I am a proud liberal

August 30, 2009

I doubt if there’s anyone who is capable of decidely picking up and carrying the torch that Senator Kennedy did for so long. I grew up in the 60s,   witness to such a deeply historic time. It is why I have such intolerance for neocons who are quickly becoming the speakers of the Republican party, drowning out their moderate colleagues. To Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, Rove, Cheney, Palin, Bachmann, and all of their cohorts – there is a special place in hell reserved for you all. Your devicivness  and blatant lies that you scream out (evidently they believe the louder they are the more truthful they appear to be) are mindful of petulant children who’ve been at the feeding trough too long and find yourself without dessert.

Enough pandering to bipartisanship. Push the original health care bill  through and to hell with the naysayers. Find your goddamned backbone and just do it.

Mark Karlin has a great post over at Buzz Flash

And I remember at Yale — many, many years ago — when he came to speak to the political union.  Protestors were advocating violence as a solution to a political issue of the time and interrupted his remarks.  Kennedy let them have their say and then — his voice audibly breaking and trembling — admonished them that he knew personally the toll that violence takes upon a family and that it was not what our nation was about, nor would it yield anything but loss and pain.  You could have heard a pin drop as he sucked the air out of the room with his spontaneous reaction from the depth of a wounded heart.

I am a Liberal.  I am a PROUD Liberal. And I will never feel intimidated, ashamed, or threatened by those of you who aren’t. Ever. Again.



  1. The public option has lost public support. We’ve had the debate and the longer we debate it the more support declines. You can blame all the conservative pundits you want for the waning support, but what about the people like me who want the answer to one question that no one will give me, i.e. what Constitutional right does the federal government have to take over any industry? I’ve said it time and again, healthcare needs reform. But there are far more simpler solutions than government involvement.

    Out of curiosity, how is it that congress has over 200 NATION-WIDE insurance options to choose from, yet our choices are confined to the state we live in? Why do they have better options than our military, who either have to buy private insurance like any other citizen, i.e. from the state they live in, or settle for government-run VA healthcare, which is extremely underfunded and understaffed?

    Malpractice reform needs to be involved in any bill, but Howard Dean has explained that that’s not an option because they don’t want to go after the lawyer lobby. If more power was put into the hands of doctors and patients were given more choices, the majority of the problem would be solved, but that involves less government involvement.

    Just to reiterate, I’m one of those naysayers you say to hell with. I will never advocate unsustainable government growth/spending. Keynesian economics have been proven not to be the answer, while classical economics have proven time and again they hold the answer, i.e. putting more money into the hands of consumers via tax-cuts.

    And to comment on Mr. Karlin’s remarks, while the town hall protesters have been loud and disruptive, no one was advocating violence until SEIU became involved. And it was SEIU that first became violent. I understand that Mr. Karlin was recalling a time many years ago, but I felt like it was a good opportunity to draw a corollary between then and now.

    • The call for violence by neocons is real. I only need to look a few miles away from my home, where a “minister” regularly prays for Obama’s death. When the President was in Phoenix, there was a man outside with a gun, bragging how it was his right to have it. That man is a member of the minister’s church. It’s not an extreme example, it’s an ordinary one; one that has been occuring prior to the Democratic primary. And, of course it made the national news.

      You don’t think there are “death camps” now? They’re here already, courtesy of today’s insurance companies. Don’t hear Sarah all rip-roarin’ up and mighty over them. People with pre-existing conditions are just one example. Just one. Insurance companies who put some person in charge of your medical care, and they may or may not have any medical education. The list goes on.

      Obama has the ability to get health care reform through. There are enough Democrats, most with spines, and almost a quarter of Republicans who support him. Public option? I’m doing what I can to help it happen, but w/ McCain & Kyl, I’m not banking on anyone from my state stepping up.

      “Obama has a solid majority and can achieve all this with Democratic votes alone. So why is he in such trouble? Partly it is that this kind of reform rightly stirs scepticism, and Obama has allowed a hapless and divided Congress to take the lead, muddying the message. Partly it is that the hard right is becoming more and more extreme and its fears have eclipsed the hopes of Obama’s supporters. But the most critical part, in my view, is the public understanding that after two massive bank bailouts and a vast stimulus package, with two still-intractable wars, the US cannot afford even the modest 10-year trilliondollar package Obama is proposing. And Obama’s inability to cut spending while the economy is so fragile means he is constrained from offering fiscal reassurance.

      So, tactically, Obama is on the defensive. Strategically? Again, he is stronger than he now appears. When the health insurance bill is passed and elderly Americans are not rounded up into concentration camps and granny isn’t subjected to euthanasia, and when many uninsured people gain a peace of mind they have never felt before, and people become able to change job without fearing loss of insurance, the Republican scare tactics may come to seem absurd.

  2. Still looking for the provision in the Constitution that allows for the majority of the “reform” in the current bill. There are several things I agree need to be changed. Portability can be handled on the state level. Removing the FEDERAL restriction on crossing state lines needs to be taken off the books. Malpractice reform can be handled on the state level. Why would anyone who’s a fan of Thomas Paine want more bigger government? Why would a fan of the Constitution want an unconstitutional bill passed? I really want to know because for the life of me I can’t figure it out.

  3. Oops. Didn’t mean “more bigger”, just bigger. That must’ve been the redneck in me coming out 🙂

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: