Dems are struggling mightily for a solution to the hobbling of the Hobby Lobby decision

[stupidicus]

why get all complicated when single-payer will do, won't it?

Why not let the law of unintended CONsequences prevail before Mr. Murphy enters again from stage right with more religion based bondage in mind?

Oh that's right, they are hobbled by that "politically possible" thing. That's why, unlike with the unrealistic goals of rightwingers --like a Ryan budget -- they generally start from a less demanding position, you know, the way it was ignored in the last health care reform battle.

And as we can see, the country is now barely hanging on in the wake of that economy, etc, destroying Obamacare being implemented, and the rightwing swamis are feeling bold, authoritative, and even more uncompromising in the wake of their succesful predictions as the loving and empathetic stewards of the general welfare of we citizens that they've always been.

never mind

[JustAnotherGen]

1. I like your ideas and tone

But there's one ace in the hole that around DU is considered one of the 'bad guys'.

Big Pharma.

And they might be able to influence some races.

SCOTUS just attacked a line of revenue for them . . .

[stupidicus]

3. good point

and a fine example of how politics can result in some strange bedfellows

[woo me with science]

2. "unlike with the unrealistic goals of rightwingers --like a Ryan budget"

I see what you did there.

Unfortunately, this is just too much honesty for DU today.

K&R

[stupidicus]

4. well my friend

as I've witnessed you experiencing many times now, most days are bad days for the wrong kinda truths.

From the enactment of the ACA I've told rightwingers they should really sit down and shut up about it because single-payer is the likely next stop. I can't help but think that their efforts like this make that more likely.

[JustAnotherGen]

5. Thank you

http://www.democraticunderground.com/125546317

I might be out of my brilliant mind . . .

[stupidicus]

6. no way

people are gonna have to start wearing sunglasses around you...lol

I'm inclined to think that this won't be the last example of the business and religious/socially conservative wings butting heads over their respective interests, and imo you're entirely correct that seeking their help in ending this kinda stuff will be far, far more productive than appealing to those who greased the slippery slope so many and so much could well now be on as a result of this ruling.

[MohRokTah]

7. Non-starter.

Tell me, how do you get single payer through a GOP controlled House?

You are not realistic in your expectations, and you blame the Democrats when the minority party in the House can do absolutely nothing.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

8. As long as we're doing a post mortem on political realities

Why was the BC mandate even put forward while a conservative majority sits at the USSC?

Nevermind the fact it's not a law but merely a bureaucratic policy that can be dropped at a moment's notice. The whole thing was never thought through.

[stupidicus]

9. wrong question

and I'd think obviously answered with the "politically possible" remark and that associated with it.

The real question is how it is ever "started" as long as the so-called "liberals" in DC hide from/are silent about it as their alleged "liberalness"?

Why are my "expectations" unrealistic, when for example, Boner is suing Obama to hopefully quell the rightwing base "expectation" of impeachment?

My only "expectation" is that they fight for it, which requires mentioning it as a solution for contemplation to the problems posed by the HL decision, and more -- like the millions that will remain uninsured despite the existence of the ACA and the numbers that will have insurance because of it -- for "starters".

If you think it is "unreasonable" of me to "expect" them to fight for what a majority of their supporters want, and indeed, the country wanted http://www.healthcare-now.org/another-poll-shows-majority-support-for-single-payer http://www.medicareforall.org/pages/Chart_of_Americans_Support and the dem base likely still wants, well, perhaps maybe you should contemplate your reasoning on the matter.

Of course it's a "non-starter" when those you help elect are opposed to it as well. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-zuesse/hillary-clinton-likes-oba_b_4881399.html

Maybe you're CONfused, but I ain't. "Unrealistic" in this case would be defined as wanting or expecting it, but supporting someone like her that doesn't.