Jump to content


The Bernie Bros and sisters are coming to Republicans’ rescue


32 replies to this topic

#1 AnBr

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10660 posts

Posted 11 August 2017 - 09:52 PM

https://www.washingt...68ed_story.html

Quote

Things could go well for the Democrats in next year’s midterm elections — if they don’t Bern out.

President Trump is woefully unpopular, feuding with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) and other Republicans. The GOP can’t manage to repeal Obamacare or do much of anything. Voters say they’d like Democrats to run Congress.

But here come the Bernie Bros and sisters to the Republicans’ rescue: They’re sowing division in the Democratic Party and attempting to enact a purge of the ideologically impure — just the sort of thing that made the Republican Party the ungovernable mess it is today.

"Science is more than a body of knowledge; it is a way of thinking. I have a foreboding of an America in my children's or grandchildren's time - when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all the key manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; when awesome technological powers arc in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what's true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness.

— Carl Sagan
The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark
1995


“As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.”

— H.L. Mencken
On Politics: A Carnival of Buncombe


“The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.”

— Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Second inaugural address January, 1937

#2 LFC

    Fiscal Conservative

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 18944 posts
  • LocationPennsylvania

Posted 12 August 2017 - 09:40 AM

View PostAnBr, on 11 August 2017 - 09:52 PM, said:


I hate extremists. I hate them all. Every single one of them. They should all be shipped off somewhere in the middle of the country and forced to fight with knives in a giant cage match with the survivors getting shot. It's the only way to deal with extremists. We have to wipe out every ... uuuuuh ... errrrr .... oh, f***. See what they did to me?
" 'Individual conscience' means that women only get contraceptives if their employers, their physicians, their pharmacists, their husbands and/or fathers, pastors, and possibly their mayors, Governors, State Secretaries of Health, Congressmen, Senators, and President all agree that in that particular case they're justifiable." --D.C. Sessions

"That's the problem with being implacable foes - no one has any incentive to treat you as anything more than an obstacle to be overcome."

"The 'Road to Serfdom' is really all right turns." --Progressive Whisperer

""The GOP ... where every accusation is also a confession." --Progressive Whisperer

#3 nuser

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1000 posts

Posted 12 August 2017 - 01:34 PM

If you shout Single Payer often enough ,maybe it will stick and maybe it should!
Universal medical insurance is coming like in many other countries in the world.
Mr Sanders is not hurting the Dems but rather focusing on what is important for
the U.S. Mr Schumer already mentioned " Single Payer" did he not? IMHO Dana
Milbank is a true bot or at the very least a Shit disturber on purpose.
Would Mr Sanders be better off with the slogan : medical insurance for all Americans
Regardless of cicumstances.The Democratic Party is now so splintered that one
opposing man - Sanders- will only help the Party , at least he stands for something!

#4 D. C. Sessions

    I don't have to pretend to be an adult any more

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7095 posts
  • LocationCentral New Mexico

Posted 12 August 2017 - 02:51 PM

The question is whether he stands for something, or spends most of his efforts on tearing down those who differ from him the least.
These days, "libertarian" is just a euphemism for a Nazi who's afraid to commit.
"If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention." -- Heather Heyer
"I'd rather have my child, but by golly, if I gotta give her up, we're gonna make it count." -- Her mother
The purpose of "defense spending" isn't "defense," it's "spending."
Our Party! In her relations with other Americans may she always be in the right; but Our Party, right or wrong!

#5 nuser

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1000 posts

Posted 12 August 2017 - 03:57 PM

Where are all the opposing voices from the Democrats?
Why not ask Canadians how their Medical services are working?
Mr. Sessions , why would an old man waste his time on Health Care
unless he was a believer? Mr. Sanders is quite irritating at times, but
Carries a humane message. Would love to see a poll in the southern states
Asking people ; what is single payer?

#6 D. C. Sessions

    I don't have to pretend to be an adult any more

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7095 posts
  • LocationCentral New Mexico

Posted 12 August 2017 - 04:08 PM

I don't think anyone is questioning his faith -- it's his tactics and those of his followers which raise doubts.
These days, "libertarian" is just a euphemism for a Nazi who's afraid to commit.
"If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention." -- Heather Heyer
"I'd rather have my child, but by golly, if I gotta give her up, we're gonna make it count." -- Her mother
The purpose of "defense spending" isn't "defense," it's "spending."
Our Party! In her relations with other Americans may she always be in the right; but Our Party, right or wrong!

#7 nuser

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1000 posts

Posted 12 August 2017 - 04:24 PM

Mr. Session
How can you question Mr. Sanders motives in these days Of Trump.
Please scream some more Sanders ,Americans will lose most of their
Coverage and they apparently do not understand they are about to .


#8 D. C. Sessions

    I don't have to pretend to be an adult any more

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7095 posts
  • LocationCentral New Mexico

Posted 12 August 2017 - 04:55 PM

View Postnuser, on 12 August 2017 - 04:24 PM, said:

How can you question Mr. Sanders motives in these days Of Trump.

<Headdesk>
These days, "libertarian" is just a euphemism for a Nazi who's afraid to commit.
"If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention." -- Heather Heyer
"I'd rather have my child, but by golly, if I gotta give her up, we're gonna make it count." -- Her mother
The purpose of "defense spending" isn't "defense," it's "spending."
Our Party! In her relations with other Americans may she always be in the right; but Our Party, right or wrong!

#9 drdredel

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2347 posts

Posted 12 August 2017 - 05:42 PM

I don't think it's hyperbolic to say that fixing our health care system (and the ACA is a pretty long way from being that fix) is in the top 5 concerns which could make or break our ability to persevere as a nation. I could make a plausible argument for how it may actually be the number 1 thing as far as things that the government can actually do something meaningful about.

So - while I too am opposed to fanatical oaths that people have to take in order to belong to some faction, at some point one has to ask what does it "mean" to be a Democrat? Maybe it's not so bad to assert that if you're a Democrat who doesn't believe in a universal single-payer health care system (of some stripe) then you really don't belong in the party and you're just tagging along for the ride.

Consider that if you substitute this with something egregious like "white supremacy" or "a desire to close down all schools and send the kids back to the fields to be the cheap labor that migrants currently provide" no one would be even mildly upset. The Democrats are pretty unequivocal about their nonacceptance of white supremacists. I don't think I see this as all that different. If you think that health care is a subject that belongs somewhere in the "everyone for themselves" column, then you probably aren't a Democrat after all.
The Blind have lost their sense of "sight";
The Deaf have lost their sense of "hearing";
Republicans have lost their sense of "common".

#10 nuser

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1000 posts

Posted 12 August 2017 - 07:30 PM

None but the lonely heart!

#11 LFC

    Fiscal Conservative

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 18944 posts
  • LocationPennsylvania

Posted 12 August 2017 - 07:41 PM

View Postdrdredel, on 12 August 2017 - 05:42 PM, said:


So - while I too am opposed to fanatical oaths that people have to take in order to belong to some faction, at some point one has to ask what does it "mean" to be a Democrat? Maybe it's not so bad to assert that if you're a Democrat who doesn't believe in a universal single-payer health care system (of some stripe) then you really don't belong in the party and you're just tagging along for the ride.

Seriously? I can understand universal health care being a goal of the party (and I'd bet it is supported by nearly every if not every Congressional Democrat) but if you don't swear fealty to achieving through single payer (and ONLY single payer) then you might not really be a Democrat? The end isn't enough, you must take an oath for the means of achieving it as well. [insert slow head shake]

This thinking is exactly why the Democrats are doomed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
" 'Individual conscience' means that women only get contraceptives if their employers, their physicians, their pharmacists, their husbands and/or fathers, pastors, and possibly their mayors, Governors, State Secretaries of Health, Congressmen, Senators, and President all agree that in that particular case they're justifiable." --D.C. Sessions

"That's the problem with being implacable foes - no one has any incentive to treat you as anything more than an obstacle to be overcome."

"The 'Road to Serfdom' is really all right turns." --Progressive Whisperer

""The GOP ... where every accusation is also a confession." --Progressive Whisperer

#12 D. C. Sessions

    I don't have to pretend to be an adult any more

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7095 posts
  • LocationCentral New Mexico

Posted 12 August 2017 - 07:46 PM

The term "single payer" has become either irrationally restrictive or meaningless. "Universal coverage" is not in doubt, any Democrat should be able to sign onto that [1] -- but in fact most of the developed nations that have universal coverage don't have "single payer" in the British or Canadian sense. Is the distinction enough to fight a war over? One that has the potential to hand the Republicans a chance to take the country back to 2007?

[1] Possibly excepting some running for razor's-edge swing districts. In which case: would you rather have a Republican who will give McConnell a majority, or a Blue Dog who will help where he can even if he won't say the magic words?
These days, "libertarian" is just a euphemism for a Nazi who's afraid to commit.
"If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention." -- Heather Heyer
"I'd rather have my child, but by golly, if I gotta give her up, we're gonna make it count." -- Her mother
The purpose of "defense spending" isn't "defense," it's "spending."
Our Party! In her relations with other Americans may she always be in the right; but Our Party, right or wrong!

