Obama On Health Care: A Comprehensive Betrayal – Where Do We Go From Here?

You'll vote for him again. He's your guy.

Well, since I've gone on record criticizing Obama on these boards BEFORE BAC created this thread, I'd say you're (once again) off on your observations....thus making your speculations erroneous at best.

Put it to you this way, Southie. I voted for Slick Willy because he was the lesser of two evils....but I didn't vote for his second term. I voted for Obama because there was NO third party candidate. If he and the Dems don't get their respective acts together in the next 3 years, I'll follow suit as I did with the Slickster.
 
Well, since I've gone on record criticizing Obama on these boards BEFORE BAC created this thread, I'd say you're (once again) off on your observations....thus making your speculations erroneous at best.

Put it to you this way, Southie. I voted for Slick Willy because he was the lesser of two evils....but I didn't vote for his second term. I voted for Obama because there was NO third party candidate. If he and the Dems don't get their respective acts together in the next 3 years, I'll follow suit as I did with the Slickster.
Lots of folks criticize the Bamster but still voted for the guy. So will you. You won't vote for the Republican.
 
I referred him to you, you are white, right and have an agenda. Dixiecrats, didn't they join the Republicans?
I'm sure some did, but by and large they were re-absorbed into the Democrat Party, which has historically been and still is the racist party.
 
Rachael Maddow says she is not surprised and I am on the Bill Maher side, I guess I want change so badly that I heard from Obama what I wanted to hear!

Don't feel bad about your desire to see this nation live up to its potential. That's patriotism good sister.

But like Maddow, I'm not surprised either.

I could go on and on about the problems with Obama, but he's not really the problem. McCain was most certainly not an answer. The problem is that we exist in a plutocracy and our politicians are chosen and controlled by corporations.

Surely we've become the laughing stock of the planet.
 
Well, it's time to kick ass and take names. The same drive that put him in office can make it clear to the Congress & Senate that it's time to pay the piper (so to speak). Third party candidates, anyone?

Third party is the message I was preaching last election.

At what point does the left recognize that the Democratic Party does not respect it and only uses it during elections?
 
This is what you get when you vote for a man with no moral compass and no conviction. Bitch about him all you want, but W was not lacking in this category.

Are you fucking insane?

Bush mass-murdered countless innocent people, including women and BABIES .. FOR PROFIT.

It is absolutely fucking incredible that there would be anyone dumb enough on planet earth to suggest that Bush is a man of conviction and a moral compass.

... yet here you are.

amazing.
 
At some point in last year's presidential election campaign, Barack Obama went on Bill O'Reilly's show to concede that maybe the war in Iraq, and Bush's murderous escalation of that war, the so-called surge, were not such bad ideas after all. Obama met with the admirals and generals and came away declaring that withdrawal from Iraq really meant withdrawal to secure bases inside Iraq. A US troop pullout would not happen until well into his second term, if then, with the accent on the “if.”

Casting the wishes of most Americans and the overwhelming majority of his own party under the bus, Democratic leaders and the corporate media told us all, was the wise, the realistic, the pragmatic thing to do. The election, they said, would be waged on domestic policy, on health care. Barack Obama has again and again doubled down on that set of promises, declaring that his first term should be judged on whether he manages to deliver comprehensive, affordable health care to everybody, including the nation's fifty million uninsured.

Seven months into his administration, Barack Obama has never been the antiwar president. He was the first president in American history to keep a Secretary of Defense appointed by the other party. Obama is not the anti-warrantless wiretapping president, or the anti-torture president or the anti-NAFTA president, or the pro-public education president, either. He bought GM but refused to use it as a lever to create a new passenger rail industry or green jobs, instead crushing the auto workers and forsaking his promises to make it easier to organize unions. Obama has transferred, as Glen Ford points out, $12 trillion dollars to fraudulent Wall Street banksters, more than all previous presidents combined. Beyond the lovely wife and family, and the novelty of a black president who speaks full sentences in correct English, not much is left of the man or the cause tens of millions thought they voted for.

