger folks, who are sometimes reluctant to buy coverage.
OH NOES!!!!!!!
Still, a calculator on the Kaiser Family Foundation Web site gives a rough sense. It suggests that under the House’s 2-to-1 cap, a 20-year-old would pay $3,169 in annual premiums and a 60-year-old would pay $6,339 for comparable plans, if they both had incomes above the subsidy-eligible level.
OMG!!! Gawd forbid that a person who has been working his/her entire life should get a fucking break on their insurance. And gawd forbid that a 20-year-old who “doesn’t want to” should buy health insurance. As we know, adults never ever have to pay for things they don’t want to. (insert eyeroll here) And really, as if they’re not on their parent’s insurance anyway! Stop with the generational warfare and go endorse another TARP, Wall Street Journal.
“I laid out a very simple principle, which is this is a health care bill, not an abortion bill,” Obama said. “And we’re not looking to change what is the principle that has been in place for a very long time, which is federal dollars are not used to subsidize abortions.”
Saying the bill cannot change the status quo regarding the ban on federally funded abortions, the president said, “There are strong feelings on both sides” about an amendment passed Saturday and added to the legislation, “and what that tells me is that there needs to be some more work before we get to the point where we’re not changing the status quo.”
Perhaps it’s me, but I can’t figure out from his statement what exactly needs to change about this bill. Sounds like the language in the Stupak Amendment is just about perfect for our “radical pro-abortion” President. And yes, we could very well change the status if he would just sign FOCA, the way he promised Planned Parenthood all the way back in July of 2008. But he won’t, because he is the candidate – and President – of Chump Change.
Back in 1962, the BBC launched “That Was the Week That Was”, a lampooning comedy hosted by David Frost. TW3, as it was known, pulled no punches and had no compunctions about tackling politicians, or any other facet of society. An American version ran briefly a few years later. It was hilarious.
The first week of November, 2009, was our week that was. However, it was anything but funny. Yet, it also assaulted politicians and American society. On Monday, a prominent local attorney and fundraiser was indicted for crimes ranging from influence peddling to public corruption. Sadly, there has been quite a herd of public officials ranging from school board members to county commissioners indicted of late, along with a prominent ophthalmologist. Broward County is no stranger to any of this, but some of the people involved were borderline shocking.
Tuesday’s limited elections found the Democrats blown out in Virginia, losing a close race in New Jersey, and bagging a New York Congressional seat that they lost well over 100 years ago. The race for New York mayor was far closer than anyone could have foreseen. Both political parties spent the next several days rejoicing in their wins, while explaining away their losses. Few noticed, or admitted that they noticed, the anti-incumbent mood afoot. Explanations and rationalization continued non-stop on every news channel on Wednesday.
Oh my goodness. What a week, Widdershins, what a week!
The House Bill was endorsed by a bunch of uptight guys in dresses. Whoop-de-doo! And this means exactly what? Why should a bunch of government officials care about what religious figures say? In what universe is this supposed to be relevant?
I’m a big believer in the separation of church and state. I am a big believer in our constitutional structure. I’m a law professor at the University of Chicago teaching constitutional law.
Source: Chicago Sun-Times, “I have a deep faith” Apr 5, 2004
May I ask a screamingly obvious question?
Why are women supposed to vote for Democrats again?
Today’s email includes a plea from Terry O’Neill, the President of NOW, to pretty, pretty please contact my representative to vote for HR 3962, AKA “The Affordable Health Care for America Bill”. She freely admits that this bill is far from our wildest dreams, but insists that this is probably the best that we are going to do at this point in time. Terry states that Nancy Pelosi is certain that this “compromise” bill will cover 96% of the American public, which is great unless you happen to fall into the 4% that is excluded. Call me crazy, but I had always thought that Congress represents everyone – silly me!
HR 3962 will, she states, curb insurances abuses, provide insurance reforms, cover “a majority” of citizens, provide subsidies to low “and some” moderate income people, assure that at least one plan will cover termination of pregnancy, and contains the essentials of a public health plan. “Much needed repairs” to the health care system are contained in this bill.
So here we go, Widdershins. The true gem of the NOW email is this: “NOW is committed to working on a better public health insurance plan, and eventually (emphasis mine), to see states adapt the much more affordable and comprehensive single payer plans.” Eventually? Sweet jumpin’ Jayzus on a carousel, Terry. We’ve only been at this since the Roosevelt administration. When the hell is eventually? Call me crazy, but I sort of think the time has come.
House Democratic leaders struggled Wednesday to strike a deal that would restrict the use of federal money to pay for abortions under sweeping health care legislation headed for debate on the House floor this week.
(snip)
The House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, a supporter of abortion rights, has little choice but to heed the concerns of members of her caucus who oppose abortion. As many as 40 House Democrats, a potentially decisive bloc, have threatened to oppose the bill without tighter restrictions on abortion.
Over all, the House bill would provide coverage to 36 million people at a cost of $1.1 trillion over 10 years.
(snip)
The Congressional Research Service said recently that money received by the government insurance plan, including premiums, “may be classified as federal funds or government funds.”
But in a memorandum analyzing the House bill, Prof. Laurence H. Tribe of Harvard took issue with that conclusion, which he described as “an exercise in sophistry.”
Under the House bill, he said, abortion services could be financed “only by special private premiums that are segregated” from other money. Thus, he concluded, the House bill, “as it currently stands, does not authorize governmental funding of abortion.”
My husband, who is usually quite well-informed, just asked me if this was the Republican plan, and I don’t blame him! Does this SOUND like something real Democrats would ever come up with in a million years? This, my friends, is the result of Obama and his faith-based initiative to woo the fundiegelicals over to our side. This is where his campaign and his strategy has taken us. This is where Nancy Pelosi is now, being held hostage by a bunch of 40 misogynist freaks in the House, and you know what, it’s her fault for supporting Obama and supposedly claiming that he was “God’s gift.” Yeah, Nancy? Ya think he’s God’s gift now? Do ya, punk?
Recently, I watched David Gregory interview Secretary of the Treasury Tim Geithner on Meet The Press. Gregory became incredulous as Geithner explained that large financial institutions needed to take more risks. WTF??? Did we not just bail them out of a similar situation?? I know that my memory is not what it once was, but it seems that we really did take innumerable billions out of the taxpayers’ – past, present and future- collective pockets in order to remedy the fallout from such behavior.
Barney Frank had introduced some legislation that would seemingly ameliorate the situation, but apparently it has more holes than a colander and would not affect the most egregious of the offenders one iota, as it would permit any number of secret deals that would seemingly not be in favor of the general population. Dylan Ratigan posted a rant on Huffington Post that he continued on “Morning Meeting,” in which he stated unequivocally that Turbo Tax Tim must go. What really got his attention was Geithner’s assertion that if unlimited pay and bonuses are curtailed, the taxpayer will never get their money back. Hmmm, let’s see……unlimited money and secret deals is giving me an uncomfortable sense of déjà vu.
Even Alan Greenspan recently admitted that TBTF concerns should be broken into smaller groups, and that the economy could not tolerate another similar upheaval. Thanks, Big Al, even if you are a number of days and an incredible number of billions of dollars short in this particular calculation.
Ratigan further asserts that the administration is at a point where they no longer deserve the benefit of the doubt, and I agree. The time has come to cut our losses, and stop throwing good trillions after bad. Geithner is in this up to his neck, and his ultra-fragile credibility is a thing of the past. If the average person has any hope whatsoever of seeing a light at the end of the tunnel, it’s time for Tim to go. If he continues with his plan, the only light any average American will see is that of an oncoming train.
As I write this, the Republicans have swept the Virginia elections for Governor, Lieutenant Governor and Attorney General. The pundits are falling over themselves talking about how Obama is reacting (or not reacting) to the results, and whether it is, or isn’t, a reflection on Obama’s Presidency. Meanwhile, Republican Chris Christie is ahead in the race for Governor in New Jersey, and the race for New York Mayor is tight. Heavy turnout in Maine augurs well for same-sex marriage rights.
I don’t know what happened last night after I wrote this post, but whatever it was, it’s bound to be dissected and discussed by everyone who opinionates on politics. So why should we be any different, Widdershins? What do you all think about last night’s developments?
This is an open thread. (Because of last night’s elections, we’ll combine Action Wednesday with Feminism Friday this week.)
It’s Election Day, folks, and some very interesting things indeed are happening on the East Coast, with enough drama to give “One Life to Live” a run for its money. Truth is, indeed, stranger than fiction.
First, there is the Virginia Governor’s race. Virginia has always been fairly conservative, but it went bright blue in 2008, with two Democratic Senators, a Democratic Governor and its precious electoral votes going to Obama. Unfortunately for Virginia Democrats (including my relatives!), it looks like ol’ Virginny might be returning to a more reddish hue.
What seems to be of particular interest to CBS is the question of whether Creigh Deeds, the Democrat, can win the same voters Obama did in 2008, or even that former Democratic Governor Tim Kaine did in 2005. To me, these are the wrong questions. The question is not whether the youngsters and African-Americans will show up. (I am quite sure that the youngsters will not.) The question is, what will happen to the Republican Party? Will it embrace a more moderate direction, the way the Party elders clearly want to do? Or will it be drawn into the howling vortex of fundigelical insanity, the way people like Sarah Palin clearly want it to be?
Nowhere is this question more pointed than the huge, eleven-county district of New York’s 23rd. On Sunday we discussed how the conservatives in the Republican Party (with Palin leading the pack) had forced Dede Scozzafava, the socially moderate Republican, to withdraw her candidacy in favor of the much more right-wing Conservative Party candidate, Douglas Hoffman. Since Scozzafava was endorsed by all the Party bigwigs, including Newt Gingrich, KKKarl Rove and the full might and money of the RNC, this was a huge victory for the wingnuts. In a hilarious development, Scozzafava sent a big “fuck you” to Palin & Co. by endorsing the Democrat, Bill Owens. Dede, girl, you’ve got ovaries!
Of course, there’s the mayoral race in New York City, where we have the choice between that whiny-voiced, plutocratic, ideologically non-existent, billionaire schlub, current Mayor Michael Bloomberg (“I”), and City Comptroller Bill Thompson (D), who has barely blipped on our collective radar after 8 years in office. What’s very strange is that Bloomberg has switched Parties so often, he’s given up and become an Independent. So, technically, there is no mainstream Republican in the race – and if there were, he/she would be a third party.
Thompson was endorsed by Obama, and Bloomberg, by Giuliani. Oy vey is mir! I do wish Anthony Weiner had run – he really might have had a shot this time, because let me tell you, these two candidates are beyond uninspiring. Besides, Anthony is funny! Remember when the Republicans tried to sneak the phraseology “the Democrat Party” into the lexicon? This was his response:
Madam Secretary of State has concluded a three day trip to Pakistan, where she made a number of statements characterized by the media as “unusually blunt”. Actually, she was pretty gracious the first day; it went downhill thereafter.
The Pakistani government protested our drone strikes as unconscionable, and our use of Marines to protect the embassy as illegal. She was unmoved. She then advised a group of Pakistani journalists that she finds it “hard to believe” that no one in either the government or the military knows the whereabouts of Al Qaeda, which, she correctly stated, has enjoyed sanctuary in Pakistan since 2002. She left the journalists in quite a snit, as they appear to be certain that their actions against the Taliban should overshadow their lack of action against Al Qaeda. Go figure.
She further discussed the inactivity regarding Al Qaeda with students at the Government College University in Lahore. She raised issues concerning the Interservices Intelligence Agency, which has been rumored to support militia groups within the Pakistan borders, and advised the students that there was a consensus of opinions among a number of nations that the military security establishment was being overly cooperative with militia leaders.
