(11 am. – promoted by ek hornbeck)
A whole pile of people know that it is Obama and the Democrats that refuse to support medicare for all the public option, despite the fact that is what a most of the country wants. If mandates, a middle class tax, fines, medicare cuts, and no public option is the best Obama and the Democrats can do with a mandate and a solid majority, they deserve to lose their jobs.
They gave pharma and the insurance companies almost as good a deal as Wall Street got. Free access to our money with no strings attached.
Democrats can run, but they can’t hide. goinsouth pointed out this article to me: Three Polar Politics In Post-Petroleum America, by Stirling Newberry. Here are some tidbits. I encourage you to read the whole thing. I had to force myself to stop collecting the money quotes.
They are managing the liquidation of America.
– –Hence financial elite money and support shifted to the Moderates, on the proviso that the Moderates did not disturb the Confederate architecture of George W. Bush. No major part of the Bush legacy has been overturned by Obama. None. No major part of the Bush legacy is on the calendar to be overturned. None. Obama’s money mandate is to Do Bush Right.
– –The “pragmatists” turn out not to be pragmatists, but merely those who have a craving for compromise. Compromise is an excellent tool, but a poor idol.
– –The public’s support for his policies has ebbed. His entire political thesis, that he would do small good things, and this would buy him capital, was historically idiotic, and is already turning bad.
– –Members of Congress without the moral clarity to recognize this equivalence will be condemned by history. Their spinelessness and lack of will when confronted with the power of the insurance industry is just as morally bankrupt as the American congressmen who bowed to Southern slave-owners.
We’ve been wanting to have a conversation about political reality and where to next. This article opens that door. Which of his thoughts and statements resonate most with you?
18 comments
Skip to comment form
Author
I just had to share this article with all of you. I can’t stop thinking about it. Somewhere in there, I’ve looked and can’t find it again, he reinforces our contention that the Republicans abandoned their party and took over ours.
to be even talking about health care when the United States has already been sold out to the highest non-bidder.
Would I like to be taken care of medically, yeah sure but it’s not care they have in mind. They want your medical data for global eugenics experiments. They will insure you only enough to get you “on” any one or several of big pharma’s designer symptom alleviation concoctions.
You do have the option of scoping out via Google to see if your meds bring up legal teams soliciting your business.
In the late 19th century, they hid behind the corporate curtain, validated and protected by government. Now they own the government. Their words ring as true today as they did over 100 years ago:
Vanderbilt: What do I care about the law, ain’t I got the power?
J.D.Rockefeller: I have ways of making money that you know nothing of.
*not wanting to be left out Jay Gould offers this gem:
Gould: I can hire one half of the working class to kill the other half.
And it wouldn’t be right to leave out Carnegie who knew a lot about political access and timing:
Carnegie: The first man gets the oyster, the second gets the shell
Unfortunately, we’re stuck with a shit load of shells today, being told the same old story that there just aren’t enough oysters to go around. And notice how Jay Gould’s tricks are being artfully resurrected.
Author
All this is very obvious. It is even obvious to a surprising number of people who comment and diary on DailyKos.
I’d like to see more building going on and less fussing over the obvious. It might also be useful to analyze, from a natural history pov, the habits and structure of the oligarchy — that hasn’t really been done.
Certain issues remain central but haven’t been addressed like “deep politics”. To me that it is pretty important, for example, to understand the events of 9/11 and what prompted those events. It seems like it is the one traumatic we can all point to as being of singular importance. If indeed the events of 9/11 were much different from what the MSM narrative says then those events have very, very, very profound significance for us in evaluating our situation. And evaluating our situation is absolutely necessary.