It looks like Barack Obama won't be the health care president either. Obama's health care plan is so full of concessions to drug companies, so crammed with a constantly growing list of bailouts and exceptions for insurance companies that the White House is deliberately withholding information on it from Obama' own supporters. Organizing For America, the remnant of the Obama campaign and inheritor of its 13 million strong email and phone list, is calling supporters to canvass and turn out for health care “town meetings,” but dares not tell people exactly what they are supporting. For a while it was something called “the public option,” which would compete with and keep the insurance companies honest. Now it's something even cloudier, called a health co-op. Among the known

No less a progressive stalwart than Detroit's Rep. John Conyers announced his deep disappointment with Barack Obama before a crowd of progressives last month in Washington's Busboys and Poets restaurant. Obama, he opined, could be a one-term president if he doesn't manage to deliver on health care.

Conyers is the sponsor of HR 676, the Enhanced Medicare For All Act, which proposes the expansion of the highly successful Medicare program, along with enhancements such as dental coverage to all Americans. President Obama has admitted many times in recent months that Medicare For All, also called single payer, is the only way, and the least expensive way to cover the uninsured while at the same time bringing costs down. But with few exceptions, leading Democrats, themselves in the pay of health insurance companies and Big Pharma, have declared that Medicare For All is “politically infeasible.”

With corporate media shutting off all points of view to the left of the president, and Republicans fighting even the hopelessly compromised Democratic plans as if they were single payer, the public is presented with an utterly distorted picture of the health care debate --- pro-Obama legislators being shouted down by right wing seniors on Medicare worried about government coming between them and their doctors, and liberal Democrats pleading for civility. It's worth remembering that the same people calling for amiable and civil discourse on health care have ruthlessly censored any mention of single payer from the broadcast airwaves. Even the White House has disinvited the president's own family doctor for his single payer sentiments, and removed the testimony of single payer advocates from White House transcripts and video.

For the moment, argues Dave Lindorff, single payer advocates have more in common with some of the deluded Republican protesters at public health town meetings than they have with Democratic legislators at the front of the room. They know they're being lied to and they know that the proceedings are sham and theatre and they are acting accordingly. Maybe we ought to be doing the same. We ought to insist on a floor vote on HR 676, and demand that our representatives support it. We also have to demand that states be free to pursue their own single payer experiments.

It's time to stop listening to Democrats who say Medicare For All is “politically infeasible” despite its being the democratic will of most of the American people. On their lips, political feasibility is just another name for whether it can pass the legislature this session. Political feasibility is not even in the language of movements for social change. The activists of the 1950s and 60s Freedom Movement knew very well that their demands were not politically feasible. Should they have shut up until Congress and the Supreme Court caught up with them?

Barack Obama may well make himself a one-term president by adding health care to the growing list of his betrayals, and he might come close to handing the Congress back to Republicans as soon as next year. Those are the wages of comprehensive betrayal. If that's what they want to do, we can't stop them. We've got our own work to do, going forward, and regardless of what they Democratic leaders and corporate media imagine is politically feasible.
http://blackagendareport.com/?q=con...-comprehensive-betrayal-–-where-do-we-go-here

I've said this would happen since the moment Obama was elected.

... not voting for him has never looked better.

It was the evil, Spawn of Satan, Bill O'Reilly that did it. Yes, he and FOX News are behind EVERYTHING EVIL!

Muah-ha-ha-haaaaaaaa!!!!

http://www.satanspace.com/videos/spawn-of-satan-5352710
 
Are you fucking insane?

Bush mass-murdered countless innocent people, including women and BABIES .. FOR PROFIT.

It is absolutely fucking incredible that there would be anyone dumb enough on planet earth to suggest that Bush is a man of conviction and a moral compass.

... yet here you are.

amazing.
Bush killed Saddam because he mass murdered hundreds of thousands of innocent people. Of course you got it backwards.

Yet you liberals murder millions of babies in abortions every year and that's OK.
 
Lots of folks criticize the Bamster but still voted for the guy. So will you. You won't vote for the Republican.

Once again, you ignore what someone writes and repeat yourself.....you're insipid stubborness and ability to substitute your supposition and conjecture as fact is truly amazing sometimes. But like I use to treat a 2 grade class, I'll treat you:

Pay attention:

I would have preferred a Edwards/Richardson ticket in 2008, but that self destructed.

McCain was NOT the McCain of a decade ago.....hell, even your neocon cabal was not fully behind him (BUT YOU VOTED FOR HIM ANYWAY, DIDN'T YOU BUNKY?). But I was not about to vote for a continuation of the PNAC agenda on full tilt boogey and dominating the GOP party.

And there were NO 3rd Party candidates on the docket in 2008.

Hence, Obama gets my vote. BAC'S article may have points of hyperbole, but there are valid concerns and points within. IMHO, Obama is playing chess during a street fight. It's time for the American's that voted for him and the Dems now in power to remind these folk what we put them in office for.
 
Third party is the message I was preaching last election.

At what point does the left recognize that the Democratic Party does not respect it and only uses it during elections?

Well, to be frank there is a bit of hyperbole in your article....but essentially it points to a truism.....Obama is playing chess while everyone else is in a street fight. The people that put him in office need to use that same drive to wake him and the Dems up that we put them there for a specific purpose...which is NOT to negotiate with the PNAC agenda of the neocon GOP.

There are a lot of things that won't be/can't be overturned/fixed in a day (unless you have a full blown civil war, IMHO), but the olive branch is NOT working. Time for Obama to draw the line in the sand....and for us to make him do so. I've already put my gov't reps on notice...I hope others follow
.
 
Wake up, Southie....put in gear an 8th of the brain that God gave you.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/
Check:

PH2009080902547.jpg
 
Once again, you ignore what someone writes and repeat yourself.....you're insipid stubborness and ability to substitute your supposition and conjecture as fact is truly amazing sometimes. But like I use to treat a 2 grade class, I'll treat you:

Pay attention:

I would have preferred a Edwards/Richardson ticket in 2008, but that self destructed.

McCain was NOT the McCain of a decade ago.....hell, even your neocon cabal was not fully behind him (BUT YOU VOTED FOR HIM ANYWAY, DIDN'T YOU BUNKY?). But I was not about to vote for a continuation of the PNAC agenda on full tilt boogey and dominating the GOP party.

And there were NO 3rd Party candidates on the docket in 2008.

Hence, Obama gets my vote. BAC'S article may have points of hyperbole, but there are valid concerns and points within. IMHO, Obama is playing chess during a street fight. It's time for the American's that voted for him and the Dems now in power to remind these folk what we put them in office for.

I voted for the most conservative candidate in the GOP primary: Keyes. I then voted for the most conservative candidate for the general election: McCain. You will vote for Obama in 2012 because he's black.
 
Well, to be frank there is a bit of hyperbole in your article....but essentially it points to a truism.....Obama is playing chess while everyone else is in a street fight. The people that put him in office need to use that same drive to wake him and the Dems up that we put them there for a specific purpose...which is NOT to negotiate with the PNAC agenda of the neocon GOP.

There are a lot of things that won't be/can't be overturned/fixed in a day (unless you have a full blown civil war, IMHO), but the olive branch is NOT working. Time for Obama to draw the line in the sand....and for us to make him do so. I've already put my gov't reps on notice...I hope others follow
.

Hyperbole aside, it's that truism you point out that matters my brother.

At some point the left will recognize that the Democratic Party does not repect them .. including Obama. There are few real proponents of the values of the left within his administration. In fact, there are more conservatives around him than the left. This is no accident and I said this would be the case even before he was elected.

Obama is a centrist, and like all centrists, he's not interested in causes, only in getting elected. This has been his way since he first ran for office. If you want to see what Obama is, research his race that he lost against Congressman Bobby Rush. He doesn't even like the left .. doesn't like civil rights leaders. .. but that should be obvious. Jesse knew that .. which is why he wanted to snatch his balls off. Problem is, he doesn't have any.

I predicted all that Obama has become before he was elected .. which is why I didn't vote for him. In fact, I was calling him Obambi because I knew he was a pussy.

Now that we have him, what are democrats going to do with him? My prediction .. NOTHING. He will continue to meander somewhere in the mushy middle and the republicans will continue to beat him and the democrats up. The Democratic Party is the biggest collection of wimps I have ever seen. I would be fucking embarrassed to call myself a goddamn democrat.

The good news is Obama is already losing support from many who ran to the polls only listening to the beat .. never hearing the actual words. Unions have put his ass on notice.

Come 2010 the democrats will have less control of Congress and will bend over and drop their pants even further for the evil of the right.

This is American politics as usual .. easy to predict.
 
Back
Top