Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Greenwald tries to attack Elizabeth Warren on twitter - Uses right wing source [View all]muriel_volestrangler
(101,271 posts)185. Greenwald on single payer and the public option:
The public option, of course, all along was already a compromise from what most progressives wanted, who wanted single payer and were told by most Democratic politicians for a long time that single payer was the optimal course. The public option was already a means of doing nothing other than at least providing some competition to the private health insurance industry. And all year long, Democratic senators and the White House pretended that they were in favor of the public option. They kept insisting, Were behind the public option. We want the public option, even though there was all sorts of evidence that the White House was secretly negotiating with the health insurance industry to make sure that it would be excluded from the final bill.
...
Well, now you have a situation where everybody is talking about doing healthcare reform through reconciliation, where only fifty votes, not sixty votes, are required. And what does the President do? He immediately, when he finally unveils his first bill, excludes the public option from the bill, even as he says were going to use a process that will only require fifty votes. And you even saw Senator Jay Rockefeller, who spent the year pretending to be so devoted to the public option that he said he will not relent in ensuring that it gets passed, that there is no healthcare reform without a public option, now that it can actually pass and become a reality, he turns around and says, Im not inclined to vote for it in reconciliation.
...
Well, first of all, one of the things thats most amazing is that single payer and the public option both poll infinitely better than the healthcare bill itself, than the Senate healthcare bill that the President is advocating. And despite that, what you see all the time when they talk about bipartisanship is shifting the terms of the debate onto, essentially, the right-wing playing field to accommodate Republican views, which basically means there should be no healthcare reform, and excluding views that are to the left of anything that is essentially a conservative idea.
And so, Anthony Weiner and Dennis Kucinich have both been the leading two of the leading participants in the healthcare debate from the very start, but because they want to move the healthcare debate into the area thats actually popular, which is providing either single payer or at least a robust public option, theyre excluded from the start. And this is the Democratic White House excluding anything to the left of conservative ideas in defining what the scope of the debate is. And, of course, thats something that happens in issue after issue.
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/2/25/glenn_greenwald_dems_hiding_behind_filibuster
...
Well, now you have a situation where everybody is talking about doing healthcare reform through reconciliation, where only fifty votes, not sixty votes, are required. And what does the President do? He immediately, when he finally unveils his first bill, excludes the public option from the bill, even as he says were going to use a process that will only require fifty votes. And you even saw Senator Jay Rockefeller, who spent the year pretending to be so devoted to the public option that he said he will not relent in ensuring that it gets passed, that there is no healthcare reform without a public option, now that it can actually pass and become a reality, he turns around and says, Im not inclined to vote for it in reconciliation.
...
Well, first of all, one of the things thats most amazing is that single payer and the public option both poll infinitely better than the healthcare bill itself, than the Senate healthcare bill that the President is advocating. And despite that, what you see all the time when they talk about bipartisanship is shifting the terms of the debate onto, essentially, the right-wing playing field to accommodate Republican views, which basically means there should be no healthcare reform, and excluding views that are to the left of anything that is essentially a conservative idea.
And so, Anthony Weiner and Dennis Kucinich have both been the leading two of the leading participants in the healthcare debate from the very start, but because they want to move the healthcare debate into the area thats actually popular, which is providing either single payer or at least a robust public option, theyre excluded from the start. And this is the Democratic White House excluding anything to the left of conservative ideas in defining what the scope of the debate is. And, of course, thats something that happens in issue after issue.
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/2/25/glenn_greenwald_dems_hiding_behind_filibuster
Yet again, Sir, he is not a right libertarian.
"he still concentrates fire away from the chief opponents of proper regulation"
Where? Don't just assert stuff, Sir. It's beneath you. He supports regulation, and you're reduced to pretending he doesn't. This won't do.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
188 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Greenwald tries to attack Elizabeth Warren on twitter - Uses right wing source [View all]
Cali_Democrat
Jul 2014
OP
I never keep my head down. It's not my style. I always go in gunz blazing...
Cali_Democrat
Jul 2014
#3
People Need To Get It Through Their Heads, Sir: Greenwald is Not a Leftist
The Magistrate
Jul 2014
#2
You realize that what is happening here is exactly that, just the opposite POV.
cui bono
Jul 2014
#165
I die a bit inside every time someone claiming to be a "liberal" or "progressive"
anti partisan
Jul 2014
#80
All you're doing is crying about it. You might start by looking at the man's history.
MADem
Jul 2014
#98
It's uncivil to call people trolls. Welcome to DU, I recommend you read the ToS. nt
MADem
Jul 2014
#113
Agreeing that is the type of "libertarian" he is-- civil libertarian, like the ACLU.
deurbano
Jul 2014
#174
At the beginning of this thread, Greenwald was called a "right libertarian" ...
deurbano
Jul 2014
#176
Thank You! It's amazing the credibility he's given here, when he has none. n/t
Tarheel_Dem
Jul 2014
#20
I guess touting the work of a Newsbusters-Breitbart-CNSNews lackey passes for "credibility"
MADem
Jul 2014
#146
Does it bother anyone else that these are our "secrets", but GG's the only one getting rich? So much
Tarheel_Dem
Jul 2014
#150
Actually he's not, but let's say he was, is one's political affilation a crime now
sabrina 1
Jul 2014
#77
Well, I wasn't asking you what you thought of his writing style, I was asking if you
sabrina 1
Jul 2014
#85
I know, it's so transparant, not to mention we KNOW that a contract was out on
sabrina 1
Jul 2014
#83
But Ron Paul wouldn't be wanting a position from Warren on the subject
muriel_volestrangler
Jul 2014
#181
That Would Depend, Sir, On Whether He wanted To Make Trouble For Democrats At The Moment
The Magistrate
Jul 2014
#182
Greenwald is a fan of Warren, when it comes to financial regulation
muriel_volestrangler
Jul 2014
#183
What was she suppose to do, stop and resolve the Middle East Crisis, right then and there?
randys1
Jul 2014
#5
Start your own thread..and in the mean time thanks for kicking the thread on Greenwald
Cha
Jul 2014
#162
Uh-oh! I think we're going to see some cognitive dissonance happening in a big way on this board!
MADem
Jul 2014
#15
It sure is, but it's not easy when a guy touted as a hero is shown to be the Libertarian
MADem
Jul 2014
#40
If Warren ever plans to run for Prez, she needs to get some foreign policy experience
Larkspur
Jul 2014
#18
He's what he's always been; an opportunist who's all about Glen Greenwald
mountain grammy
Jul 2014
#21
Yes, and this has been known for some time. But some like sticking their head in the sand. N/T
Chathamization
Jul 2014
#134
He's not a Democrat, he's as Magistrate describes him--he gets no special protections here.
MADem
Jul 2014
#39
Good Post, I agree, lots of the information given appears to be trying to hurt the DNC, what gives.
Thinkingabout
Jul 2014
#57
As Hartmann used to say, "A libertarian is just a Republican who wants to get laid & smoke dope".
Tarheel_Dem
Jul 2014
#132
He said she was one of the "genuinely progressive candidates on domestic issues"
Chathamization
Jul 2014
#136
"Hell, we probably don't get them anyway". Another truth. This is a great thread.
Tarheel_Dem
Jul 2014
#133
Nobody has "to smear" Greenwald. Him and his stupid "Gotcha" moments do that all on his own.
Cha
Jul 2014
#74
Yeah, Greenwald is his own worst enemy.. a freaking opportunist always ready to ratfuck Dems.
Cha
Jul 2014
#96
Funny, I could have sworn the question was if you had any opinion on the NSA.
cui bono
Jul 2014
#166
No one is preventing you from starting a thread on that topic--but in this thread, the topic is
MADem
Jul 2014
#100
Click on the link, and scroll down just a few lines; GG's offending tweet leads the parade. nt
MADem
Jul 2014
#110
What a load of...ahem...misleading crap starting at square one. What attack?
TheKentuckian
Jul 2014
#118
I love Elizabeth. Where's the attack? I see someone asking a perfectly acceptable question.
Autumn
Jul 2014
#125
Why don't you google that "someone" and then come back with how "reasonable" he is.
MADem
Jul 2014
#145
Go on ahead and mitigate his attempt at a sandbag. Surprised he didn't try to buttonhole her in the
MADem
Jul 2014
#155