Every Thursday I have coffee with a good friend whose politics are opposite mine. We tend to look for common ground, and here's one patch we agree on: America is starting to look ungovernable. As Steven Flynn put it Tuesday morning on the Diane Rehm Show: "the U.S. has become like a bus where everyone has a brake. It won't run."
Exactly what the hell the voters of Massachusetts thought they were doing by electing a Palin wannabe is quite beyond me. Fortunately, Mitchell Bard's excellent post outlines the main points of this act of epic stupidity, so I can at least get my head around how it happened.
Have a taste:
Bush spent eight years running the country into the ground. The issues that seemed to bother Massachusetts voters (the economy and the abuses on Wall Street) not only originated and/or were encouraged under Bush, but the current Republicans in Congress have no desire to help on either of these counts. They oppose stimulus or anything else to help put Americans back to work (no, more tax cuts for the rich won't accomplish that goal), and they have even less interest in reforming financial regulation (they've come out against consumer protection and re-regulating the industry).
In effect, the voters of Massachusetts decided that even though it took eight years of Republican rule to create these problems, the Democrats should have solved them in 11 months (even as the Republicans tried to block solutions at every turn). And for the Democrats' failure, the state should send a Republican to Washington who has no interest in fixing the problems his party created in the first place. And again, the result will be 41 Republicans blocking any Democratic programs aimed at fixing the financial industry or unemployment. Democracy worked perfectly.
Yup. Welcome to to the traffic jam. And thanks, Massachusetts. We owe you one.
You can blame Bush but it's getting old. I need health insurance but I don't want it from something one side rammed into place.
Lets work together and get something palatable, not something we all can't afford and is rushed versus something mature, well planned and fully funded.
Now, how do you get people, like me, health insurance FAIRLY? Why was tort-reform not included or actually avoided? Don't we all watch TV and see those commericals soliciting people to bring suit for this or that? That adds cost to healthcare and if you don't think so, your head is in the sand. I want healthcare insurance, but not provided by a one party over another...I want something everyone can live with - that includes Union or non-Union - why were Union Employees getting special consideration...........
See, it's complicated and most are over simplifying..........
The question is does the U.S. want to be a modern nation with a functioning government or move further down the (GOP) road toward being an ungovernable failed state or a dictatorship (The GOP does not believe in democracy).
That means the Dems need to grow a pair and take action.
As for health care, the answer is simple. It's single payer. That, by the way, is the only way tort reform can really work. It takes the medical care portion out of the equation. Tort reform without single payer is another gift to health insurance firms. They have stolen enough already. (Note that I don't care much for lawyers. We have too many and they often charge a lot for services necessary only because we have too many lawyers making things complicated. But they aren't the only problem on tort reform.)
"Democracy... while it lasts is more bloody than either aristocracy or monarchy. Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There is never a democracy that did not commit suicide."
-John Adams
It's the economy, stupid.
Now at least they have chance to actually reform DC instead of play at DC insiders - we'll see if they take advantage of the opportunity.
riiiiiight.
I live in NY but if I had lived in Mass I would not have voted for Coakley. Because in 2 years it will be easier to replace Brown with a rela progressive than it is is to replace a Moderate dem with a Progressive.
The dems had 60..but not really. Nothing has changed in the grand scheme of vote counts accept a bill that was a bailout of the insurance industry is dead.
Good.
Hopefully Obama got the message
You got suckered into supporting one of several healthcare lobby strategies all designed to ensure no one all last year ever mentioned the words - "single payer." Don't blame the rest of America for seeing through it.
Now if you really want reform - demand that Congress pass Medicare expansion through buy-ins using reconciliation immediately and make those buy ins effective before November - watch how quickly that would change things.
The Reps were against the Stimulus because they knew it wouldn't work.
Obama promised unemployment will not rise above 8% with the Stimulus. I believe we topped out at 10.2% Hope you like that Change
the Wall St abuses are still there. Obama and the Dems have had a year to crack down on Wall St. Have they yet, no.
And the Dems were in control of Congress for 2 years under Bush. And they (Dems) did nothing to stop him. Yet, no one talks about that.
"Health Care Reform"? Massachusetts already has far better, ... and this shadow of a law, developing out of sight in back rooms owned by the industries that bought and paid for these representatives, would have taxed their plans in many cases. So it wasn't about healthcare, it was about incompetence and obfuscation in government. It was about abandoning commitments for a public option and handing the money instead to Big Insureco, with the threat of a fine hanging over all of us.
The garb may be familiar, but that man whom the people of Massachusetts stabbed in the back last night, ... that man was not our Uncles Sam at all, ... but a shill hired by Wall Street, Big Pharma and Big Insureco. That's why you don't show us his face.
Obviously, I side more to the camp of "let's get it in and then fix it." There are good historical analogies to be made with Medicare and Social Security.
As it now stands, I reckon ANY reform has a better than 50% chance of tanking completely. I doubt that's the outcome you wanted.
I am truly disgusted with the voters of Massachusetts. They strike me as either unintelligent or lazy.
Please don't vote unless you actually have an understanding of what you're doing. You should not be uninformed and you should know the implications of the issues.
Congratulations, Massachusetts. You've succeeded in helping to speed up the Republicans' final destruction of America. They are traitors and not patriots, for they care nothing for the American people. They care about the American corporations. And you, Massachusetts, voted for the corporations - even though you said you were voting against Wall Street.
Ridiculously dumb.
And we vote for Kerry for over 20 years.
And we vote for Barney Frank for over 20 years.
Maybe voting for a Rep Senator is the kind of "Change" we need.