Note to self: Don't drink out of the DU punchbowl today.

[mac56]

People are lining up to pee in it.

Man, I don't believe this place some days. This is an excellent, amazing victory for our side!

Some people are not happy unless they're not happy. Just sayin'

[hlthe2b]

1. Yes.. but nonetheless..

this is a victory that came from making lemonade from lemons. That said, I'll take it, hope to hell we can get a majority back in Congress and Obama reelected and work to improve the health care initiative with either medicare for all or some kind of public option.

[mac56]

2. For one day, just enjoy the lemonade!

[hlthe2b]

6. I shall...n/t

[lamp_shade]

3. I only spotted a couple. I must have the rest on ignore.

[Uncle Joe]

4. It all depends on your perspective one person's lemonade is another's Trojan Horse.

Thanks for the thread, mac.

[mfcorey1]

5. Amen!!!!!!

[Pab Sungenis]

7. I'm not happy the mandate was upheld

but I'm happy that the law as it is stays. And happy about the way Roberts worded the decision on the mandate, which puts the mechanism for Single Payer in place.

[TBF]

29. Agree, Roberts was a surprise on this and I'm ok with it -

it has taken us decades to get this far and it means kids are covered through age 26 - that is awesome. Now, we keep working to get to universal health care.

[nineteen50]

31. You were surprised a corporatist would vote to keep corporate pork in place?

[TBF]

36. Of course - this opens the door to further reform.

I suspected Kennedy would be with the majority rather than Roberts.

[Blanks]

62. How is this corporate pork again?

The 'fine/tax' goes to the government.

[ieoeja]

30. Actually, Roberts specifically stated that the Mandate was unconstitutional.

He then went on to point out that a 1% tax to assist in providing people health care insurance is perfectly valid. As is an exemption from that tax for people who purchase coverage.

[vi5]

8. People can be stupid sometimes.

I didn't like the ACA. I think it was the wrong approach and I think it was not sold as it should have been by it's main proponents.

But it helps me, it helps my son and I'm not so shortsighted as to not see how we'd be worse off as a country if it were thrown out.

Of course there's still nothing to stop it from being overturned the next time there is a Republican congress and a Republican president, which can possibly be sooner than we think or would like.

[MadHound]

9. You know, this isn't about "our side" or "their side",

It is about helping the American people.

Just because Obama and the Democrats took a policy originating with Nixon, supported by Bush I, Romney and others of their ilk, backed by the Heritage Foundation and made it their own, doesn't make it a good policy for the American people.

Rather, forcing a mandated monopoly for the insurance industry, and establishing the precedent that the government can force individuals to purchase a product that they need, or not, from a for profit corporation, that isn't a victory for the American people, that's a huge loss.

[mac56]

10. Thanks, Eeyore.

[MadHound]

11. Sorry, that's the truth,

If you can't handle the truth, that's your problem.

[KurtNYC]

15. and to people with pre-existing conditions you say what?

Pro-abortion and against slavery used to be Republican positions too -- are you sorry they "won" on those?

[Odin2005]

16. You apparently do not understand the meaning of "monopoly" or "force".

[Ikonoklast]

19. I am mandated by force to purchase nothing from a monopoly of hundreds of competing providers.

Is that about right?

[bvar22]

53. With an Anti Trust exemption,

...and less than 5 "players",
he understands "monopoly" better than you do.
Do you really believe that these players are going to compete with each other
on "The Exchange"?

You won't find any deals on The Exchange.
The prices are being set, and the policies Xeroxed as we speak.
The Players will divide up those Americans herded into the Exchange Pens
and begin Shearing of the Working Class of the few dollars these already struggling Americans have in their near empty pockets.

The REAL Perfect Storm will develop when these 40 - 70 MILLION (estimated # or Uninsured by 2014)
try to convert their "Bronze" insurance policies into actual Health Care.

[randome]

25. But you do think it's a bad policy because of how it evolved.

Otherwise, why keep repeating its origins? I thought we wanted Republicans to stand up for what's right no matter where the idea came from.

ACA may not be the Utopian paradise you wanted but hey, it's an imperfect world.

[NNN0LHI]

12. DU has had Larouchies, Paul crazies and Nader nuts posting here from its inception

Just need to learn how to distinguish the Democrats from the whack jobs.

Don

[mac56]

14. Can't tell the players without a scorecard!

[NNN0LHI]

18. When you see someone about my age(57) post here that they didn't really get involved in politics ...

.... until some time after George W. Bush stole the 2000 election that is very telling.

Whenever I see someone post that my Reaganite detecting antenna goes straight up.

Don

[Ikonoklast]

20. No Sex Threads, Don.

[NNN0LHI]

21. Now that is a DUZY

I never recommended a post for that before.



Don

[freshwest]

59. +1

[Luminous Animal]

26. What do you call anti-abortion Democrats? There are plenty of those on this board and I don't

see people calling them fundies, teabaggers, & Paul crazies.

And how about the anti-union Democrats on this board? What kind of dismissive names do you have for them?

[Zalatix]

33. Anti-abortion Democrats? Isn't that an instant PPR?

[Luminous Animal]

42. No.

[Tarheel_Dem]

69. NAILED! IT!

[Tarheel_Dem]

13. But you assume that everyone here is on "our side". Big mistake.

[dionysus]

63. why that little yellow feller squintin at me? that looks like... fightin woids!

PUT UP YER DUKES!11111

[Tarheel_Dem]

65. No dion, we can't fight. Didn't you know we're "a pack"?

[dionysus]

67. yeah, grabbin ice cream cones from little kid's hands licking them, and throwin em into mud puddles!

[Tarheel_Dem]

68. You big ol' bully enabler you!

[dionysus]

70. that's how the hive\swarm\pack rolls....

[Tarheel_Dem]

74. Bzzzz.....

[AngryOldDem]

17. Not surprised.

There will always be those who will see the cloud in the silver lining.

All I know is, someone who is very dear to me will benefit from the upholding of this law. Seriously -- I couldn't give a fuck about what the naysayers **think** may happen somewhere down the road.

[treestar]

22. No kidding!

Doesn't matter what happens, the doom and gloom brigade finds a way to piss and moan over it!

[whatchamacallit]

23. If you're smart you'll avoid DU Kool-Aid as well (nt)

[Tarheel_Dem]

71. Why? You didn't. You just drink a different flavor. Just sayin'

[whatchamacallit]

77. A small sip perhaps

Last edited Fri Jun 29, 2012, 03:34 PM - Edit history (1)

I don't yet have a fully formed opinion of the ACA. If it plays out as advocates assume it will, it'll be a great achievement for the Obama Administration and a boon to the American People. If.
I do have serious reservations about the mandate, especially without price controls. I'm just not ready to join the Glorious Victory Parade.

[Tarheel_Dem]

78. I'm sorry, but downers like you make me ill (metaphorically) when I consider real people like this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002872673

You do more harm than good, and I'm not sure what the point is.

[whatchamacallit]

80. Well if that's fair

I guess it's fair to say people like you who blindly support the president and his policies, do more harm than good when it comes to saving the lives of innocent men, women, and children in our wars of opportunity. See how that game works?

[Tarheel_Dem]

81. I supported, and still support the Afghan mission. Never saw it as a "war of opportunity".

Iraq could definitely be described as a "war of opportunity", which I never supported, and the president got us out of it. Yippee!

If I'm a "blind supporter", of the "Democratic" President, on a site devoted to "electing Democrats", then sobeit. None of that third party/republican/libertarian idiocy for me. How 'bout you? Why are you here?

And just to reiterate, I'm damned proud of my "democratic" president, whose momentous legislative achievement, AKA Affordable Care Act was upheld by the highest court in the land. You're damn straight. And I'll support "democrats" like TZ and people like him/her who can't be kicked off of insurance because of a pre-existing condition.

As far as those "innocent men, women, and children" you speak of? I feel sorry for them too. Sorry that the cowardly assed people who like to blow up humvees, office buildings, and army bases like to use them as human shields, and get tools in this country to "catapult their propaganda".

[great white snark]

82. Well good for you you blind supporter you.

Thanks for keeping this good day good.

[Tarheel_Dem]

83. Thanks great white. Signed, Tarheel Dem, "blind supporter".

I don't know if I've promoted or demoted. Yesterday I was "part of a pack".

[whatchamacallit]

84. Of course...

As far as those "innocent men, women, and children" you speak of? I feel sorry for them too. Sorry that the cowardly assed people who like to blow up humvees, office buildings, and army bases like to use them as human shields, and get tools in this country to "catapult their propaganda".

Funny, my right-wing uncle has the same pathological inability to recognize any US responsibility. I can only imagine how you'd feel about Iraq if Obama had started it. How 'bout that Drone-a-Pallooza?

What am I doing here? When I first started coming to DU, it seemed democrats identified more with principles and values than party and candidates, and hadn't yet morphed into third way, republican lite, tools. If this place is supposed to be a dedicated campaign headquarters, I missed the memo.

[Tarheel_Dem]

85. As a "Democrat", when I joined DU it was because of this:

Vote for Democrats.
Winning elections is important — therefore, advocating in favor of Republican nominees or in favor of third-party spoiler candidates that could split the vote and throw an election to our conservative opponents is never permitted on Democratic Underground. But that does not mean that DU members are required to always be completely supportive of Democrats. During the ups-and-downs of politics and policy-making, it is perfectly normal to have mixed feelings about the Democratic officials we worked hard to help elect. When we are not in the heat of election season, members are permitted to post strong criticism or disappointment with our Democratic elected officials, or to express ambivalence about voting for them. In Democratic primaries, members may support whomever they choose. But when general election season begins, DU members must support Democratic nominees (EXCEPT in rare cases where were a non-Democrat is most likely to defeat the conservative alternative, or where there is no possibility of splitting the liberal vote and inadvertently throwing the election to the conservative alternative). For presidential contests, election season begins when both major-party nominees become clear. For non-presidential contests, election season begins on Labor Day. Everyone here on DU needs to work together to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of American government. If you are bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for our candidates during election season, we'll assume you are rooting for the other side.

You could start your own thing, ya know? You could call it Progressive Underground, or "PU" for short.

[SidDithers]

24. DU rec...nt

Sid

[dionysus]

72. vaht? vas you saying shumthing.. about the punchbowl.. to meeee? ....vaht?

[girl gone mad]

27. It's just not very good policy.

Therein lies the problem, imho.

[wryter2000]

28. No kidding

Reminds me of the day Beverly Sills died and someone found something negative to say about her.

[Zalatix]

32. Yeah, damn all of us for having contrary opinions to you.

Put us all on ignore like you said you put me on ignore.

[mac56]

45. Where did I ever suggest I'd put you on ignore?

And deny myself your consummate brilliance?! Puh-leeze.

[Aerows]

34. Some folks seem to piss in the punch bowl

No matter what. It was upheld, which is good news for those 26 and under, those with pre-existing conditions, and those with ... I want to say a brain in their head, but I'm sure I'll get alerted on

Fuck it. I said it anyway.

[freshwest]

60. Some people can't be happy without that litle dark cloud over their heads. And as far as not wanting

Any improvement, but perfection, or not wanting to pay... It's really not about us.

Like Obama's statement on marriage equality.. It's about doing what's right.

And it's about the future. I'm pretty much done, but I want young people to not have to declare medical bankruptcy, lose homes, jobs, so many other things that make living worthwhile.

What I've seen happen would have never happened with a system based on doing what was right instead of what made money.

That's what I want to see whenever the day comes that I leave this world - a better world. It's not just about us.

[aaaaaa5a]

35. There is a lot of money in misery.

I read an article several years ago where it showed that Rush Limbaugh's audience went up when the GOP lost. It was actually more profitable for him to have Clinton in office compared to Bush. Republicans winning was actually bad for business at the EIB network.

Plus, there are people who will NEVER BE HAPPY no matter what. And that's true regardless of politics.


Before returning to battle tomorrow, today we need to CELEBRATE. This is one historic victory. For us to look at it any other way is absurd.

[ehrnst]

37. One could say helping someone pay heating bills

Is simply helping out the coal, oil and gas industries.

Or you could say it's getting people through the winter without freezing to death while we figure out an alternative source of heat for them.

I say cover the uninsured the quickest way we can, and work on the details later.

I agree.

[progressivebydesign]

39. excellent point! n/t

[mac56]

46. +1

[Tarheel_Dem]

73. Another +1.

[progressivebydesign]

38. also staying away from the Wheaties today.

Seriously... As much as I dislike everything Republican, they do NOT eat their own. Dems/Liberals are free-thinkers, but too often get so hung up on their own self interests that they are the worst team players.

This was a victory. It was a damn victory! EVEN for those freepers whose heads are exploding on FR. They think it's bad because Fox and Rush tell them it's bad. It's good.. it's going to save BILLIONS in what we all pay for the uninsured.

[lillypaddle]

40. Well said

[zipplewrath]

41. hardly

This is a victory where the policy candidate Obama campaigned AGAINST was upheld by the supreme court.

[Ken Burch]

43. look at it this way...

If the ACA had been thrown out, that punch bowl would be filled with turds by now.

For a lot of people, this ruling brought up all the deeply conflicted feelings they had once had about the ACA...the relief that some sort of bill passed, combined with the sense(and this wasn't an isolated sense)that what remained in the bill after all the concessions may not have been worth having(that's still an open debate).

I think you have to allow for that...given how painful the healthcare debate and the dilution of the bill was for so many(a pain that was combined with the abusive "suck it up-you had no right to expect anything more than thia" tone many hardline "all that matters is passing SOMETHING" crowd took towards those who felt the ACA had been too badly weakened-a tone that, IMHO, had a lot to do with the massive decline in Democratic turnout in 2010, the decline that unfortunately gave us the Boehnerhaus and most of the other shit we've had to deal with since then).

Given that, it was only to be expected that you'd see people reacting like this today.

[AtomicKitten]

44. Those lining up with the teabaggers are showing their asses today.

[nxylas]

47. You have to wonder what they're up to, though

It could be that this SC actually voted to uphold based on legal arguments and put aside any partisan reasons. But that sounds drastically out of character. My Republican "friends" are crowing right now that they've handed the election to Romney. I don't think they're right, but maybe the Republican judges thought so too.

[mac56]

48. Handed the election to Romney?! How's that exactly?

Now he not only has to campaign against his own plan, but he has to say why he still thinks it's unConstitutional.

They're just whistling past the graveyard.

[nxylas]

61. In the rightwingoverse, everybody hates universal healthcare

Because teabaggers only ever talk to other teabaggers, and get all their information from Tea Party approved sources (Fox News, Rush Limbaugh etc) they believe that they speak for the entire nation, apart from a tiny liberal elite that holds all the power. Pretty much the opposite of the truth, but it's what they tell themselves. And to them, it doesn't matter that "Obamacare" was originally Romneycare. What matters is that he said he was going to repeal it on day one of his presidency. He may have flip-flopped on everything else, but there is absolutely no possibility that he would flip-flop on this, oh no siree bob.

[daligirl519]

49. In other words. . .

"When life gives you lemonade, make cyanide."

[mac56]

50. Now that's a DUzy!

[whistler162]

51. Most punchbowls aren't white porcelian

so I don't think that is a punchbowl.

[mac56]

52. Ruh roh.

Wondered what that handle was for.

[RC]

76. Refills

[stupidicus]

54. I'll drop a turd in it

Not over the win, but rather the predictable reaction from the "purists" here that regardless of the issue, continually insist that the dem emperor so to speak, is fully clothed, no matter how visible the turd is seen hanging from their anus.

I never supported the mandate and always thought it would be upheld, and as far as the lack of support is concernd, for likely the same reasons others here and elsewhere don't.

What I don't get, is why those who disagree about this and that on principled grounds, and who are otherwise largely your ideological and political allies, are told "politely" (well, that characterization may be a stretch) to sit down and shut up (in the form of an insult to them and their principled stand like "some people love misery -- to paraphrase) because they can't and/or won't share your level of pleasure or enthusiasm stemming from a victory. I'd guess you've never had a coach tell you immediately after a win, that despite it, your performance sucked and needed improvement, no, like in how the win was achieved? http://www.google.com/search?q=%22while+I%27m+pleased+with+the+ein%22&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GGHP_en#hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-us%3AIE-SearchBox&rlz=1I7GGHP_en&sclient=psy-ab&q=coach+%22while+I%27m+pleased+with+the+win%22&oq=coach+%22while+I%27m+pleased+with+the+win%22&gs_l=serp.12...17235.31297.1.33579.10.10.0.0.0.3.375.2484.0j1j7j2.10.0...0.0.YY9LafAAbA8&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=8aabf25a9b44994b&biw=1680&bih=828 Maybe once eh, because you couldn't take what you so freely dish out, criticism in this case directed at an issue, and not you? I'm surprised that coaches that do/say that don't lose their jobs like you'd deny others their voice.

Not only is that kinda BS insulting and grossly dishonest, it's totally indicative of the fact that you can't dispute much less rebut the the various reasons why they don't like the mandate -- like the perpetuation and feeding of the leeches known as insurance companies for example, which also means they'll be wielding the political power they had before, which they'll no doubt use in the event more moves towards single-payer are made. And no, giving the insurance companies millions of new customers is not like paying heating bills (and filling energy producer coffers as a result) or food stamp recipients doing the same for food producers and retailers, because in all those and similar cases, they satisfy immediate survival needs, not the mere potential of one. The similarity begins and ends on the bottom lines of the respective corps that benefit from the benefit. ANd if that analogy was to hold, based on those who will become insured as a result, then what you're cheerleading is satisfaction with it despite the 26M that will still have to do without http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/odonnell-no-matter-how-scotus-rules-afford which what, one can't complain about without fear of reprisal from the "totally elated"? Will those 26M be considered "masochists" too for talking about the inadequacies, methods and means behind the reasons for their continuing plight? This isn't a case in the minds of many of a desire for perfection being the enemy of the good, but rather the complete abandonment of the simplest and best solution that exemplifies "half-assed" in form and measure given that 26M figure.

But then I've never been one to argue that rightwingnuts have a monopoly on shortsightedness or intolerance, or the methods and means to make the existence of both undeniable.

well done

If I were to take a page outta your book, I could easily claim and sustain that most if not all of your elation (and that of others here)is all about the political victory, not the solution to plight for the half or so it represents. After all, you're cheering the failure for the 26M, aren't you? Do you share the apathy so rampant in the rank ranks of rightwingnuts? To say no then undermines your BS here, given that you'd be doing exactly what you've weakly taken others to task for in this top post, no? It's kinda like you being elated in the win, despite losing a teammate to a concussion during the game, no? Winning is everything, isn't it?

I'd be curious to know after this next election, how many lefties stay home, not JUST because of the many and varied disagreements with and disappointments over this and that they have with BHO and the dem leadership, but rather over the treatment they get for daring vocalize them to "tolerant" libs. All this kinda stuff provides is another cross for them to bear, or the feeling that they are an "untouchable". Wow, somebody put a pisser on ignore --- big, as some say, "fugging" deal. That is certainly a wise choice, given the likelihood of a loss upon confrontation. Why should they vote with those who would insult and exclude them? If anyone is the masochist, it's those who push others away over the lack of complete agreement.

And besides, it's not like the less enthused are some tiny minority you can freely piss on

The poll found that a large number of Americans - including about one-third of Republicans and independents who disagree with the law - oppose it because it does not go far enough to fix healthcare.
Seventy-one percent of Republican opponents reject it overall, while 29 percent feel it does not go far enough, while independent opponents are divided 67 percent to 33 percent. Among Democratic opponents, 49 percent reject it overall, and 51 percent wish the measure went further.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2012_06/inside_the_paradox038160.php

now are they, since "further" suggests dissatisfaction that by your standards, should it be expressed in any form or measure, is treason to the cause and therefore justification for things like "some people are only happy being miserable!".

Or how about their distaste for the mandate, the reason/s notwithstanding

Still, the most controversial component of the law - the requirement that nearly all Americans obtain health insurance -- does not sit well with the American public. In that same March poll, 45 percent approve of that provision, but 51 percent do not. According to an April Kaiser Family Foundation survey, seven in ten find that element of the law unfavorable

Also, among those who oppose the law overall in the March CBS News/New York Times Poll, seven in 10 disapprove of the mandate that people buy health insurance.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57462689/public-opinion-of-the-health-care-law/

SO by all means, tell all those who aren't that happy (to fulfill your mandated expectations and definitions as to what constitutes what, a "real" dem, or even as a reasonable and rationale human being it appears) with the survival (but likely immensely so over the misery this has caused rightwingnuts at least, as well as some of the bennies in the bill that deny rightwingnuts a continuation of human misery those sadists relish, etc) of the mandate they're masochists. That should get them running to the voting booth for more abuse from your "It'll be COMPLETELY my way or the highway" kind in the future.

And the next time, if ever, the coach tells you that you need improvement after a win, tell him to piss off, and that we won and that's all that matters, because ALL victories are beyond reproach, and only masochists think otherwise. That's what any "thinking" adult would do, no?

If a relationship can't survive a little legitimate rain on a parade without insulting from "sweet" crybabies afraid of what, melting from the moisture, it ain't a relationship worth preserving anyway. If I was a rightwingnut, I'd take some solace and find some joy in the way some eat their own around here, and unwittingly erode that "enthusiasm" factor as a result, and all in the name of the needed cohesion you destroy with it, eh Mr. Masochist?

[bvar22]

55. Righteous Rant.

The Supreme Court upheld Conservative Republican Policy,
and some "Democrats" are doing a Victory Lap?
Pardon me if I don't join the Victory Parade.
I don't think our Working Class can survive these "Victories".

My Wife & I are without Health Insurance,
and are living on a laughably low "Taxable Income".
We will be entitled to a nice "subsidy".
We STILL oppose a Mandate that forces Americans to BUY an invisible product every single year
from For Profit Corporations that:
*Manufacture NOTHING
*Produce NO Wealth (Value Added)
*Provide NO useful service.
Billions of Taxpayer Dollars.....for NOTHING.

Health Insurance does NOT equal health care.


For those rejoicing because NOW the "deadbeats" will have to buy insurance,
YOU will STILL be paying.
The much vaunted "Subsidy for the Poor" doesn't really go to The Poor,
but instead goes directly into the pockets of some of the RICHEST For Profit Corporations in The World.
Now, in addition to paying for their Health Care through your tax dollars,
you will ALSO be paying for Private Jets, New Summer Homes in Aspen, Yachts, and other toys for the 1%.

Congratulations.
Their "cut" of your Tax Dollars is skimmed straight off the top!

Woo-Hoo!
High Five!!!!
VICTORY!!!


FDR and LBJ would NOT be celebrating.



You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

[stupidicus]

56. indeed dude

I didn't begin to cover all the potential flaws involved with the "victory".

The biggest to me is the potential machinations or intented effort at them from Roberts, who no doubt sees himself as a master of subterfuges. As soon as I heard the vote and his involvement in it with the taxing power -- not commerce clause -- justification, I smelled a rat.

That post was all about the all too often forgotten message in your closing comment, and the way so many around here and elsewhere forget about the importance of solidarity in their dittofests like this one has turned into, that are designed to embarrass and humiliate any and all dissent that isn't accompanied by an "But I love those screwing me anyway", even if 26M Americans remain screwed, etc.

I don't have any substantial problems with them following their principles and consciences in terms of thinking more about this victory than what wasn't or hasn't been gained in this ongoing fight for a fundy right to health care, I merely expect reciprocation in terms of civility, etc, not just as a personal matter, but also and moreso in the interest of preserving the solidarity lacking and so sorely needed if we lefties are to prevail this fall so as to take further baby steps in the direction of universal health care -- the goal we all presumably share. We aren't gonna get there with the silence of complacency, and pointing out and acknowledging the flaws in the formulation, creation, implementation, and drawbacks to the ACA is the only avenue to improvement and hopefully, the achievement of the shared goal that has or at least had, widespread support. http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002866261

It just slays me the way so many around here insist (and try to enforce it with efforts like this top post) upon solidarity, then do everything they can to break it with nonsense. Solidarity imo, is something that is derived from common goals, and the goal is universal health care and the breaking of the lobbying influence of one more corporate/fascist entity, not something that lets them continue with their evils at the expense of 26M that will remain without healthcare. To be insulting those who remain unsatisfied is just plain wrong, if for no other reason than who they are speaking for -- those that will remain uninsured -- not to mention as noted, a threat to the crucial solidarity they laughably consider themselves the champions and creators of.

I see this on every board I've ever posted on, whether purely "liberal" like here, or where cons and lefties have at it. These online/pixelworld "commmunities" differ little from those to be found in the "real" world in terms of the social dynamics, and especially ones as old as this one where many of the posters have had the time to get to know one another and align themselves and what they post accordingly. If one wants to "fit in" with most of the old timers around here it seems, one must be willing to either forget what shouldn't be forgotten -- like the content of your response -- or be willing to make sure that you add that you love the dems/BHO despite their flaws like family or something, no matter what the offense in terms of deeds or inaction.

This is exactly how and why the divide and conquer strategy of the monied interests has been so effective in creating a faux duopoly in DC and the good cop/bad cop tactic that obscures it, so productive and profitable, and why things like the abandonment of the public option way back when, were quickly excused and forgotten.

It's also why the OWS movement sprang into existence. I'm guessing I'd be unsurprised and amused to find out that the majority of those under discussion here would defend OWS and its goals, and yet here they are daily playing popularity contest like schoolchildren in an effort to silence those who are really doing little but promoting the OWS cause. I can only speak for myself of course, but as an OWS preemie, that's my take on their efforts. BHO and the dems may be much preferable to the rightwingnuts, and especially now as they near the insanity cliff, but that should serve as no bar whatsoever to efforts to pull the dem leadership leftward. They can hang their hat on the excuse of "what's politically possible" if they want, but that imposes no duty of silence or the dismissal of the quest for more in the interest of the helpless others, or even ourselves in dedicated and selfish self-interest. I find your stance quite admirable, given the selflessness element to be seen in it.

It's almost like anything stronger than "please" in that pulling pursuit, is something akin to a mortal sin, regardless of the issue. They simply won't tolerate anything that might make the modern dems look like even the rightwingnuts of old, even though the mandate itself was their idea, amongst many.

And indeed, as a baptised Catholic, now atheist lefty, your parting comment about the redemptive and character defining value of "good works" over "faith" it's there, isn't lost on me, either in meaning or real world benefits.

[woo me with science]

86. Excellent posts here. Thank you. nt

Last edited Sat Jun 30, 2012, 09:54 PM - Edit history (1)

[nc4bo]

57. +1. nt.

[Logical]

58. Wow, what a waste of words.

[stupidicus]

64. do you mean the ones you didn't understand

or those comprising the content you couldn't address, much less rebut?

[Logical]

75. No the ones you must not understand. You are really clueless! N-t

[stupidicus]

87. thanks for conceding the validity of my remarks

and showcasing your ony strong suit -- hollow declarations representitive of nothing but the content of your head

as any school child could no doubt discern, if things were as you argue, then you wouldn't have been so quickly reduced to such, and would have instead easily overcome my alleged "cluelessness" by making a specific case with facts, etc, in tow with which to sustain it.

that's only "logical", which is apparently something you know little about as well

thanks for assisting me in making this clear for the readers.

[Swede]

66. If you notice,they all already have no use for Obama.

Some of them have been around for awhile. Go figure.

[demgrrrll]

79. Some Dems remind me of the last scene in Joe vs. The Volcano, or Joe in general

It's always going to be something with you, isn't it Joe.