Extreme Liberal's Blog

Where Liberalism Is Alive and Well!

Dems Grow Some Balls! Hamsher Gets Whiny….AGAIN!

I just came across this story that says that the Senate democrats will pass health care reform within the next 60 days. They will do it by using budget reconciliation to pass a series of fixes to the bill they passed in November. I’m still skeptical whether it can really happen, given so many loopholes in the rules in congress, but it’s great to hear that they are at least considering doing it. I think the democrats are screwed in 2010 if they don’t pass something. From The Hill

“We’ll do a relatively small bill to take care of what we’ve already done,” Reid said, affirming that Democrats would use the reconciliation process. “We’re going to have that done in the next 60 days.”

The move would allow Democrats to essentially go it alone on health reform, especially after losing their filibuster-proof majority in the Senate after Sen. Scott Brown’s (R) special election victory in Massachusetts.

Of course the Republicans are crying fool play, which just cracks me up. They think it is a “hyperpartisan” move to ram through the bill. Now I guess using a 41% “majority” to stop EVERYTHING including low level appointees….well, that wouldn’t be hyperpartisan, would it? This is the height of hypocrisy.  They also are saying that this really makes the bipartisan health care summit moot, and of course what have they been saying since the summit was planned? More hypocrisy for you from the party of No!

Speaking of hypocrisy, Jane Hamsher and her Firedoglake brigade are showing us once again, that hypocrisy isn’t just a conservative thing. These so-called progressives are fighting the president not just on healthcare, but many other things. I read a post from Jane herself where she scoffs at the public option coming back, makes several snarky comments, the usual crap she and her gang trot out. Here is a particularly snarky comment from Janey…

The last of the rationalizations for ditching the public option have been peeled off the pundit apologists, who now stand naked and exposed atop their piles of selectively chosen factoids and statistics. (And therein lies the danger of laundering “tips” fed to you by “anonymous sources” who keep their hands clean while you affix your name — you ultimately have to own it.)

Her posts are always stream of consciousness rants, that often make no sense not just because of the lack of support, but for the confusing wording. But she does throw in her buzzwords periodically as red meat to the brainwashed supporters she has tapped into. I wonder what exactly she means by “selectively chosen factoids and statistics”? Would that be oh, pre-existing conditions, not being able to drop peoples coverage, expansion of child health care, community clinics, children being able to stay on their parents insurance till age 26, subsidies for poor people? Are these the “factoids” she is demeaning? What a complete absence of compassion for those who would benefit from any versions of the bill.

In another segment of her rant, she says this…

But the bottom line is that the health care bill that the White House drafted, the one they pushed through the Senate, the only one they ever wanted, is dead. There is not enough graft and payola in the world to get the Blue Dogs to line up for Martha Coakley duty.

Now, I could go and weed through all her previous bullshit posts and find where she criticized the president for letting the congress write the bill. They railed against Obama for not writing the bill, but now that the congress has made the sausage, she wants to put it all in Obama’s lap. It’s only recently that the White House has tried to pull together all sides in the debate and this is because they didn’t want the repeat of Hillarycare, which was criticized for not including the congress in the process. Remember? So her above statement is pure propoganda, she’s trying to appeal to those teabaggers she has been reaching out to and apparently lying is her best tactic. It’s pretty sad, really. The Martha Coakley comment to me reads like she is dancing on her grave, a democrat. Her gang was part of the chorus trying to spin the loss in Massachusetts as a referendum on Obama, another democrat. Hmmmm, what’s wrong with this picture.

About these ads

February 21, 2010 - Posted by | Democratic Party, Health Care Reform, Hypocrisy Watch, Jane Hamsher, Politics, President Barack Obama, Republican Party

8 Comments »

  1. Interesting! Jane LIEberman loves those anonymous sources she speaks of! Like a typical right wing nutcase, ole Janey can’t see her own hyprocrisy. Of course, she’s the same person who was made at Bayh and others for going along with the republicans, while at the same time joining forces with Faux News and Grover Norquist! Seriously, can she just shut her trap for once or will she work hard to make sure REAL progressive liberals never get elected to office ever again because she’s mad that the Obama White House isn’t suckling from her titties and praising her like she’s some kind of deity or something? I think the latter is most likely!

    Jane will next come out against single payer too because she’s just that mad!

    Anyway, Jim (wrote the following on my blog too)….

    I just laid down and watched your fantastic documentary, Up From The Bottoms! What a wonderful look back at the history of Muskegon, Michigan and how the African Americans from the South came there to live and start a new life! Man, the song at the end made me tear up. I especially loved those in the film who shared their story. So powerful! I wasn’t surprised to learn that the Muskegon African Americans allowed whites and others of ‘color’ to join in with them at their bars or what have you. These left-hand-side people (a reference to the placement of the fountains!) truly understand unity and equality, whereas, the right-hand-side people do not….AND THEY STILL DON’T. The righties are an exclusive group and not inclusive to this day!

    I highly recommend your documentary to everyone! http://www.upfromthebottoms.com/

    Comment by KayInMaine | February 21, 2010 | Reply

  2. Jim, I couldn’t find your email address or I would ask my question via email. I’ve read a bit of what you have written here and in comments on other blogs.

    In your opinion what is it about not denying people based on pre-existing conditions that has so many people up in arms?

