Video 'Bernie Schools Pelosi On How To Talk Healthcare'

[Kulindahr]

^ one thing that is obvious from the Trump presidency, billionaires look after each other and themselves over everybody else.

The Democrats need to reframe the argument from minorites and sick people versus the white middle class to the rich versus everyone else.

Healthcare is no different. The outcomes matter more than the inputs, and currently the USA has worse overall public health indicators than equivalent developed countries that spend far less per capita on healthcare.

No, they need to reframe it in terms of we, the people, and then point out who the enemies of the people are. And those enemies are obvious: they're the 0.2% who fund the elections, who in fact control the only election that counts, the one to get a chance to run in the first place.

Of course if the GOP were really republicans they could frame it the same way, but they're not, they're the party of plutocratic oligarchy. I suppose in ancient Genoa, where having the vote was something only for the wealthy, that could be called a republic, but even they were more virtuous in caring for the citizens than are today's GOP.

 

[Kulindahr]

That's part of it, but there are other things too. There is an argument to be made for why the centrists (and don't let the Windbaggers fool you, THEY the Centrists, are the majority, not the other way around) moved right. Fact is that for decades the Windbaggers have been sneering at places like Oklahoma, calling them names, dismissing people in the Midwest and the South and that attitude has carried over into a lot of what the Left has become, and into the institutional attitudes of the Democratic party.

Democrats don't even run candidates for most races in Texas. If there is a Dem, most likely he's on his own and has no national or Party support. It's like that in a lot of the country, because people on the Left sat on their arrogance and decided that Wyoming didn't matter.

If the left has a reputation for being precious elitists, there are certainly examples that roundly deserve such criticism.

That arrogance is exactly why Clinton lost -- she had it in spades, and not just toward people in Oklahoma but toward the grass roots of her own party. You attribute it to Bernie voters, but Schumer, Feinstein, and the like are far better examples of that arrogance.

 

[TX-Beau]

Oh, come on -- Obama sold out the little guy by caving to corporations through his lifting of a health care plan from a right-wing source!

Protestations of caring when you're busy bowing to the wishes of a very non-democratic and non-republican set of power interests come across as pious platitudes. The only reason I don't call Obama a hypocrite is that he did manage a few things for the people -- unfortunately, pretty much only ones that the corporations don't care about.

Yeah he should have stood on his principles and gotten nothing at all. This is why Libertarians and Windbaggers are marginalized.

- - - Updated - - -

That arrogance is exactly why Clinton lost -- she had it in spades, and not just toward people in Oklahoma but toward the grass roots of her own party. You attribute it to Bernie voters, but Schumer, Feinstein, and the like are far better examples of that arrogance.

Clinton didn't lose the election.

 

[TX-Beau]

There have been threads about it. I know you've seen them.

Excuse me, all I've seen are the threads the Winbdbaggers post like the latest about how the real enemy of the "worker" is the Democrats because some Mayor didn't raise the minimum wage.

 

[Kulindahr]

Yeah he should have stood on his principles and gotten nothing at all. This is why Libertarians and Windbaggers are marginalized.

No, he should have twisted arms, made promises, been a leader. He acted like a community organizer trying to get everyone to like him rather than like a president out to get something done. Instead of using a Republican plan as his initial position he should have used something to the left of Bernie so via compromise he could have gotten something better than a corporate sellout.

And he could have twisted arms; his popularity was high enough he could have done an LBJ and calmly told any Democrats not willing to sign on with him that he would be picking their opponent for the next primary. Obama was too nice to do that, so he wasn't effective.

Clinton didn't lose the election.

And you think Benvolio lives in a delusional place!

Gimme a moment . . . . . .
Yep, went and looked; she wasn't the one who got sworn in as president, so she definitely lost.

 

[Kulindahr]

Excuse me, all I've seen are the threads the Winbdbaggers post like the latest about how the real enemy of the "worker" is the Democrats because some Mayor didn't raise the minimum wage.

Odd claim, since we're presently in a thread providing just what you ask for.

It's not just the right that closes its eyes and shuts its ears, obviously.

 

[TX-Beau]

No, he should have twisted arms, made promises, been a leader. He acted like a community organizer trying to get everyone to like him rather than like a president out to get something done. Instead of using a Republican plan as his initial position he should have used something to the left of Bernie so via compromise he could have gotten something better than a corporate sellout.

And he could have twisted arms; his popularity was high enough he could have done an LBJ and calmly told any Democrats not willing to sign on with him that he would be picking their opponent for the next primary. Obama was too nice to do that, so he wasn't effective.

That's just a whole lot of whine. Whatever you think he SHOULD have done, he certainly cared about this country. Which was the point.

And you think Benvolio lives in a delusional place!

Gimme a moment . . . . . .
Yep, went and looked; she wasn't the one who got sworn in as president, so she definitely lost.

Being deliberately obtuse just make you look petulant.

 

[TX-Beau]

Odd claim, since we're presently in a thread providing just what you ask for.

It's not just the right that closes its eyes and shuts its ears, obviously.

We're in a thread where the OP with no answeres bailed, and thynight wanted to bleat about interpersonal shit also with no answers, and yes this thread eminently displays the uselessness of the Windbaggers and their special snowflakiness.

 

[opinterph]

The Democratic establishment is currently, and it has been for a good generation, an impediment to real, progressive change …

If we look back a generation or more, when is the last time period that real Progressive change was happening either with or without help from the Democratic Party?

 

[CoolBlue71]

If we look back a generation or more, when is the last time period that real Progressive change was happening either with or without help from the Democratic Party?

The 1960s. And that was with 36th president of the United States Lyndon Johnson (D-Texas), with Medicare and the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

 

[ballcaphair]

The 1960s. And that was with 36th president of the United States Lyndon Johnson (D-Texas), with Medicare and the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

To that I would add: Head Start, National Endowment for the Humanities and Arts. Carter created the departments of energy and education, which I know are debatable, but progressive.

 

[Kulindahr]

That's just a whole lot of whine. Whatever you think he SHOULD have done, he certainly cared about this country. Which was the point.

Moving the goalposts> Your after-the-fact claim is not justified by the original assertion: "Yeah he should have stood on his principles and gotten nothing at all."

You proposed a should, and I countered it. His feelings were never part of the issue.

Being deliberately obtuse just make you look petulant.

Obtuse? Since when is looking at the facts "obtuse"?

I was merely dramatizing the sheer lack of correspondence with reality entailed in your statement.

 

[Kulindahr]

We're in a thread where the OP with no answeres bailed, and thynight wanted to bleat about interpersonal shit also with no answers, and yes this thread eminently displays the uselessness of the Windbaggers and their special snowflakiness.

LOL

The OP gives answers. Frak, the thread title points at one!

 

[Kulindahr]

The 1960s. And that was with 36th president of the United States Lyndon Johnson (D-Texas), with Medicare and the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

You're not going to count the establishment of the EPA?

 

[Kulindahr]

To that I would add: Head Start, National Endowment for the Humanities and Arts. Carter created the departments of energy and education, which I know are debatable, but progressive.

Debateable, definitely. The creation of the Department of Energy wasn't much more than a reshuffling of government programs already in existence; the Department of Education is just bureaucratic theater to make the "Please do something!" folks happy.

And as independent departments, there's no justification for them in the Constitution (though it wouldn't be hard to make one if they were demoted to being subsections of constitutionally legitimate departments).

 

[Kabluey]

Debateable, definitely. The creation of the Department of Energy wasn't much more than a reshuffling of government programs already in existence; the Department of Education is just bureaucratic theater to make the "Please do something!" folks happy.

And as independent departments, there's no justification for them in the Constitution (though it wouldn't be hard to make one if they were demoted to being subsections of constitutionally legitimate departments).

Seems regressive to judge everything against a 16th century document.

 

[Kulindahr]

Seems regressive to judge everything against a 16th century document.

It's either that or admit we really don't believe in the rule of law, just the rule of whatever the PTBs would like the law to be.

Besides which, we're not talking about the Twelve Articles, we're talking about the U.S. Constitution.

 

[TX-Beau]

LOL

The OP gives answers. Frak, the thread title points at one!

LOL no he doesn't.

- - - Updated - - -

Seems regressive to judge everything against a 16th century document.

Kuli is paranoid about Coolblue taking his guns away.

 

[Kulindahr]

LOL no he doesn't.

- - - Updated - - -



Kuli is paranoid about Coolblue taking his guns away.

Give me a break.

I went back and watched not even two minutes, and there are already three ideas given.

Conclusion: four Pinnochios.


Oh -- and an utterly irrelevant statement.

 

[ballcaphair]

I have guns, I coach soccer, I pay taxes so I want it all. I'd at least want my taxes back so I can conserve them.