*I've been very critical of HCR (1+ / 0-)Obama, and the whole process and what appears that the end result will be. What would be enough for the democrats opposed to the bill to support it?
Personally speaking, I recognize that it's never going to be perfect. But the sticking point is forcing people to buy a product from a private company without any effective cost control measures. That's it, anything else I can work with.
So for me, I would need either the mandate taken out, strict cost regulation added, or a non-profit pulic option added.
What about the rest of you?
by Skellen on Tue Mar 09, 2010 at 11:59:13 AM PST[ Reply to This | Recommend ]
REPLY by .@avivao: Mandate to buy private insurance? (0 / 0)Exactly. A mandate to buy from private insurers (who're already raising rates in advance of the bill's passage--a way of gaming medical loss ratios, etc.) must be counterbalanced by a substantive public plan (Medicare for All or Medicare for More would be the most expeditious way to go, I suspect). Also, the mandate will surely cause suffering "down the road" unless regulation of insurers is actually enforceable.
Still, we must pass this #HCR bill, I think. I'm extremely worried about (1) passing it with a unilateral mandate; (2) not passing it because of a unilateral mandate.
How did we get trapped like this? What went wrong? Sure; a lot has gone right. I don't deny it. I'm glad. But we're backed into a corner now on passing this health bill. If we don't pass it, the news is very, very bad. If we do pass it, the news is probably very,very bad (for a different constellation of reasons).
I say: #PassTheDamnBill. But I'm very disturbed by the potential consequences of doing so. There are many benefits to this bill; I pray that the liabilities don't outweigh them. We'll see.
by avivagabriel on Wed Mar 10, 2010 at 11:56:59 AM PST[ Parent | Reply to This ]
KW writes: My goodness. In a wise, creative, and mischievous response to the nasty rhetoric of the press, the Occupy Wall Street folks have answered propaganda with poetry. What a graceful maneuver in the struggle for social change. Beautiful and heartwarming!
For a discussion on the media's quest for one, clear demand from the Wall Street protesters, the group created the following consensus document:
A Message From Occupied Wall Street (Day Five)
Published 2011-09-22 07:51:42 UTC by OccupyWallSt
at OccupyWallStreet.org
This is the fifth communiqué from the 99 percent. We are occupying Wall Street.
On September 21st, 2011, Troy Davis, an innocent man, was murdered by the state of Georgia. Troy Davis was one of the 99 percent.
Ending capital punishment is our one demand.
On September 21st, 2011, four of our members were arrested on baseless charges.
Ending police intimidation is our one demand.
On September 21st, 2011, the richest 400 Americans owned more than half of the country's population.
Ending wealth inequality is our one demand.
On September 21st, 2011, we determined that Yahoo lied about occupywallst.org being in spam filters.
Ending corporate censorship is our one demand.
On September 21st, 2011, roughly eighty percent of Americans thought the country was on the wrong track.
Ending the modern gilded age is our one demand.
On September 21st, 2011, roughly 15% of Americans approved of the job Congress was doing.
Ending political corruption is our one demand.
On September 21st, 2011, roughly one sixth of Americans did not have work.
Ending joblessness is our one demand.
On September 21st, 2011, roughly one sixth of America lived in poverty.
Ending poverty is our one demand.
On September 21st, 2011, roughly fifty million Americans were without health insurance.
Ending health-profiteering is our one demand.
On September 21st, 2011, America had military bases in around one hundred and thirty out of one hundred and sixty-five countrie
My question is answered. These candid photos of the perfect American family surely garnered him support. Did the attractiveness of his family help him? Most likely the people were just as intrigued by the image of upper class eastern life that the Kennedys presented, with it's fashion, athleticism, education, all resources which were starting to become increasingly valuable with the mass market.
Kennedy's ads presented him as ready to lead during a time of great tension in
the world, highlighted his commitment to create jobs and equal opportunities for
all Americans, and questioned whether Nixon was exaggerating his experience.
"He looked sick, but also a little unsure," Albert W. Upton, who had been
Nixon's drama coach at Whittier College, told The New York Times. And
Nixon's former law partner, Thomas Bewley, said, "Dick just didn't look good.
His...clothes were wrong. He didn't have the old spirit."
Style over substance in the Mass Media. The Kennedys were always avid presenters, able to make others view them in the best light possible. They carefully crafted their image to conform to the American ideal.
the tanned, photogenic Democratic candidate for President
A lot of these articles mention Kennedy's physical attractiveness. Did that add to his appeal? Perhaps it gave him additional celebrity and helped to make him a public figure, beloved by the people. Did the Media's coverage of him help in this respect? Did the images presented of him always show him at his best? Perhaps he new how to use his handsomeness and the press to his advantage as he knew he would appear to advantage in photos and on television.
This is kind of like Jimmy Carter, How sometimes the best person doesn't make the best president, because they lack the ability to persuade the caucus or play the politician.
All machines have their friction;
and possibly this does enough good to counterbalance the evil. At any rate,
it is a great evil to make a stir about it. But when the friction comes
to have its machine, and oppression and robbery are organized, I say, let
us not have such a machine any longer.
"This
principle being admitted, the justice of every particular case of resistance
is reduced to a computation of the quantity of the danger and grievance
on the one side, and of the probability and expense of redressing it on
the other."(
there be
some absolute goodness somewhere; for that will leaven the whole lump.(15)
There are thousands who are in opinion opposed to slavery and to
the war, who yet in effect do nothing to put an end to them; who, esteeming
themselves children of Washington and Franklin, sit down with their hands
in their pockets, and say that they know not what to do,
It
is not so important that many should be as good as you, as that
Practically speaking, the opponents to a reform in Massachusetts are not
a hundred thousand politicians at the South, but a hundred thousand merchants
and farmers here, who are more interested in commerce and agriculture than
they are in humanity, and are not prepared to do justice to the slave and
to Mexico, cost what it may.
All voting is a sort of gaming, like checkers or backgammon, with a slight
moral tinge to it, a playing with right and wrong, with moral questions;
and betting naturally accompanies it.
There is but little virtue in the action
of masses of men. When the majority shall at length vote for the abolition
of slavery, it will be because they are indifferent to slavery, or because
there is but little slavery left to be abolished by their vote. They
will then be the only slaves.
"I should like to have them order me out to help put down
an insurrection of the slaves, or to march to Mexico; — see if I would
go";
ow many men are there to a square thousand miles in this country?
Hardly one. Does not America offer any inducement
for men to settle here? The American has dwindled
into an Odd Fellow (17) — one
who may be known by the development of his organ of gregariousness, and
a manifest lack of intellect and cheerful self-reliance; whose first and
chief concern,
and yet these very men have each, directly by their allegiance, and
so indirectly, at least, by their money, furnished a substitute
"White House says the hiring numbers are misleading because they do not reflect the number of offers that Dean Kagan made to women and scholars of color. But this seems a bit hard to believe. Do women and people of color find a tenured or tenure-track professorship at Harvard Law School less attractive than white men? Do they really prefer to teach at less prestigious schools?"