#13 baw1064

    formerly of the public sector

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3728 posts
  • LocationEarthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanos--oh my!

Posted 12 August 2017 - 08:14 PM

It's worth noting that the other industrialized countries that provide healthcare for everyone do so in significantly different ways.

Canada is single payer, meaning that pretty much one can't even pay out of pocket for something not covered by the government. Two points here: 1) nobody would ever proposed that in the U.S. people can't spend their own money to buy something. 2) Canada's system is actually run at the provincial, no the national, level. So the U.S. equivalent would be for each state to run its own healthcare system.

The UK has a socialized medicine system, in which the national government (the NHS) runs hospitals and provides medical services. As it turns out there's a parallel system of private hospitals, which people with sufficient funds can access. So if you don't like the NHS and have enough money, it's not a problem.

Germany has a system of private insurance, but one that is highly regulated and in which everyone has to participate.

The most plausible universal coverage system in the US would be to just extend Medicare to everyone. That doesn't have an exact counterpart in most other countries.
“Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” --Dr. Seuss

#14 JackD

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 776 posts
  • LocationChicago area

Posted 12 August 2017 - 08:26 PM

Or, perhaps, to allow people to buy in to Medicare. People preferring their own arrangements either through their employer or on the individual market would be allowed to keep them.

#15 AnBr

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10660 posts

Posted 12 August 2017 - 08:32 PM

Pragmatism and compromise are the only ways forward. The only other option is to get nothing, which is what the Bernouts got; nothing. the problem is that that is exactly what the rest of us got as well.
"Science is more than a body of knowledge; it is a way of thinking. I have a foreboding of an America in my children's or grandchildren's time - when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all the key manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; when awesome technological powers arc in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what's true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness.

— Carl Sagan
The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark
1995


“As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.”

— H.L. Mencken
On Politics: A Carnival of Buncombe


“The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.”

— Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Second inaugural address January, 1937

#16 baw1064

    formerly of the public sector

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3728 posts
  • LocationEarthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanos--oh my!

Posted 12 August 2017 - 09:00 PM

View PostJackD, on 12 August 2017 - 08:26 PM, said:

Or, perhaps, to allow people to buy in to Medicare. People preferring their own arrangements either through their employer or on the individual market would be allowed to keep them.

But one big disconnect is that the cost of health insurance is tax deductible (both the portion you pay and what your employer pays) if offered through you job. If you buy it yourself, it's not.

A way to rein in the cost of healthcare very quickly would be to count the value of health insurance subsidized by one's employer as taxable income, which would mean people would have to pay income taxes on a very large amount of money they didn't even receive. Leading to lower insurance premiums, lower benefits, and less money available for providers to claim.

But that's impossible politically.
“Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” --Dr. Seuss

#17 nuser

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1000 posts

Posted 12 August 2017 - 09:13 PM

Insurance companies are in business to make profits
Federal insurance is needed here ,whatever the name.
Forget the Willard Romney - let them go to emergency-
and treat people with a little dignity.


#18 JackD

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 776 posts
  • LocationChicago area

Posted 12 August 2017 - 09:58 PM

Maybe people buying individually should allowed to deduct the cost on their tax returns.

#19 D. C. Sessions

    I don't have to pretend to be an adult any more

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7095 posts
  • LocationCentral New Mexico

Posted 13 August 2017 - 05:08 AM

View PostJackD, on 12 August 2017 - 09:58 PM, said:

Maybe people buying individually should allowed to deduct the cost on their tax returns.

A health care subsidy for the wealthy?

We hear so much about tax deductions that we forget that they're almost worthless until you get into higher marginal brackets.
These days, "libertarian" is just a euphemism for a Nazi who's afraid to commit.
"If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention." -- Heather Heyer
"I'd rather have my child, but by golly, if I gotta give her up, we're gonna make it count." -- Her mother
The purpose of "defense spending" isn't "defense," it's "spending."
Our Party! In her relations with other Americans may she always be in the right; but Our Party, right or wrong!

#20 JackD

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 776 posts
  • LocationChicago area

Posted 13 August 2017 - 08:46 AM

It's not mostly the wealthy who buy individual policies. Mostly it's people unable to qualify for medicaid and without employer benefits like healthcare.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users