To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Nope. Americans don’t support it, by wide margins. Time to try something else.
What’s so frustrating to me in all this debate is that the media and public want to put all the political pressure on Barack Obama. But there’s no hot spotlight shining on that group of Democratic senators who would make the difference between 50 votes (reconciliation) and 60 votes (break a filibuster). I’m talking: Max Baucus, Ben Nelson, Kent Conrad, Mary Landrieu, and a few others, including Lieberman (an independent who’s aligned with the Democrats).
Instead of just asking Obama, “Is the public option essential?”, why can’t we turn the table and ask the Baucus/Nelson crowd, “Is the absence of a public option essential?” In other words, “Would you filibuster a bill that had a public option?”
Instead of kowtowing to the insurance industry-financed Baucus/Lieberman contingent, I’d rather just make these guys irrelevant and go the reconciliation route. The U.S. Senate is an undemocratic enough institution as it is without having to reach a 60-vote threshold.
But that brings me to another media meme, that reconciliation is this kind of unprecedented, inappropriate political declaration of war. Funny how people forget that reconciliation was used to pass the Bush tax cuts for the rich.
*sigh* Politicians.
Can’t live with ’em.
Can’t put their heads on pikes lining Pennsylvania Avenue.
Yep, I sure don’t support being able to see the doctor, let alone at an affordable price. Nope, I live in the edge! Healthcare roulette, all the way! Screw having insurance! Me & 50 million other people, we get off on the suspense of bankruptcy & financial catastrophe looming over us, oooooooo. Best to be destitute & ruined than, God forbid, someone in a position of power, say the Senate, MAN THE FUCK UP AND DO WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE! If you’re shy, just eat some Powder Milk Biscuits, “gives shy persons, the strength to get up and do what needs to be done!”
But that’s not what some old lady wearing a tea-bagger t-shirt screamed at him in the airport!
Three-quarters of American citizens want single payer national health care.
The other one quarter are in denial, and virtually all of them are ON SOCIALIZED MEDICINE provided by Medicare, Medicaid, VA, or active military medical.
Lieberman really is one of the senates biggest pieces of corrupt dung. And from what I’ve seen lately, that really is saying something.
Not that MoveOn/SUSA poll again!
It’s bad data – an extreme outlier, and artifact of a poorly constructed questions and context.
Start here
http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/healthp…
and dig in deep to get an idea what the public really thinks.
This cherry=picked poll-driven belief that the public strongly favors the public option disables progressives from applying effective persuasion in favor of the public option.
go ahead
beat Joe
elect a Republican
Americans are “centrists” and the public option is a “far left” position. Republicans say it so it must be true.
@12 – lol, have you ever BEEN to that district?
fat chance.
@5 — Actually, as someone who was registered Democrat back in 2000 (independent, now), I thought Joe Lieberman was actually a black mark on Al Gore’s standing as a potential leader of our country, because I was familiar with his record prior to that (he was one of the early folks to try to get violent video games banned because Think Of The Children).
@4, can you not put heads on spikes on Penn? That would make my walk home exceptionally unpleasant. But if you want to do it, say, along Independence, or between 3rd NW and the Capitol on Penn, that would be cool, I don’t go those ways. 🙂
Seriously…time to man up and just push the damn thing through. In the last 8 years wars, tax cuts, and other nonsense were just pushed through. SOME people are going to be pissed, but they’re the minority and they’ll eventually fade into obscurity as people realize that their healthcare is so much cheaper and people they saw suffering are doing better. Too bad that they’re a vocal minority, but Obama has another few years before reelection, and, as much as people are upset with the Dems, they still don’t like the Repugs any more.
Oh, and I love that most of the trolls on this thread are all about the public option and single payer. 🙂
14
Liebermen is a Senator and represents a state, not a district.
fat head.
There are good arguments against the current form of the public option but those Republican imbeciles flat out refuse to use any of them, instead resorting to fallacious and inaccurate arguments instead.
I feel like we as a general public are getting played by both parties.