    To draw an analogy from the automobile insurance pool. If two drivers the same age and same zip code want to purchase coverage for identical vehicles the price would be significantly different if one had a spotless record and the other had tickets. That is accepted and normal because one is proven a higher risk than the other. How is it different when we substitute health insurance for automobile insurance? The question I have is how can you morally and ethically force the low risk insured to pay as much as the high risk insured?

    If the drivers record is really bad what happens is no one wants to insure them and they have to pick up high priced policies through their state’s high risk pool. Is it right that if I live a healthy life, eat the right foods, exercise regularly, and limit my partying that I would have to pay the same rate as the 380lb, beer swilling, Cheetos eating fat ass living next door?

    I just don’t get it. What do you think?

    Comment by Chicken Hammer | February 21, 2010 | Reply

  3. CH – It’s my understanding that the bill that passed the Senate would allow people with pre-existing conditions to be charged more. I guess that is the fair thing to do, since they will have a better chance of having a claim. But of course if they are poor, we should subsidize them.

    I remember when I was a teenager and I learned about the whole concept of health insurance. You pay premiums in case something happens. If nothing happens to you, you don’t get the money back that you paid in. I remember thinking how stupid that is, what if I don’t want to get insurance, why should I have to? Well, it’s because if something happens to me, who
    is going to pay that bill? So the people who don’t have claims help to pay for the people who do, that’s the beauty of it. But if insurance companies don’t cover some people, then they are rigging the game….for more profits. And by forcing younger people to have health insurance, it helps to spread the risk around.

    In the car analogy, if I smash into someone and hurt myself or kill them or hurt them really bad, who pays for that? Are you offering Chicken Hammer? In our society we won’t just let someone bleed to death on the side of the road, funny how we are, heh? So that’s part of it, if everyone has insurance, then the uninsured aren’t being passed onto the rest of us. And I have no problem at all putting major restrictions on health insurers, I don’t think people’s health should be a profitable commoodity. If the insurance companies don’t like it, sell some other kind of insurance.

    So I don’t think that anyone is saying everyone should pay the same price, as far as I’ve seen. It’s all about availability and subsidies for people who can’t afford it. I know I’m going to keep the health insurance I have, no one is forcing me to change mine.

    I’ll keep going, since no one else is probably going to read it anyway. I had a friend from Germany and we had a long discussion about health care back in the 90′s when Clinton was trying to pass health care. He clued me into many things. One thing he talked about was how where he was from, people took better care of themselves because if something was wrong, they just took care of it. There was more preventative medicine, children were much healthier.

    He also told me about how in Germany and Europe they want there fellow men and women to be healthy, they think it’s a basic right…..to have health. They also feed anyone who is hungry and house those who are homeless, actually, he said there wasn’t much homelessness at all. I hope to travel to Europe someday to see it for myself.

    So he said it’s really a cultural thing, the Reagan years and Bush 1 made it OK to be greedy and selfish, I’ve got mine, you get yours…..horseshit. But I was raised as a bleeding heart liberal, in a loving, caring home where we were taught to be polite, kind, respectful of others no matter who they are and to care about my fellow man. I’m proud to say I care about people.

    Sorry about the rant.

    Comment by ExtremeLiberal | February 21, 2010 | Reply

  4. Nancy Pelosi wanted to cap the amount to be charged to Americans for the public option and she was practically booed off the stage by the republicans!

    Comment by KayInMaine | February 22, 2010 | Reply

  5. Jim, apparently Chicken Hammer thinks I’m stalking HIM for coming over to your blog to blog:

    You’re also banned from my blog (along with your underwear…Atlanta Ralph). I love how you go to another liberal’s blog instead of going to the dungeon called RedState or Michelle Malkin’s blog! What’s the matter? Is the RNC paying you to go after liberals and this is why you go from one to the next?
    –KKKay

    I don’t know why you are stalking me. I wish you would quit doing it. I don’t care about being banned (IP or username?) from your blog. If I want to post there I will but I’m really not interested in posting there.

    Ciao,
    CH

    PS: Jenn said you have record size skid marks in your drawers.

    LOL! Jim, I had no idea you and Chicken Hammer have been buds forever and I’m the outsider here. Yeah, yeah, that would be like going to Jenny of the Bunglers hate site to post and then asking CH why he’s there and claiming he’s stalking me for showing up!

    Too funny.

    The right wingers are feeble minded retards. They should all be institutionalized because it would make for a safer nation!

    Comment by KayInMaine | February 22, 2010 | Reply

  6. Chicken Hammer is playing games, what else do republotards have to do besides play games? They have no leaders in their party who actually have rational thought. They have no ideas that help Americans. They have no compassion for anyone but themselves. It’s all about lies, distortions, picking around the edges. He’s only come on this site and acted like he’s civil to piss you off. I remember when I was in junior high and people played games like that.

    Comment by ExtremeLiberal | February 22, 2010 | Reply

  7. Exactly Jim! Yep, the right wing retards continue to play their sophomoric games to make themselves feel better! The funniest part is they still believe we liberals can’t see what they’re doing. Pathetic. Truly, they are pathetic. Fun watching their train wreck though! :lol:

    Comment by KayInMaine | February 23, 2010 | Reply

  8. You people seem pretty smart. You should check out my publication. I think you’ll find a lot to like there.

    http://progrepnow.blogspot.com

    Comment by Amber Milgram | February 24, 2010 | Reply


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 152 other followers

%d bloggers like this: